Inspired by some of the currently active posts and honestly not looking to troll, but at what point did it become accepted wisdom that the last years of economic misery for many was the fault of The Bankers? There are a lot of apparently smart people who will quote this, but I've never got it myself. Surely the people taking loans they couldn't afford to pay back, which the banks then sold on and on, also must shoulder the blame? If I spend more than I can afford, whose fault is that? Surely there is a broader blame to be placed on society as a whole which sold the dream of property ownership, big TV and a nice car for all.
Apologies in advance for naiviety, political insensitivity, you name it. Genuinely interested.
Yes.
Next question.
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Weren't you paying attention then ?
The credit crunch was extensively covered when the shit hit the fan.
Obviously interested parties, ie, bankers, Tories, etc, now want to re-write history......it was all very embarrassing for them. And it has to said they are having some success. As your thread clearly suggests.
I want your money. You know I can't pay it back. But you give it to me anyway, and persuade me that I'll be fine, that the value of the asset I'm borrowing to buy will be an everlasting gobstopper.
Who's the bigger fool?
(Given the information inequity.)
THE BANKERS?
That's like saying that terrorism is all the fault of THE MUSLIMS.
I blame the regulators, or should I say lack of regulation.
One thing I don't understand though is inflation is supposed to be a bad thing and is something that needs to be controlled. However, during the boom years the Bank of England turned a blind eye to rampant house price inflation.
american bankers were the fools in all this.
Surely the people taking loans they couldn't afford to pay back, which the banks then sold on and on, also must shoulder the blame?
That was only a small part of it.
The bankers themselves can't be blamed really, since they were just doing there job - which is to make money. Do you blame other businessmen for wanting to make a profit?
Each individual 'banker' was just working within their organisation and practises. The bosses of each organisation were under pressure to compete with each other.
The only people who are free to control this are the politicians. They didn't control it, and so the blame is with them.
Poor people are generally morons (not all of them) who think they deserve everything for nothing. That's not how life works. I think it's fair they feel the full brunt of the economic crisis.
I have a comfortable life, I have everything I need and can afford everything I want (within reason). I got here through a combination of working very hard, luck and having a good upbringing and a dad who knows people.
In my eyes, I deserve my life. However, there are alot of folk who don't deserve my life and they shouldnt attempt to buy it on credit!
These people need to know their "place". If they want to change their place then that's fine, however this is done through hard work (and taking the odd risk I might add).
People are brought up to believe that they must own their own home. It is a constantly pushed theme by politicians and the general media. People are scared that they are left outside of normal society if they don't conform so they fall in line and borrow to achieve the expectation.
Singularly as individuals, by far the vast majority of us, can have little effect on the course of our lives. We can try and work towards a job we like, maybe save up for a few toys and have a hobby. But we can't jack it all in and become an international playboy and live in a 17th century castle in the south of France. We have to spend much more of our lives giving our time to someone other than ourselves.
Our choices are limited to those that life presents us, and in countries where you own your on home or are nothing, the choice is to borrow whatever you have to, to become like everyone else.
Is this the point where we get the kettle on and the biscuits out ?
I have a comfortable life, I have everything I need and can afford everything I want (within reason). I got here through a combination of working very hard, luck and having a good upbringing and a dad who knows people.
Self entitlement encapsulated in one perfect paragraph.
dt, that thing with trolling...
...less is more, ok?
Regulation for finance is being clamped down, you ain't see nothing yet. google 'mortgage market review' for some night time reading. Basically after easter all secured lending has to be advised. So if you want to borrow 5k to do up your kitchen you'll have to sit through an hour long advised phone call to see which product you should have. At the end of it if you decide you don't like what they've advised you can choose what you want anyway, and that's even before the credit score. It's going to be a massive PITA for everyone. Also for all new borrowing you will have to provide 3 months banks stats and if you go in to your overdraft for a while your mortgage will be declined. I need to do a PSA on this when icba.
😀
I know, I need a new log in.
