Bankers "need to join real world" minister says

[Buzzer]

That's not quite true. Marx said that capitalism was inherently unstable and would collapse in the long term but you can't say that he was wrong because the long term hasn't been reached yet.

That's the problem with Marxist theory - it's ultimately meaningless. As Popper demonstrated, because Marx's tenets are unfalsifiable, the theory just can't hold water.

I'm no Marxist, partly because of this lack of intellectual rigour, but can you say that he was proved wrong. Marxists will - and do -say that the current crisis is an example of how right he was.

Sorry, but the past 161 years have proved that Capitalism is very stable. It survived world wars, recessions, technologies, democracy, Communism (which it defeated in the West and will defeat in the East) and it grows bigger and stronger. A free society now cannot exist without it. The argument that 150 years is not long term is a ridiculous standpoint. The Communist Manifesto was written as a blueprint for revolution in the lifetime of its readers so I think its safe to assume what Marx meant when he referred to long term.

 

[Buzzer]

well done, sorry, was trying to do my highly SOUGHT after job whilst typing away on NSC - You ?

Waiting for the IT guys to hook me up with remote access so am twiddling my thumbs and listening to music at home.

 

[Lokki 7]

And all of those are down to Investment Banking bonus schemes ?

My point is that our society is not so diseased that it needs to be completely overhauled.

 

[Lokki 7]

And if all the banks, globally, collapsed what would have been the situation then? Would we have been worse off? I'd like the opiniion of someone in the industry.
QUOTE]

Money would be worthless. I can't imagine what that would bring, but it would be very, very unpleasant. No one would go to work for a start, so who would grow our food? Police our streets? etc

And if all the banks, globally, collapsed what would have been the situation then? Would we have been worse off? I'd like the opiniion of someone in the industry.

And you didn't answer my second point - what would happen if the Dubai situation brought another credit crisis and more collapsing banks, could the UK government afford to bail out any more banks?

A very good question. I guess the real answer is they would, if people have faith in the govt to pay it back one day. If it is seen as too risky then no one would lend to the govt so they would not have the funds to bail anyone out. Printing money would just create inflation. It would be a post-war Germany situation.

Luckily the Dubai exposure is not huge and is fairly well spread.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

I travel all over the country, often to watch the Albion. I moan, but I always arrive safely and often in time and in comfort. I think we take all of this for granted and forget where it has come from. I use Somalia as the complete opposite but you could also use Cuba, Peru, Albania or just about any developing nation. We are bloody well off in this country and it didn't happen by chance, it is underpinned by a way of life that has delivered these things. We should stop and think about it sometimes.

I agree we are better off than the countries you mention, I use public transport quite a lot and I don't find it decent, I would say it is adequate.

 

[WATFORD zero]

My point is that our society is not so diseased that it needs to be completely overhauled.

Well we do agree that Society doesn't need overhauling However is making profits in a growing market and losses in a shrinking market really a vastly underated skill ? It's just that from my experience, when there is a growing market, lots of people claim to be "top performers" as they have made good profits (which, historically has been 90%+ of the time). It's only when times get tough that you really find out who can perform.

 

[Lokki 7]

Well we do agree that Society doesn't need overhauling However is making profits in a growing market and losses in a shrinking market really a vastly underated skill ? It's just that from my experience, when there is a growing market, lots of people claim to be "top performers" as they have made good profits (which, historically has been 90%+ of the time). It's only when times get tough that you really find out who can perform.

I do agree with you, but going back to my original point, we own RBS. If we want it to be worth something, ie get our money back then we need to keep the people making the money. If they leave, our asset devalues.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I do agree with you, but going back to my original point, we own RBS. If we want it to be worth something, ie get our money back then we need to keep the people making the money. If they leave, our asset devalues.

It seems like we are keeping the people who lost the money. And paying them a Kings ransom.

No-one is irreplacable. Other people will come in.

 

[WATFORD zero]

But the point I am trying to make, (albeit badly !) is that we are supposedly going into a period of growth and that to make profits in that period will be relatively straightforward. I am questioning the industry perception that we have to keep the 'high performers' and that we can't replace them. I believe that actual shop floor trading is a relatively short career due to the pressures, so it's not as if we are paying for years and years of experience.

