View Full Version : Sorry seems to be the hardest word
Watched the gang of four on TV last night offering their rehearsed apologies. the 'apologies' were meant to head off the drubbing I guess. I agree with the Select Committee chairman in his view that they were sorry only in the sense that they regretted what had happened, well they would be wouldn't they as it stopped the gravy train, but not sorry in the sense of personal culpability.
Hornby is now a consultant with Lloyds Banking Group, advising on how to obtain maximum value from the HBOS takeover - in other words, telling them how many people to sack and how to screw suppliers still further. For this he is paid £60K.
A month, that is.
What a price for failure. Why is it that these failures always seem to manage to bounce back? Old boys club dies hard
MiniMatt
11-02-09, 12:25 PM
Folks who have disproportionately lined their own pockets at the expense of the nation being asked questions by hardworking honest good value elected public servants.
Or have I got that the wrong way round? :D
Banks got greedy, whoop-de-do, news flash there. Private enterprise will always go after the buck, it's pretty much the exact definition of private enterprise, it worked for so long that people were beginning to profer Thatcher up for sainthood. It's the job of government to regulate that greed, and they failed. But whilst it's tempting just to blame the current incumbents, in truth Reagan and Thatcher are just as much to blame as Brown and Bush.
And to be fair, we've had a reasonable run, perhaps quarter century of boom followed by five years of bust is a preferable cycle to constant creep.
Meh, it's happened before, it'll happen again, the bankers concerned yesterday are just four of a slimy greedy bunch. And greed is what makes capitalism work - whether that's a good thing or not is another matter altogether.
Ceri JC
11-02-09, 01:05 PM
Folks who have disproportionately lined their own pockets at the expense of the nation being asked questions by hardworking honest good value elected public servants.
Or have I got that the wrong way round? :D
Banks got greedy, whoop-de-do, news flash there. Private enterprise will always go after the buck, it's pretty much the exact definition of private enterprise, it worked for so long that people were beginning to profer Thatcher up for sainthood. It's the job of government to regulate that greed, and they failed. But whilst it's tempting just to blame the current incumbents, in truth Reagan and Thatcher are just as much to blame as Brown and Bush.
And to be fair, we've had a reasonable run, perhaps quarter century of boom followed by five years of bust is a preferable cycle to constant creep.
Meh, it's happened before, it'll happen again, the bankers concerned yesterday are just four of a slimy greedy bunch. And greed is what makes capitalism work - whether that's a good thing or not is another matter altogether.
Bang on the money. :)
Flamin_Squirrel
11-02-09, 01:13 PM
It's the job of government to regulate that greed, and they failed.
Not only that, but by taxing savings they forced financial institutions to take bigger risks to get the returns savers needed
But whilst it's tempting just to blame the current incumbents, in truth Reagan and Thatcher are just as much to blame as Brown and Bush.
Nah. If Brown didn't see this coming, you can hardly blame Thatcher.
Meh, it's happened before, it'll happen again, the bankers concerned yesterday are just four of a slimy greedy bunch. And greed is what makes capitalism work - whether that's a good thing or not is another matter altogether.
Might not be good, but it's the least worst.
isnt it time we all moved on? we've worked out who's to blame, they've had their rollicking, can they/we/us now concentrate on resolving this sticky situation...
just a thought like...
Dicky Ticker
11-02-09, 01:45 PM
As a freemason I object to the suggestions of corruption and greed. I suggest to you that you have not the slightest inclanation what freemasonry is about, is he a freemason?
Perhaps we should be saying the banking industry is riddled with greed and corruption
AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE as I don't like being put down by people who don't even know me
Biker Biggles
11-02-09, 01:57 PM
The real lesson we will fail to learn here is that these people who earn vast amounts of money on the basis that they are irreplaceable and "very special"are actually nothing special and no different to millions of other hard working intelligent people.They and many others like them are not worth the huge salaries and continue to con the rest of us by threatening to clear off elsewhere if we wont pay them "properly".Theres plenty more still pulling this fast one in every walk of life,not just banking.
SoulKiss
11-02-09, 02:08 PM
As a freemason I object to the suggestions of corruption and greed. I suggest to you that you have not the slightest inclanation what freemasonry is about, is he a freemason?
Perhaps we should be saying the banking industry is riddled with greed and corruption
AN APOLOGY WOULD BE NICE as I don't like being put down by people who don't even know me
Why get so upset?
If you are a member of a secret society (or a society with secrets as I believe the preferred term is) you cant get upset when someone from outside of your Sky-Fairy Believing Society questions what goes on behind its closed doors.
Its not you thats being attacked - but if all is above board why the secrecy?