I was just trying to sum up how a worrying amount of people tend to think
The bankers themselves can't be blamed really, since they were just doing there job - which is to make money. Do you blame other businessmen for wanting to make a profit?
I don't blame anyone making a profit with a modicum of responsibility. I'm not sure lending money to folk who you know can't pay it back is entirely responsible.
😳
It is what so many people do think, and frequently post on here. I fell for it hook line and sinker.
Aw; that had potential to run for days! Spoilsport! 😡
[quote=MSP ]
It is what so many people do think, and frequently post on here. I fell for it hook line and sinker.
Don't feel [i]too[/i] bad about it. DT is Der Trollmeister
I found a series of interesting interviews with some city people recently
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/joris-luyendijk-banking-blog
course it's responsible DD - as long as you can sell on the debt before it defaults (or better still if you can blackmail the government to pay it off when you start your "financial meltdown apocalypse" shroudwaving)I'm not sure lending money to folk who you know can't pay it back is entirely responsible
The banks wanted profit at any cost & messed up, but it's ok as it wasn't their fault, apparently it's the fault of someone else, welcome to this century, HTH.
I stand corrected scaredy. 🙂
The banks wanted profit at any cost & messed up, but it's ok as it wasn't their fault, apparently it's the fault of someone else
Would you let your multi billion pound business (and that of the shareholders) fail because you didn't do what everyone else was doing?
People are brought up to believe that they must own their own home
That's not really it. Owning a home is hugely desirable from a financial point of view.
I know, I need a new log in.
So did cybicle. He got a new one, though.
Owning a home is hugely desirable from a financial point of view.
Yes, but only if you can afford to buy it.
The banks wanted profit at any cost & messed up, but it's ok as it wasn't their fault, apparently it's the fault of someone else
I think the theory runs along these lines :
If banking experiences failure then it's everyone's fault and everyone should be made to bear the consequences.
However if banking experiences great success then the credit must go to the bankers and they should be richly rewarded.
It's the logical progression from nationalise the losses and privatise the profit.
IE, socialism for the bankers, free-market for everyone else.
Owning a home is hugely desirable from a financial point of view.
Because we have built a system where that is the case, and then allowed the prices to spiral to such an extent that people think they have little choice but to overburden themselves to achieve home ownership.
Everything you need to know is here; this [url= http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/ ]oscar winning documentary [/url]spills the beans
Would you let your multi billion pound business (and that of the shareholders) fail because you didn't do what everyone else was doing?
If it was my business & I thought it was a bad business model then yes, are you really saying it was all about shareholders?
Smacks of the Lloyd's insurance investors moaning when they took a loss for the first time ever, shares can go down as well of up, they are a gamble, do you not get that?
If it was my business & I thought it was a bad business model then yes, are you really saying it was all about shareholders?
Well sort of, it's all about competing in the marketplace.
It's like blaming a dog for attacking people. Yes, it's the dog's fault on the face of it, but I blame the owners.
If you ran a bank with anything other than absolute competitiveness, you'd be booted out pretty sharpish and replaced.
If it was my business & I thought it was a bad business model then yes, are you really saying it was all about shareholders?
Thats why you're not a banker
Certainly a society problem, rather than a banking one. We have bubbles all the time: south sea, tulips, property up until 2007.
People were banging at the banks door to borrow 120% to buy houses in the 'have to jump on the bandwagon days'.
What does the bank make on a mortgage? 5% a year less costs? The idiots overstretching themselves were doing so in the hope of doubling their money in 10 years. So who was greedy? Who was lying about being able to repay loans, or not coming up with a plan to pay off interest only loans?
Now the banks have quite reasonably decided not to lend to people who can't be bothered to save up for a deposit. But, we're not having that, so now the government has been forced to step in to lend to the greedy and lazy instead!
As a population we need to get a better handle on debt. No bank ever forced anyone to take out a loan they could not afford. No bank will now lend to anyone who can't prove they can afford it, and the papers are going mad about it, saying lending has to increase. That is the problem in a nutshell.
