Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Britain 'loses'in Capping Bankers Bonesses?
I thought personally that is a success to the public? Its about time these idiots stop getting all the money they rob from the general public. How can they say the uk lost? They were responsible for the reccession yet they were still getting massive bonusses while people were losing there homes.
Yes it may well mean London is no longer the financial capital but hey I think the UK has bigger problems it should be dealing with.\
http://
Yes it may well mean London is no longer the financial capital but hey I think the UK has bigger problems it should be dealing with.\
http://
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by honeydip. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I suppose your definition of "success to the public" is key to this question.
If you believe that laws that regulate the conduct of large UK companies are best made by unelected foreigners then I suppose it counts as a success. However, if you believe such matters should be determined by the UK elected Parliament then I imagine it is less of a success, more of a diktat imposed by people from overses.
If you believe that laws that regulate the conduct of large UK companies are best made by unelected foreigners then I suppose it counts as a success. However, if you believe such matters should be determined by the UK elected Parliament then I imagine it is less of a success, more of a diktat imposed by people from overses.
Exactly... how dare they.
another diktat handed down from our unelected undemocratic masters in the EUSSR, awaiting the day they have total control over the Jewel in The Crown...The UK and its financial services sector.
If the UK turned round today and said get rid of Greece,stop Bulgaria, Romania, turkey et al coming and we'll join , adopt the Euro the full monty whole membership shebang , theyd bite our hand off so quickly you wouldnt even realise theyd done it. (theyd go back on the deal and get the other countries subjugated at a later date) but as long as they could get control over us thats all that matters to them
we are the top prize and this is just another coup for them on the road to their superstate building ambitions
another diktat handed down from our unelected undemocratic masters in the EUSSR, awaiting the day they have total control over the Jewel in The Crown...The UK and its financial services sector.
If the UK turned round today and said get rid of Greece,stop Bulgaria, Romania, turkey et al coming and we'll join , adopt the Euro the full monty whole membership shebang , theyd bite our hand off so quickly you wouldnt even realise theyd done it. (theyd go back on the deal and get the other countries subjugated at a later date) but as long as they could get control over us thats all that matters to them
we are the top prize and this is just another coup for them on the road to their superstate building ambitions
"If you believe that laws that regulate the conduct of large UK companies are best made by unelected foreigners then I suppose it counts as a success"
On the other hand, if you believe that the laws governing large UK banks are best made by the recipients of large donations from the financial sector, then I guess it's a failure.
On the other hand, if you believe that the laws governing large UK banks are best made by the recipients of large donations from the financial sector, then I guess it's a failure.
Recipients from the financial sector or not, rojash, they are still the elected government of the UK. If the electorate does not like such recipients being in charge it has the opportunity to boot them out. They have no such choice with unelected EU commisioners.
I'm not particularly fussed about the issue one way or the other. In the overall scheme of things bonuses given to bankers are small beer. I don't however, enjoy the fact that unelected foreign officials can determine how much UK companies can pay their staff.
No doubt the Europhiles will say that this is another example of the EU championing the rights of the consumer. However, this has nothing to do with the consumer and everything to do with detsroying the UK's position as the number one financial centre in Europe. If you think, honeydip, that London losing its place as the prime financial centre for Europe is somewhat irrelevant you should take a look at how much cash the City earns brings into the country.
I'm not particularly fussed about the issue one way or the other. In the overall scheme of things bonuses given to bankers are small beer. I don't however, enjoy the fact that unelected foreign officials can determine how much UK companies can pay their staff.
No doubt the Europhiles will say that this is another example of the EU championing the rights of the consumer. However, this has nothing to do with the consumer and everything to do with detsroying the UK's position as the number one financial centre in Europe. If you think, honeydip, that London losing its place as the prime financial centre for Europe is somewhat irrelevant you should take a look at how much cash the City earns brings into the country.
" everything to do with detsroying the UK's position as the number one financial centre in Europe."
How?
At the moment all European banks pay enormous bonuses. If no European banks pay enormous bonuses, the playing field remains level, so how exactly will that destroy the UK's position as the the number one financial centre in Europe?
