Eurozone will collapse...

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

It would undo it over time.

There is no way to deal with it without them crying over it and leaving or at least threatening to leave which ultimately would make the government back down. The government needs to stop been afraid of the banks, call their bluff.

Its evident how powerful they were back at the time they won the overdraft charges case, the system was simply too scared to make them hand billions back to consumers.

Even though I went to a great deal of trouble to type out the differences between the manner in which the banks caused the problems and the effects of what is proposed via a Tobin tax would have, I appear to have wasted my time.

The would be no threatening to leave involved at all. Tomorrow the banks start quoting pairs prices for currencies on the global Forex markets. If London carried a Tobin tax nobody would deal with them and pay the tax but instead would use American banks as market makers.

From the global leader, London would be finished from the opening bell of the first day of the unilateral introduction of such a tax. The 1.35 Trillion of capital flow through London markets would be instantly stopped and with Britain closed for that type of business the international banks wouldn't threaten to leave, they would just leave and relocate that business, most probably to America.

We are nothing but a tiny little island in a world of globalisation. Within that area of finance we punch well above our weight and are the global leader.

Failure to understand what we are privileged to be the central hub for and confuse the issue with high street banks charges is hard to describe in words without being insulting. Perhaps if you took time out to think about the different aspects of banking and separated the good from the bad you may understand why Cameron had no choice.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

It would undo it over time.

There is no way to deal with it without them crying over it and leaving or at least threatening to leave which ultimately would make the government back down. The government needs to stop been afraid of the banks, call their bluff.

Its evident how powerful they were back at the time they won the overdraft charges case, the system was simply too scared to make them hand billions back to consumers.

Once again you are letting your understandable dislike for Fred the Shred and his ilk cloud the issue and conflating fat cats, the City of London, the financial sector as a whole and the high street banks. At the same time you avoid the issue of what happens about all those thousands of distinctly non fat cat jobs nationally which depend (directly and indirectly) on the financial sector as a whole. Do you want those jobs lost and the billions the tax payer has put at risk in RBS, HBOS back or not? You can't have it both ways.



---------- Post added at 21:21 ---------- Previous post was at 21:20 ----------

Originally Posted by Traduk

Even though I went to a great deal of trouble to type out the differences between the manner in which the banks caused the problems and the effects of what is proposed via a Tobin tax would have, I appear to have wasted my time.

The would be no threatening to leave involved at all. Tomorrow the banks start quoting pairs prices for currencies on the global Forex markets. If London carried a Tobin tax nobody would deal with them and pay the tax but instead would use American banks as market makers.

From the global leader, London would be finished from the opening bell of the first day of the unilateral introduction of such a tax. The 1.35 Trillion of capital flow through London markets would be instantly stopped and with Britain closed for that type of business the international banks wouldn't threaten to leave, they would just leave and relocate that business, most probably to America.

We are nothing but a tiny little island in a world of globalisation. Within that area of finance we punch well above our weight and are the global leader.

Failure to understand what we are privileged to be the central hub for and confuse the issue with high street banks charges is hard to describe in words without being insulting. Perhaps if you took time out to think about the different aspects of banking and separated the good from the bad you may understand why Cameron had no choice.

Very well explained but I doubt it will make any difference sadly.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Traduk

Even though I went to a great deal of trouble to type out the differences between the manner in which the banks caused the problems and the effects of what is proposed via a Tobin tax would have, I appear to have wasted my time.

The would be no threatening to leave involved at all. Tomorrow the banks start quoting pairs prices for currencies on the global Forex markets. If London carried a Tobin tax nobody would deal with them and pay the tax but instead would use American banks as market makers.

From the global leader, London would be finished from the opening bell of the first day of the unilateral introduction of such a tax. The 1.35 Trillion of capital flow through London markets would be instantly stopped and with Britain closed for that type of business the international banks wouldn't threaten to leave, they would just leave and relocate that business, most probably to America.

We are nothing but a tiny little island in a world of globalisation. Within that area of finance we punch well above our weight and are the global leader.

Failure to understand what we are privileged to be the central hub for and confuse the issue with high street banks charges is hard to describe in words without being insulting. Perhaps if you took time out to think about the different aspects of banking and separated the good from the bad you may understand why Cameron had no choice.

The problem you posted was they up and left sweden right?