 

[Gwylan]

Sorry, but the past 161 years have proved that Capitalism is very stable. It survived world wars, recessions, technologies, democracy, Communism (which it defeated in the West and will defeat in the East) and it grows bigger and stronger. A free society now cannot exist without it. The argument that 150 years is not long term is a ridiculous standpoint. The Communist Manifesto was written as a blueprint for revolution in the lifetime of its readers so I think its safe to assume what Marx meant when he referred to long term.

You're confusing two works. The Communist Manifesto was indeed a call to arms but that didn't contain the deep analysis of the capitalist economy of Capital. That was the work that described what Marx saw as the inherent instability of capitalism and there was no time limit - he didn't say that it would collapse in 100 years or 150 years, it was left deliberately vague. However, the fact that he saw it happening in the long term does suggest that he saw it occurring beyond his life time.

Is 150 years a long time? When the Chinese communist leader was asked about the consequences of the French revolution he said it was "Too early to tell." Surely the point of history is to identify how events have happened in the past affect today's society. To give two examples: the conflict in Northern Ireland has its roots in events of over 300 years ago and the Balkans crisis of the the 1990s stemmed from the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, so in historical terms, 150 years is nothing,

 

[DJ Leon]

Sorry, but the past 161 years have proved that Capitalism is very stable....it grows bigger and stronger

Marxism arguments aside, I don't think this is true. Capitalism has failed recently, if we'd dogmatically stuck with the free market, major industries (car, banking etc) would have collapsed and we would have had a global financial meltdown. The best way to organise our society it might be, but it's a flawed and failing model.

 

[Lokki 7]

It seems like we are keeping the people who lost the money. And paying them a Kings ransom.

No-one is irreplacable. Other people will come in.

It may seem that way, but what we are actually doing is tainting everyone at RBS with the same brush. Anyhoo, I've bored everyone enough, I'm out and off to my City lunch.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

It may seem that way, but what we are actually doing is tainting everyone at RBS with the same brush. Anyhoo, I've bored everyone enough, I'm out and off to my City lunch.

Good man. You have earned it.

 

[User removed 4]

You've answered a point I didn't make, which is easy enough to do. I haven't called for the abolition of capitalism. I've responded to Lokki's fair point about Northern Rock, and presumably though Bushy has just spontaneously combusted that's what he thinks would have happened to RBS. But even if you accept these organisations have a role to play, they must be regulated in such a way that this insanity cannot continue. Even if that costs a bit.

I havent spontaneously combusted, I've just calmly, languidly even, pointed out that you havent got a f***ing clue what you're talking about, you're just spouting meaningless "bash the bankers" rhetoric, without a clue as to what the course of action you recommend would entail.

 

[Buzzer]

Marxism arguments aside, I don't think this is true. Capitalism has failed recently, if we'd dogmatically stuck with the free market, major industries (car, banking etc) would have collapsed and we would have had a global financial meltdown. The best way to organise our society it might be, but it's a flawed and failing model.

As with Gwylan, point taken and we're now straying into areas where it's beyond my ken. I'm outta here. Have a good weekend

 

[Dandyman]

why is it that its always the people in cushy but non wealth generating jobs who bang on about morality ? You're just like the ugly fat harridans who are constantly carping about page 3 girls being demeaning to women.

What price are stale cliches trading at today?

 

[wellquickwoody]

For what my opinion is worth....(bugger all)....

I understand the need to retain quality staff and, as Bushy said, that finding the correct replacements is not as easy as it sounds. There are an awful lot of bankers out of the industry right now, investment bankers or futures traders or whatever they maybe, that are obviously very talented people. Even without the correct experience I am sure that people that talented, and motivated since unemployment, could learn very, very quickly. The need for bonuses to retain talent in boom times is understood by most people, maybe for now the bankers demanding bonuses should keep their heads down for at least this year. If not, we should call their bluff!

 

[User removed 4]

What price are stale cliches trading at today?

why? starting to get all introspective and thinking about your self worth ?

 

[Dandyman]

why? starting to get all introspective and thinking about your self worth ?

Not really, I add value to a socially vital organisation.You work in a glorified casino. I'm quite happy with my worth.

 

[CHAPPERS]

It may seem that way, but what we are actually doing is tainting everyone at RBS with the same brush. Anyhoo, I've bored everyone enough, I'm out and off to my City lunch.

Stella and sniff no doubt

*jealous*