It's like blaming a dog for attacking people. Yes, it's the dog's fault on the face of it, but I blame the owners.
So the bankers were the dumb animals and the people were the clever owners in charge of the situation?
[quote=skooby39 ]No bank will now lend to anyone who can't prove they can afford it, and the papers are going mad about it,
Too many banks were turning a blind eye (self-certification anyone?) in order to ensure they still had a decent share of the mortgage market. As has been pointed out already, any CEO that didn't achieve this didn't last long.
If banking experiences failure then it's everyone's fault and everyone should be made to bear the consequences.
To be fair that's pretty much the position of every sector of the economy: the harvest fails and the farmers are pleading for aid, bumper harvest and they're not exactly queuing up to pay more. Same with haulage companies, construction etc. etc.
Where we went wrong was is not telling them to f-off. And for that I blame the politicians more than the bankers: they let the banks get "too big to fail".
There have been a few comments on the bankers just doing there job etc. but it is interesting to think who they were working for. Some of the biggest investors in this country are the pension companies. They work for us trying to maximise returns on our investments.
To be honest whenever I see someone "blame the bankers" I lose interest as that is far too simple a summary of something that was massively complex. There are a huge number of factors in play but it is easy to single out one group and plant the blame there. It makes a nice sound bite and it is human nature to try and find a group and blame them.
So, to sum up. Bankers are no more or less corrupt than any other business, but the public's desire to own homes and lack of regulation from the government allowed them to get away with it?
EDIT: and by corrupt, I really mean morally flexible.
Too many banks were turning a blind eye (self-certification anyone?) in order to ensure they still had a decent share of the mortgage market. As has been pointed out already, any CEO that didn't achieve this didn't last long.
Are you saying that those blatantly lying are not responsible for their actions?
Say a friend borrowed £10 off you, saying he'd pay it back, but fully intending to put it on shergar at the bookies. After you've found out, and written off ever seeing it back, would you
a) expect all your friends to call you a swine for lending it to him in the first place, having taken him for his word but not checked it out. Then all ask you for £10 as well.
b) not lend any money to anyone else in the same situation for a while. Have to borrow £2 off Mum to get bus home because you didn't get the £10 back.
Banks are currently doing b. Much of UK population currently doing a.
To be fair that's pretty much the position of every sector of the economy: the harvest fails and the farmers are pleading for aid, bumper harvest and they're not exactly queuing up to pay more. Same with haulage companies, construction etc. etc.
That's not actually true, apart from anything else it is illegal under EU rules for governments to financially prop up companies unless they have special EU dispensation.
Farmers do sometimes get assistance for loss of livestock outside their control, but the whole business isn't propped up, which is what happened with the banks - they were failed businesses, not simply businesses in difficulty.
And I don't know what haulage companies and construction companies have been saved from bankruptcy by the government - care to elaborate ?
The banks received very special treatment, there's no doubt about that.
Capitalism is way too complex a system with too many players for the bankers to be able to bring it down on their own.
There were certainly a lot of shoddy practices going on in the banks, but regulators were asleep on the job and we, the people, went mental on personal debt. And scarily seem to be going right back there again right now.
It's easy for the various stakeholders who would like to deflect the blame away from themselves to blame 'bankers' en masse - they were hardly flavour of the month even when we thought we were rich. It's like blaming all black people for all crime...
We need to be very careful about following simplistic narratives about the crises, otherwise we'll end right back there again in short order
I see the problem as people blaming the regulators, just let the business go bosoms up, why/how does a business get so big it needs regulating?
That to me is the real problem.
[quote=skooby39 ]
Are you saying that those blatantly lying are not responsible for their actions?
oh - I'd say that, individually, they were all responsible for their actions. Fraud actually. However, if you [i]knew[/i] your friend was going to put the borrowed money on a horse at the bookies but lent it to him anyway, would you not accept some complicity?