I wouldnt care less if they left the UK. Germany seems to manage ok without financial institutes,

---------- Post added at 07:46 ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

Once again you are letting your understandable dislike for Fred the Shred and his ilk cloud the issue and conflating fat cats, the City of London, the financial sector as a whole and the high street banks. At the same time you avoid the issue of what happens about all those thousands of distinctly non fat cat jobs nationally which depend (directly and indirectly) on the financial sector as a whole. Do you want those jobs lost and the billions the tax payer has put at risk in RBS, HBOS back or not? You can't have it both ways.



---------- Post added at 21:21 ---------- Previous post was at 21:20 ----------




Very well explained but I doubt it will make any difference sadly.

It may sound odd to you but no I dont want people remployed in the financial sector, its a trojan horse. Instead I want this country back to manufacturing and IT. That sector the way it makes its money is just overkill capitalism which everyone else bears the cost for as unequal wealth spread. The terms I would let them stay has already been stated as unacceptable to those bankers, its already been made clear to me in this thread that the bankers would up and leave if they were made to share their wealth more, thats the morals of those institutes.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

The problem you posted was they up and left sweden right?

I wouldnt care less if they left the UK. Germany seems to manage ok without financial institutes,

---------- Post added at 07:46 ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 ----------



It may sound odd to you but no I dont want people remployed in the financial sector, its a trojan horse. Instead I want this country back to manufacturing and IT. That sector the way it makes its money is just overkill capitalism which everyone else bears the cost for as unequal wealth spread. The terms I would let them stay has already been stated as unacceptable to those bankers, its already been made clear to me in this thread that the bankers would up and leave if they were made to share their wealth more, thats the morals of those institutes.

What sounds odd to me is that you would sacrifice tens of thousands of existing jobs and billions of tax revenues when you don't have a clue if/how, in the real world, those jobs and revenues could be replaced at a time when large portions of the western world are stuggling to manufacture and sell their goods and we're already looking at more of the same.

In your haste to blame the 'bankers' for everything and tendency to conflate issues, once again you also ignore the public's considerable investment in those banks - do you want that back or are you happy to chuck our money away with a whole lot of other people's jobs?

You can argue all day about some sort of socialist Utopia but we are where we are and you have no answers to the above questions just a desire, seemingly, to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

. Germany seems to manage ok without financial institutes.

That's because Germany still has a manufacturing Industry

[nomadking]

They will do their business somewhere, so it might as well be here. Even if they stayed here, the proposals would take BILLIONS out of the economy, just so that the UK can be forced to help prop up the Euro, despite not being a part of it in any way. We already contribute via the IMF, and separately helped out Ireland.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If only there was a worldwide "General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade", now covered by the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Let's suppose it did happen. It's unlikely that the UK on it's own would have a big enough negative impact in the first place for anybody to feel the need to take that sort of action. It would be more likely that the EU would pose a problem to the US, simply because of their pig-headedness and hatred of the US. In that instance the UK wouldn't be on the receiving end of any US actions. So will people stop talking total and utter nonsense about possible outcomes that are never going to happen.

We never had(nor will have) any input to any proposals, so not submitting to Berlin's demands won't have a negative impact on any potential influence. Simply agreeing to what Berlin says, is not having influence.

The sooner it happens, the better!

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Osem

What sounds odd to me is that you would sacrifice tens of thousands of existing jobs and billions of tax revenues when you don't have a clue if/how, in the real world, those jobs and revenues could be replaced at a time when large portions of the western world are stuggling to manufacture and sell their goods and we're already looking at more of the same.

In your haste to blame the 'bankers' for everything and tendency to conflate issues, once again you also ignore the public's considerable investment in those banks - do you want that back or are you happy to chuck our money away with a whole lot of other people's jobs?

You can argue all day about some sort of socialist Utopia but we are where we are and you have no answers to the above questions just a desire, seemingly, to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I am very confident the financial sector has lost far more then tens of thousands of jobs elsewhere.

The publics investment isnt really an investment, its a handout. It looks clear there is no chance of that money been recouped especially with the sale of NR at a loss.

We need a system reset, which involves pain. Not some sort of pretend fix which involves attacking the sick.

The size of the financial sector compared to the damage its caused is small.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I am very confident the financial sector has lost far more then tens of thousands of jobs elsewhere.

The publics investment isnt really an investment, its a handout. It looks clear there is no chance of that money been recouped especially with the sale of NR at a loss.

We need a system reset, which involves pain. Not some sort of pretend fix which involves attacking the sick.

The size of the financial sector compared to the damage its caused is small.

