Lib Dem's New Banking Rules

Waterfield

Waterfield

Well-known member
Messages
251
Likes
75
Since Hotch isn't going to post this, I will!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8617345.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport...ses_small.html

"These are the highlights:

1) All bonuses over £2,500 would be payable in shares, which couldn't be redeemed, or pledged as security for loans or turned into anything spendable for at least five years.

2) No one on the board of a bank, not even the chief executive, would be eligible for a penny of bonus.

3) Loss-making banks would be banned from paying bonuses.

4) Every employee of a bank earning more than the prime minister - which Mr Clegg defines as circa £200,000 - would be publicly named.

5) Bank directors would be fined if their banks were to break the remuneration code."

I was going to vote Lib Dem to win in my Constituency (which they will) but now I'm not so sure. I think they're a bit late on the banker bashing bandwagon to be frank.
 
load of ****e, cant wait to move out of this socialist state.

"Loss-making banks would be banned from paying bonuses." is this so all the people who could turn it into a profitable bank go work else where? so dumb

why should you be "publicly named" if you earn over 200k..

all the political manifestos for the election have a very stalin esque feel, soon we will be addressing each other as comrade.
 
Lib Dems have my vote!!!!

I found the following comment hilarious:

Mr Clegg's latest plans have been met with alarm in the City. Stephen Pope, chief global equity strategist at Cantor Fitzgerald said: "Can the Lib Dems really believe that their policies have any merit in making the banking system or the City of London strong?" He added: "Yes there is a need for reform, we have to celebrate the intelligence and innovation in the City not give it a dose of euthanasia."

"intelligence and innovation" ??!! :LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:

Reckless b@sterds... make em pay!
 
This would be comical if it were not so serious. The result of a policy such as this would see an exodus of all financial talent from London and finish off London as being a financial centre.

This is another example of idiotic politicians making foolhardy policies for which they have no understanding whatsoever of the consequences of them being implemented.


Paul
 
Trader333 said:
This would be comical if it were not so serious. The result of a policy such as this would see an exodus of all financial talent from London and finish off London as being a financial centre.

--> Good riddance to bad rubbish!! (y)
Only true Capitalism should survive.. not the "profit is private and loss is public"
type of communism. These boys (and girls) can go to Russia and setup shops there
if thats how they want to play the game!
How can these disaster creating, economy wrecking morons be called "talented" is
beyond me! They are lucky not to have been jailed (or lynched by Joe public)


This is another example of idiotic politicians making foolhardy policies for which they have no understanding whatsoever of the consequences of them being implemented.

--> er.. the public emptied their tax pockets to help out these sw1ne. The
consequences of NOT implementing controls are now very well known. Thanks.

Paul
Click to expand...

Chill
 
Chill, I'm pretty sure these rules will be implemented on all banks. Not just the bailed out ones.
 
Waterfield said:
Chill, I'm pretty sure these rules will be implemented on all banks. Not just the bailed out ones.
Click to expand...

I sure hope they are implemented rigidly on ALL banks.

Also, split the retail (useful) and investment (cowboyzone) arms.

..and some really stringent rules so that they stop p1ssing on my pension pot.
 
N Rothschild said:
....
"Loss-making banks would be banned from paying bonuses." is this so all the people who could turn it into a profitable bank go work else where? so dumb
....
Click to expand...

This depends on what their bonuses are for. If you get a bonus just via some chap on the board deciding you're a decent chap, and shame about the sub-prime losses, then off with their heads! And their bonuses.

But if you have a contract saying you will earn a bonus for achieving such and such a target, then there should be nothing the state can do about it.

The main problem is that the BoE and the Fed etc were clueless.

And I don't follow your logic - if the people getting bonuses are the ones who could turn the bank around, surely they wouldn't have made a loss in the first place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
UFX bank - is this a good deal? 50% bonus
Replies
6
Views
3K
FxColombia
F
Pat494
Should the banks be making millionaires ?
Replies
2
Views
2K
wackypete2
W
0007
Banking's not so risky then ?
Replies
10
Views
3K
shadowninja
shadowninja
Ben Tippen
  • Article
Interviews Day Trading & Scalping Interview with US Stock Scalp Trader Ben Tippen
Replies
1
Views
6K
coopster
C
Top