It is not a great idea to be looking at racy photos whilst on your work computer in a busy office. It is a terrible idea to do it whilst in scene of a television interview....
Showing posts with label Bank Bailout. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bank Bailout. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Monday, December 07, 2009
Exodus
Hmmm.... 1,000 bankers quit RBS for rivals, just as the Government is hinting strongly about punitive taxes.
Who could have possibly seen that coming!
Who could have possibly seen that coming!
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
£39Billion
I don't have all the details, and will try to follow up later in the week, but a further £39 BILLION was committed to the failed banks which are being propped up by UK PLC.
That's £39 Billion borrowed against the coffers that me and thee will need to service the interest on and probably end up paying back.
The announcement was made last night, leaked from Downing Street to media sources, and not I might add announced to Parliament first. £39 Billion. Not only was it not announced there, there was no debate there either.
£39 Billion. Good news though, Lloyds and RBS bankers are deferring their bonuses for three years. No wait, not good news, unsurprising news. Hardly a slap down is it for failing, they will still get the bonuses, they will just be deferred for a bit.
3rd November 2009... A really shitty day in the history of this country.
That's £39 Billion borrowed against the coffers that me and thee will need to service the interest on and probably end up paying back.
The announcement was made last night, leaked from Downing Street to media sources, and not I might add announced to Parliament first. £39 Billion. Not only was it not announced there, there was no debate there either.
£39 Billion. Good news though, Lloyds and RBS bankers are deferring their bonuses for three years. No wait, not good news, unsurprising news. Hardly a slap down is it for failing, they will still get the bonuses, they will just be deferred for a bit.
3rd November 2009... A really shitty day in the history of this country.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The Recession Is Not Over, And I Don't Think It Will Be For Some Time Yet
I see in the news the announcement that the recession is not over. The surprise for me is that there is surprise at this particular announcement.
I am no economist, and every post when I talk anything approaching economics I still feel the need to warn of this, but my analysis and predictions have so far been pretty accurate. My thinking going back to early Q2 that we would not emerge until at least early 2010, and possibly not until Q3 2010. If 6 quarters is the worst recession for 54 years, I do wonder where 9 or 10 qtrs will sit?
Why do I think this? Because the Government and the Bank of England have taken measures to ensure that economic corrections are kept to a minimum.
Now I can understand the politics of this, and they two-fold.
Firstly, it is one of the biggest dividing lines in the minds of Conservative and Labour voters over aged 30. During the 80’s and the 90’s when the UK went into recession the Conservatives allowed the market to contract before recovery with little or no intervention. This allowed for a quicker recovery (in theory) but meant the economy dipped faster and deeper causing many people to lose houses, their livelihoods, their businesses. The Conservative argument would be that the UK economy leading into the 80’s was in need of modernisation and was still built very much in the image of post-war Britain and overly reliant on dying industries. The crashes took a lot of older businesses out, but in the booms allowed for the creation of future industries which we rely upon today. It is an argument that will never probably be settled in broad public opinion. Labour stuck very much then to the politics they have followed during this recession; that Government(s) should intervene to prevent the recession getting too deep at any one point. The argument again would be that (in theory) this will draw out the recession for longer and also that the necessary “corrections” which our future economy may benefit have not had a chance to come into place. Now, I say this not to advocate either position, but, the current path undertaken was one that was known and one of general intervention rather than of allowing market forces to work unfettered.
The second point is as political as it is economic. It was and is a very big gamble. To my mind the Quantitative Easing programme has been a stealth effort in devaluing sterling, which has had some results, not necessarily completely positive, but not disastrous (yet). Of the big economies only Japan and the EURO zone have not followed with similar measures and China’s decision to fix against the Dollar is looking to have been very profitable. The EURO zone may still need to devalue, as it is hard to see it continuing for long at $1.50 to €1.00. The EU including the UK needs grow its Exports, and with the EURO so strong that is not looking likely. The danger of QE is hyperinflation, and clearly the extra money is not being leant as it was supposed to have been, but the UK seems to have been able to leverage its independence from the EURO to keep Sterling attractive and as exports may not have suffered as much as they could have, and we have an advantage, for now, on the EURO zone countries.
On point two however, I think we have our economic independence to thank, as we have been able to make decisions independent of the EU. It could however very quickly turn to be a disadvantage and I would like to see an end to QE and an immediate cut in Government borrowing. As long as we have QE we risk adding hyperinflation to an increasing unserviceable debt mountain. That would be like the perfect storm of recessions.
