Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
Apologies if it's already been posted - i've been away
Anyway, remember St Fred Goodwin, who nearly brought down the Royal Bank of Scotland, running up the greatest losses in UK corporate history and needing tens of billions in taxpayer funded bail outs. Who was then punished by being forced to keep his knighthood and having to scrimp by on £365k a year as a pension, paid for from the bank he nearly destroyed (ie being paid by the taxpayer?
Well, guess what, he's got himself another job as an advisor to RMJM. RMJM are the architects who successfully delivered the Scottish Parliament building 3 years late and 10 times over budget.
[url= http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6990445.ece ]Speechless[/url]
Anyway, remember St Fred Goodwin, who nearly brought down the Royal Bank of Scotland, running up the greatest losses in UK corporate history and needing tens of billions in taxpayer funded bail outs
Yes, because Fred Goodwin was the guy who personally approved each and every dodgy loan, mortgage, credit card etc and the entire thing is of course his fault, as the newspapers have told us. 🙄
That's nothing, Tony Blair is the bringer of peace to the Middle East.
That's nothing, Tony Blair is the bringer of peace to the Middle East.
Thanks. That p*sses me off every time somebody reminds me of it.
The deluded, power-crazed smug git.
It really doesn’t surprise me 🙄
Yes, because Fred Goodwin was the guy who personally approved each and every dodgy loan, mortgage, credit card etc and the entire thing is of course his fault, as the newspapers have told us
So who did approve the lowering of standards so that the dodgy loans, mortgages and credit cards would get approved? With authority comes responsibility, no?
Yes, because Fred Goodwin was the guy who personally approved each and every dodgy loan, mortgage, credit card etc and the entire thing is of course his fault, as the newspapers have told us.
He probably did have quite a lot to do with the purchase of ABN Amro though, which was pretty instrumental in RBS going breasts skywards.
It should probably be pointed out that Fred Goodwin was Chief Executive between 2000 and 2008, during which time the RBS [u]grew[/u] to be the fifth largest bank in the world.
So even though it subsequently went belly up, he isn't the entirely useless klutz that the papers portray him as.
On the subject of the bankers who approved all the dodgy deals that led to the crash, who made it possible for them? In this country, at least...
all the people who wanted stuff now but wanted to pay for it later?
The acquisition of NatWest and subsequent integration is generally regarded as one of the best implemented mergers of two banks. The takeover of ABN Amro, particularly after the sale of their US bank to Bank of America which is what RBS wanted, for cash was his ego getting the better of him and led to most of RBS's present woes.
At that level, he is [u]accountable[/u] for everything.
i agree with Hainey he is responsible for it all - he was in charge it was his watch.
On the subject of the bankers who approved all the dodgy deals that led to the crash, who made it possible for them?
Thatcher. And who voted for her?
Oh and bear in mind accountability is not the same as culpability.
Is there an alternative to Goodwin's (no relation) law about mentioning Hitler on a thread for the "It's all Fatcher's Fault"?
😆 @ Zokes!
Molgrips, I'm sure it was someone else who promised "light tough regulation". I wonder who...
And who voted for him?
Ah - it's all Thatcher's fault, eh?
Who favoured "light touch" banking regulation?
Who was "intensely relaxed" about people being "filthy rich"?
Hmmmm...
Thatcher deffo deregulated the banks and started the ball rolling, but Calamity Broon ("I have outlawed .. boom and bust") saw all the free money and either was daft enough to believe it was going to last ever or was daft enough to believe it was his gee whiz economics that made us all richer, not magic money coming from nowhere.
Sir Fred Goodwin actually said "we do not do sub prime" at a city meeting of shareholders. Totally untrue.
Bought ABN Ambro for £20bn( I think), after the RBS crash found to be valued at zero.
Well, guess what, he's got himself another job as an advisor to RMJM
Er, this has been known about for some weeks. Does STW exist in a parallel dimension way behind the times.
Oh, hold on, it's published from Todmorden, isn't it? 😀
(And, for sanity, what mefty said...).
Mr Woppit - MemberOn the subject of the bankers who approved all the dodgy deals that led to the crash, who made it possible for them? In this country, at least...
A very good point Mr Woppit, and something which is well worth remembering - good on you for bringing it up.
As molgrips suggests, deregulation of the financial services industry was an absolutely vital and central feature of the 'Thatcher revolution'.
When Thatcher came to power in '79 the Wilson government had placed very strict credit controls. For example banks were only allowed to lend for specific purchases, and the borrower was forced to contribute at least one third of the purchase price. And there was no such thing as 100% mortgages, and certainly no 110+% mortgages, iirc a minimum of 10% deposit was required.
Thatcher immediately set about scrapping credit controls and deregulating the banks. This was partly due to her unwavering commitment to laissez-faire economics and the 'invisible hand' of the market.
And partly because she was committed to cutting back on wages - one of her mantras at the time was "[i]we've been paying ourselves too much, for doing too little[/i]" and therefore credit had to be made more easily available to the ordinary consumer. Her counterpart in the US, Ronald Reagan, also deregulated the US banks.
It was should be noted that Thatcher's commitment to laissez-faire economics and the invisible hand of the market was always very selective. She certainly didn't, for example, extend it to the setting of interest rates, which was kept totally under political control and used it as a means of controlling the economy - with such devastating effect.
The Thatcher/Reagan revolution led to massive profits for the financial institutions - in fact embarrassingly high profits. So much so, that Thatcher was forced to slap a windfall tax on the banks.
The Thatcher/Reagan revolution also unleashed new levels of greed by the financial institutions. A level of greed which became blind and in denial of the risks. A level of greed which was only concerned with short-term results.
It also created a culture of culmination of material wealth and property ownership, driven by easy and irresponsible credit. Eventually the chickens had to come home to roost, and they did, in 2008, starting with the US financial institutions.
Still, never mind. When the going was good, many people got very rich. And when things went a sour, well, as the OP points out, it's always a 'win win' situation for the people who really matter. So I'm sure that if Thatcher hadn't lost her marbles, she'd be cool with it all.
But is there any culpability on the part of New Labour in all of this ? Too ****ing right there is - they had 12 years to consign Thatcherism and Reaganomics to the dustbin of history, but they chose not to do so. Something which I will never forgive them for.
just wondering Monsieur Lynch, but what is it that you do in the real world? your posts are always so well constructed and detailed, no idea if they're factual though (assume they are?)
nice analysis Ernie
Just found out that RBS 80% owned by the UK taxpayer has put up the majority of the funds needed by Kraft to buy Cadbury about 8 billion. We have effectively paid for the takeover of one of our Iconic brands. Only in the UK.
Lynch, but what is it that you do in the real world?
Loads of stuff. Employment wise - I'm just a simple soul who's happy just to earn an honest crust
........ what Jesus would have done.
So Fred did good in the end, who would have thought......