How?
At the moment all European banks pay enormous bonuses. If no European banks pay enormous bonuses, the playing field remains level, so how exactly will that destroy the UK's position as the the number one financial centre in Europe?
As much as I dislike fatcat bankers, it does seem to be more about bringing the UK financial sector to heel than anything else.
The banks will be paying fatcats the same money, they'll just have to put more of it into salaries, which makes them look less profitable. It won't do anything for the consumer.
I guess people are happy to laugh off the fact that unelected foreigners are overuling the British government so long as the dictats being issued fall broadly in line with their own views. If that changes they may be less happy about it.
The banks will be paying fatcats the same money, they'll just have to put more of it into salaries, which makes them look less profitable. It won't do anything for the consumer.
I guess people are happy to laugh off the fact that unelected foreigners are overuling the British government so long as the dictats being issued fall broadly in line with their own views. If that changes they may be less happy about it.
Europe hates the fact London is bigger than FFT. They wont stop until we are dragged down to their level.
This is a total nonsense. All it will serve is to drive those that can receive large bonuses to countries that are not part of the scheme. Banks are multi national they dont need to be in europe for 'casino' banking as you all usually call it. So we will loose the tax on it, bucket loads of it.
Nice one, know how to shoot yourselves in the foot dont you.
This is a total nonsense. All it will serve is to drive those that can receive large bonuses to countries that are not part of the scheme. Banks are multi national they dont need to be in europe for 'casino' banking as you all usually call it. So we will loose the tax on it, bucket loads of it.
Nice one, know how to shoot yourselves in the foot dont you.
"As much as I dislike fatcat bankers, it does seem to be more about bringing the UK financial sector to heel than anything else. "
Its a lot more than to heel, its just another step on the way to total control over what at the moment they would love to get their hands on more than anything else in their empire building world, our FSS.
Like I have already stated, they would give up half of the current EU countries they are wrecking/wrecked if they could get control over us and our FSS.
The actual bonuses and amounts etc is a side issue, I dont agree with the way theyre dished out and the amounts etc etc, but I sure as hell disagree a million times more with the fact that these power grabbing rswipes in brussells are telling us what we can and cant do, as NJ has said the actual amounts are mere bagatelle in the scale of things.
Just another step that gives them an excuse to foist more control over our country.....yes, our country not theirs
Its a lot more than to heel, its just another step on the way to total control over what at the moment they would love to get their hands on more than anything else in their empire building world, our FSS.
Like I have already stated, they would give up half of the current EU countries they are wrecking/wrecked if they could get control over us and our FSS.
The actual bonuses and amounts etc is a side issue, I dont agree with the way theyre dished out and the amounts etc etc, but I sure as hell disagree a million times more with the fact that these power grabbing rswipes in brussells are telling us what we can and cant do, as NJ has said the actual amounts are mere bagatelle in the scale of things.
Just another step that gives them an excuse to foist more control over our country.....yes, our country not theirs
How does this help destroy London as the leading financial centre in Europe? Simple. By demonstrating that the EU seeks to exercise control over the UK’s financial industry. This is but the thin edge of the wedge (as are almost all EU measures which are seemingly trivial but which soon escalate into regulation on a massive scale). As it seems so many people think this is a good idea it may be “well received” by the public. After all, who cares about a few millionaires having their bonuses restricted to “only” a year’s salary? So what next? The Financial Transaction Tax? No bother there, it is only 0.5% on transactions which many of us know little or nothing about. (but which, in fact, the UK would pay about 75% of if implemented across the EU. But who cares?) Then what? A tax every time you move your own money between bank accounts? (“After all, the banks already pay it, individuals also do so when they buy shares, so it’s only fair that they do so when they move their money” will come the cry).
The EU has no right to seek to control the UK’s financial institutions (or indeed anything else for which regulation is the responsibility of the UK government). It has no right to tell UK companies, whatever business or industry they may be in, how much they may pay their staff. The UK’s fishing industry has been all but wiped out because of EU regulation. Much of the farming industry is on its knees for the same reason. They will not be content until our financial services have been similarly crippled and this is just the first bullet in their opening salvo.