I really do not see any long standing positivity until Government and personal debt is slashed. I think individuals have responded and in 2009 are directing income into repaying debt rather than spending. This trend will continue. The Government needs to do the same. Though it will probably not do so and it will fall to an incoming Conservative Government to undo the damage. The sooner it is reigned in the less the UK will need to repay, and the quicker we can head to recovery. Individuals need to start spending, but day to day spending needs to not be linked to personal debt such as credit cards. As the nation’s credit rating improves, sensible borrowing for houses and big items like cars will aid recovery further.
Anyway, that’s my take, and that is what I am basing my personal economic decisions on. Recessions are ugly, and unfortunately I think until we can point to “corrections” all we have is the same struggling economy, the pain will have to be felt a lot more harshly somewhere – and I am not sure where; my guess a year ago was on homeowners, but this looks slightly less likely to be the case now. I am sure there are those of you who will disagree and that’s fine, but if you are rebutting in the comments, please keep it in layman’s terms as much as possible as like I said, I am not an economist. [So, don’t bet your house on my economic predictions!]
No surprises from me that we are still in recession. I still think there is one thing that Gordon Brown can do to bring about confidence in the markets and in the public and that would be to call a General Election.
My very final thought is again political. John Major complained of bringing about a “voteless recovery” and reports from Gordon’s bunker were in the same vein. I wonder what will be his cry if there is no recovery to link his lack of votes to?
I am no economist, and every post when I talk anything approaching economics I still feel the need to warn of this, but my analysis and predictions have so far been pretty accurate. My thinking going back to early Q2 that we would not emerge until at least early 2010, and possibly not until Q3 2010. If 6 quarters is the worst recession for 54 years, I do wonder where 9 or 10 qtrs will sit?
Why do I think this? Because the Government and the Bank of England have taken measures to ensure that economic corrections are kept to a minimum.
Now I can understand the politics of this, and they two-fold.
Firstly, it is one of the biggest dividing lines in the minds of Conservative and Labour voters over aged 30. During the 80’s and the 90’s when the UK went into recession the Conservatives allowed the market to contract before recovery with little or no intervention. This allowed for a quicker recovery (in theory) but meant the economy dipped faster and deeper causing many people to lose houses, their livelihoods, their businesses. The Conservative argument would be that the UK economy leading into the 80’s was in need of modernisation and was still built very much in the image of post-war Britain and overly reliant on dying industries. The crashes took a lot of older businesses out, but in the booms allowed for the creation of future industries which we rely upon today. It is an argument that will never probably be settled in broad public opinion. Labour stuck very much then to the politics they have followed during this recession; that Government(s) should intervene to prevent the recession getting too deep at any one point. The argument again would be that (in theory) this will draw out the recession for longer and also that the necessary “corrections” which our future economy may benefit have not had a chance to come into place. Now, I say this not to advocate either position, but, the current path undertaken was one that was known and one of general intervention rather than of allowing market forces to work unfettered.
The second point is as political as it is economic. It was and is a very big gamble. To my mind the Quantitative Easing programme has been a stealth effort in devaluing sterling, which has had some results, not necessarily completely positive, but not disastrous (yet). Of the big economies only Japan and the EURO zone have not followed with similar measures and China’s decision to fix against the Dollar is looking to have been very profitable. The EURO zone may still need to devalue, as it is hard to see it continuing for long at $1.50 to €1.00. The EU including the UK needs grow its Exports, and with the EURO so strong that is not looking likely. The danger of QE is hyperinflation, and clearly the extra money is not being leant as it was supposed to have been, but the UK seems to have been able to leverage its independence from the EURO to keep Sterling attractive and as exports may not have suffered as much as they could have, and we have an advantage, for now, on the EURO zone countries.
On point two however, I think we have our economic independence to thank, as we have been able to make decisions independent of the EU. It could however very quickly turn to be a disadvantage and I would like to see an end to QE and an immediate cut in Government borrowing. As long as we have QE we risk adding hyperinflation to an increasing unserviceable debt mountain. That would be like the perfect storm of recessions.
I really do not see any long standing positivity until Government and personal debt is slashed. I think individuals have responded and in 2009 are directing income into repaying debt rather than spending. This trend will continue. The Government needs to do the same. Though it will probably not do so and it will fall to an incoming Conservative Government to undo the damage. The sooner it is reigned in the less the UK will need to repay, and the quicker we can head to recovery. Individuals need to start spending, but day to day spending needs to not be linked to personal debt such as credit cards. As the nation’s credit rating improves, sensible borrowing for houses and big items like cars will aid recovery further.
Anyway, that’s my take, and that is what I am basing my personal economic decisions on. Recessions are ugly, and unfortunately I think until we can point to “corrections” all we have is the same struggling economy, the pain will have to be felt a lot more harshly somewhere – and I am not sure where; my guess a year ago was on homeowners, but this looks slightly less likely to be the case now. I am sure there are those of you who will disagree and that’s fine, but if you are rebutting in the comments, please keep it in layman’s terms as much as possible as like I said, I am not an economist. [So, don’t bet your house on my economic predictions!]