I must say that your 'argument' seems more based on blind, irrational and misplaced revenge for what's happened than about the best way forward at this time. You're now saying that because jobs have been lost (due to a combination of a spendthrift government, an ineffective regulator and a relatively small number of very greedy people at the very top of part of the financial sector) it's quite OK to sacrifice yet more jobs and money. All this despite the fact that UK PLC needs both greatly right now given the massive amount of debt and spending we're wrestling with. You totally ignore the fact that the damage you speak of has been done but then seek to rub salt in the wound it's created in revenge.

You say we need a 'system reset' as if you're talking about your phone NOT one of the world's largest economies and seem to think this can be done at the flick of a switch and in complete isolation from the rest of the world and the global financial system. You talk about lost billions and jobs as if they don't matter - as if they're all going to be the fat cats you loathe when in fact the vast majority of those jobs will be ordinary hardworking decent people who're struggling to get by. We give away our financial sector and what it generates and just create viable, long term manufacturing jobs out of nowhere seems to be your sole argument.

Finally, you glibly say the Germans 'seem to manage OK without financial institutions'. Are you for real? Go and tell that to the financial institutions based in Frankfurt - yes Frankfurt - continental Europe's largest financial centre which the Germans are highly protective of and would love to expand. You really need to check your facts you know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt

Anyway it's pointless debating an issue with someone who refuses to let facts get in the way of his argument so I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Osem

I must say that your 'argument' seems more based on blind, irrational and misplaced revenge for what's happened than about the best way forward at this time. You're now saying that because jobs have been lost (due to a combination of a spendthrift government, an ineffective regulator and a relatively small number of very greedy people at the very top of part of the financial sector) it's quite OK to sacrifice yet more jobs and money. All this despite the fact that UK PLC needs both greatly right now given the massive amount of debt and spending we're wrestling with. You totally ignore the fact that the damage you speak of has been done but then seek to rub salt in the wound it's created in revenge.

You say we need a 'system reset' as if you're talking about your phone NOT one of the world's largest economies and seem to think this can be done at the flick of a switch and in complete isolation from the rest of the world and the global financial system. You talk about lost billions and jobs as if they don't matter - as if they're all going to be the fat cats you loathe when in fact the vast majority of those jobs will be ordinary hardworking decent people who're struggling to get by. We give away our financial sector and what it generates and just create viable, long term manufacturing jobs out of nowhere seems to be your sole argument.

I think we're having to agree to disagree and move on.

Yes because my view is future growth will be permanently damaged unless one of 2 things happen.

1 - regulation introduced to restrict profits in the financial sector.
2 - Financial sector disbanded.

How much of the country outside of the financial sector is been damaged by the focus put on it.

Agree to disagree.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

2 - Financial sector disbanded.

.

Nurse..... Nurse.....Nurse!!....NURSE!!!!

Originally Posted by Pierre

Nurse..... Nurse.....Nurse!!....NURSE!!!!

The emphasis in this one is equally worrying:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

1 - regulation introduced to restrict profits in the financial sector.

The aim of regulation should not be to restrict profits, it should be to restrict dangerous activity that puts the savings of ordinary people at risk.

The notion that profit is an inherently bad thing is just nuts. The wheels would come off this country pretty quick if we carried on like that.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Nurse..... Nurse.....Nurse!!....NURSE!!!!

I fear we may need to call one....

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Germany seems to manage ok without financial institutes.

Yeah right!

[tweetiepooh]

Me thinks that it's only really the Germans who do well out of the Euro. They are one of the larger countries both in size and finance but they are pretty much wholly northern European so will tend to have the same thinking about work and finance across the nation.

France is big but stretches more widely that Germany so while the political classes are up north they do have a med "border too".

So we have northern Germany and political France trying to impose a common financial model on countries with very different outlooks and attitudes. Then they wonder why it doesn't work.

Maybe they should have kept national currencies and financial rules and made the Euro a sort of trade currency so businesses could trade across boundaries with less regulation and better pricing and then set prices to consumers according to local conditions.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Chris

The emphasis in this one is equally worrying:



The aim of regulation should not be to restrict profits, it should be to restrict dangerous activity that puts the savings of ordinary people at risk.

The notion that profit is an inherently bad thing is just nuts. The wheels would come off this country pretty quick if we carried on like that.

excessive profit is a bad thing, as profits ultimately have to come from somewhere.

you not noticed whenever the top 1% get richer then the rest suffer?

It would seem the US and the UK are sucking the world dry in pure greed cultures.

The financial sector in itself puts the savings of average people at risk, I call it for it to be disbanded and you call me nuts, what is it you want as you cant have both. If you support the financial sector then you support risk.