If people think this is all fine and dandy they should think again because once this comes into force the unelected Eurocrats may well turn their attention to a business or industry nearer to your heart.
The EU has no right to seek to control the UK’s financial institutions (or indeed anything else for which regulation is the responsibility of the UK government). It has no right to tell UK companies, whatever business or industry they may be in, how much they may pay their staff. The UK’s fishing industry has been all but wiped out because of EU regulation. Much of the farming industry is on its knees for the same reason. They will not be content until our financial services have been similarly crippled and this is just the first bullet in their opening salvo.
If people think this is all fine and dandy they should think again because once this comes into force the unelected Eurocrats may well turn their attention to a business or industry nearer to your heart.
how would it be if the big wigs in the EU or faceless bureaucrats which ever you prefer, tell your boss how much he can pay you, or give you in bonuses, that wouldn't be fair would it, it's up to the boss, company, surely to set it's own wage, bonus structure, so why should they be able to do this. do you think that it's ok they hold sway over every aspect of our lives?
No they are not elected, fred. They are appointed by the government of the day. (In fact they too are not elected but chosen by the people who are elected, but let's not split hairs).
Whatever way you care to look at it the financial regulators of the UK have greater legitimacy than unelected EU Commissioners. If anyone can explain to me why somebody in Bulgaria or Latvia should have a say in how much Barclays pays its staff I'd willingly listen.
Whatever way you care to look at it the financial regulators of the UK have greater legitimacy than unelected EU Commissioners. If anyone can explain to me why somebody in Bulgaria or Latvia should have a say in how much Barclays pays its staff I'd willingly listen.
Perhaps some people feel that as the Banks have been found to be;
repeatedly swindling citizens by mis-selling products,
rigging the markets to the detriment of every one of us
and exercising extreme negligence in their dealings to the extent that the financial meltdown has caused severe social damage across the entire world
Then maybe someone should intervene and dictate what they can and can't do
Let's not pretend they're like other sectors. Incompetence and melt down in other sectors doesn't usually cause widespread ruin for most of the population.
But hang on - isn't there a precedent here? haven't the FSS long accepted compliance with lots of rules laid down by faceless unelected people?
repeatedly swindling citizens by mis-selling products,
rigging the markets to the detriment of every one of us
and exercising extreme negligence in their dealings to the extent that the financial meltdown has caused severe social damage across the entire world
Then maybe someone should intervene and dictate what they can and can't do
Let's not pretend they're like other sectors. Incompetence and melt down in other sectors doesn't usually cause widespread ruin for most of the population.
But hang on - isn't there a precedent here? haven't the FSS long accepted compliance with lots of rules laid down by faceless unelected people?
one thing you missed out, that some people, perhaps that was lots of people took out loans, they didn't have to, many took on mortgages that they knew they would not be able to afford, or at least conveniently disregarded the fact that not everything in the work place, garden is rosy, so don't borrow more than you can afford to pay back. in fact where it's possible don't borrow at all, as it leaves you in debt, you will pay a lot of interest and you won't be thanked by your bank when you repay the loan early. Lots of blame heaped on the banking sector, yes i agree some of it is warranted, but people are also responsible for themselves, their families and their lives, if you want to say we are in this one together.
I agree in principle em but when i was starting in business a very wise old acquaintance advised me: 'owing money you can't pay back is bad, but not so bad as being owed money by people who can't pay you back'
Most of the people who borrowed more than they could repay have been held responsible; ie they've had their homes repossessed
the banks are responsible for lending money to people who obviously couldn't afford it. The banks' responsibility has been met by everyone else bailing them out.
Most of the people who borrowed more than they could repay have been held responsible; ie they've had their homes repossessed
the banks are responsible for lending money to people who obviously couldn't afford it. The banks' responsibility has been met by everyone else bailing them out.
1 to 20 of 20
Latest Posts
Songs That Should Have Been Number 1
Music9 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
What Do You Think Of The King's...
News163 mins ago
Animals & Nature247 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.