No surprises from me that we are still in recession. I still think there is one thing that Gordon Brown can do to bring about confidence in the markets and in the public and that would be to call a General Election.
My very final thought is again political. John Major complained of bringing about a “voteless recovery” and reports from Gordon’s bunker were in the same vein. I wonder what will be his cry if there is no recovery to link his lack of votes to?
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Is It Just Me?
Have we really not reached a point yet when the bailouts have been exposed as not effective? I am fed up of seeing my tax money go into saving failing companies and failed directors.
I would really like to see a line drawn on the sand. We should no longer be bailing out financial institutions for their failures. We should honour the £30,000 guarantees, but that is all. Lets at least say, in future no more.
At the moment, troubled financial institutions who are on the brink, possibly because of poor management, possibly not; they might as well roll the dice and take some big risks, there is no disincentive now against it, because what the hell, UK PLC will be there to bail out their customers.... No company directors have as yet been prosecuted for widespread financial mismanagement.
Where will it end?
Did you vote for the bailouts? no, me neither.
I would really like to see a line drawn on the sand. We should no longer be bailing out financial institutions for their failures. We should honour the £30,000 guarantees, but that is all. Lets at least say, in future no more.
At the moment, troubled financial institutions who are on the brink, possibly because of poor management, possibly not; they might as well roll the dice and take some big risks, there is no disincentive now against it, because what the hell, UK PLC will be there to bail out their customers.... No company directors have as yet been prosecuted for widespread financial mismanagement.
Where will it end?
Did you vote for the bailouts? no, me neither.
Monday, March 02, 2009
Brown Refuses To Back Harman
Ms Harman said in an interview over the weekend, Sir Fred "Should not count on being £650,000 a year better off, because it's not going to happen".
However, Gordon Brown in an interview with TalkSport has refused to state that the money will definitely be recovered. This will be because his legal team are saying this cannot be done, and the government is legally powerless to stop Sir Fred drawing his pension.
The Telegraph claims that their sources tell them that the PM has been infuriated by Harman's attempts to seize the limelight and posturing towards a challenge for the leadership. All is not well, me thinks.
As a lawyer, Harriet Harman should be aware that there is no legal recourse to reclaiming this money and has herself been unable to comment on how this can legally be done.
As I said last week, none of us are happy that such a massive amount of taxpayer money is going towards this reward of failure, but Sir Fred has done nothing wrong in having a pension. It is the government that failed to look at the books and committed tax payer cash before any conditions on it's use towards bonuses and pensions could be guaranteed.
Members of government are more and more frequently lining up in a vanity contest to position themselves in a future leadership role. If it wasn't costing us so much it might be quite entertaining.
However, Gordon Brown in an interview with TalkSport has refused to state that the money will definitely be recovered. This will be because his legal team are saying this cannot be done, and the government is legally powerless to stop Sir Fred drawing his pension.
The Telegraph claims that their sources tell them that the PM has been infuriated by Harman's attempts to seize the limelight and posturing towards a challenge for the leadership. All is not well, me thinks.
As a lawyer, Harriet Harman should be aware that there is no legal recourse to reclaiming this money and has herself been unable to comment on how this can legally be done.
As I said last week, none of us are happy that such a massive amount of taxpayer money is going towards this reward of failure, but Sir Fred has done nothing wrong in having a pension. It is the government that failed to look at the books and committed tax payer cash before any conditions on it's use towards bonuses and pensions could be guaranteed.
Members of government are more and more frequently lining up in a vanity contest to position themselves in a future leadership role. If it wasn't costing us so much it might be quite entertaining.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Sir Fred Goodwins Pension
I have not got a lot to say really, except that it is no good chasing Sir Fred down now asking for our money back.
The fault for all RBS expenditure now lies at the feet of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. They rushed headfirst into the deal with RBS and never stopped to consider the full extent of what they were committing the tax payer to take on.
They should have taken a good look at the books, and put legislation in place to cap bonuses, and if possible they could surely have capped extravagant pension contributions. This should have all been in place before the commitment of tax payer funds was made, before the cash went in and before anything was signed.
This was not done, and you and I will no have to pay for it. Remember that next time you go to vote.
The fault for all RBS expenditure now lies at the feet of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. They rushed headfirst into the deal with RBS and never stopped to consider the full extent of what they were committing the tax payer to take on.
They should have taken a good look at the books, and put legislation in place to cap bonuses, and if possible they could surely have capped extravagant pension contributions. This should have all been in place before the commitment of tax payer funds was made, before the cash went in and before anything was signed.
This was not done, and you and I will no have to pay for it. Remember that next time you go to vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)