Dicky Ticker
11-02-09, 02:34 PM
Perhaps its because we do good things in this world that we don't want praise for unlike many others.Perhaps its because we are non religious.perhaps its because we are non political,non racist,and open to all men of good character.Privacy,secrets seems a bit far fetched when I can go to several sites where every part of our organisation is there for examination
I agree it wasn't a personal attack but I am sure if I started saying similar about IT Operatives, Lawyers,Medical Staff or such like we would get a few retorts.
Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing so when its something you don't know about best to say nothing.
kwak zzr
11-02-09, 02:40 PM
isnt it time we all moved on? we've worked out who's to blame, they've had their rollicking, can they/we/us now concentrate on resolving this sticky situation...
just a thought like...
a HUGE pay cut would see them good, could use the saved monies to help people keep their homes.
gettin2dizzy
11-02-09, 02:44 PM
.Perhaps its because we are non religious
I thought the opposite was true?
As far as I can tell, it's more about going to the pub, so can't all be bad :rolleyes:
SoulKiss
11-02-09, 02:49 PM
Perhaps its because we do good things in this world that we don't want praise for unlike many others.Perhaps its because we are non religious.perhaps its because we are non political,non racist,and open to all men of good character.Privacy,secrets seems a bit far fetched when I can go to several sites where every part of our organisation is there for examination
I agree it wasn't a personal attack but I am sure if I started saying similar about IT Operatives, Lawyers,Medical Staff or such like we would get a few retorts.
Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing so when its something you don't know about best to say nothing.
There was me thinking that you had to have a belief in "A Higher Being" and swear an oath to that effect (unable to assertain whether this has to be sworn while standing on one leg with your moobs out or not however) - which makes it religious. The fact that until recently that would have meant that all members in a locale would have probably gone to the same church doesn't help.
And a little knowledge may be dangerous - but thats not my fault that its all I am allowed to have (although the Wikipedia entry IS quite informative).
Oops I've trodden on DT's corns. Maybe on others too.
I'm used to lawyer jibes on here - and elsewhere. If I spent my life complaining about them I'd be a deeply unhappy person, so I simply smile and think 'they haven't got a clue...'
No the comment wasn't personal.
I am sorry that I offended you, DT and I happily withdraw the comment even though the post has been edited. I'm happy to accept your rewording of the post as you suggest, and I'll stop talking about things I know nothing about.
Kate Moss
11-02-09, 03:45 PM
I've been singing this damn song all afternoon now!
Biker Biggles
11-02-09, 04:10 PM
Ed===Leaving aside your specific (now edited)reference to an old boys club you are absolutely right.No one is worth 60k a month even if they are good at what they do let alone a failed head honcho.
Flamin_Squirrel
11-02-09, 04:21 PM
No one is worth 60k a month even if they are good at what they do let alone a failed head honcho.
If they bring in more than that to their organisation, then of course they are. Obviously in banking that's fairly hard to judge, but as a sweeping statement the above is in fact, cobblers.
Where did all this freemason stuff come from?
yorkie_chris
11-02-09, 05:06 PM
I presume it was something in Eds OP and that's why it's been edited by fizzwheel.
It would not surprise me in the slightest if there was some manner of old boys brigade in force. As for whether that is the freemasons (oooooh secrecy,...), or some people who happen to know each other is irrelevent. They're still a bunch of c##ts who've taken fortunes and now the general public is paying for it.
As for the current government, well they're politicians. All pigs eating out of the same trough.
dizzyblonde
11-02-09, 05:23 PM
Hornby is now a consultant with Lloyds Banking Group, advising on how to obtain maximum value from the HBOS takeover - in other words, telling them how many people to sack and how to screw suppliers still further. For this he is paid £60K.
A month, that is.
just reading our local paper here in Halifax
Mr Hornby said he would receive no bonus for 2008 and revealed he had lost a huge sums of money saying he had invested his cash bonuses into shares.
"I have lost more money in shares than I have been paid," he said. "In nine years I never sold a share."
Mr Hornby said future bonuses should be tied to longer-term performances.
well I'm sure to feel really sorry for him, is 60k a month not enough for him? he should try living off £1200 a month like me...
Is this his funny sort of justification for'''well I've lost money too''
HBOS, which employed around 6,500 people in Calderdale, was swallowed up last month by Lloyds TSB.
I think I'd prefer to lose someone at the top that caused the trouble in the first place than a portion of the folk above that do the really hard work
The Government is facing demands for an inquiry into the role played by one of the top City regulators in the collapse of HBOS. The calls followed claims Sir James Crosby, deputy chairman of the Financial Services Authority, sacked the bank's head of regulatory risk when he was HBOS chief executive.
Paul Moore said that he was fired in 2005 after warning that the bank was "going too fast". Michael Fallon, senior Tory on the committee, said that if the claims were true, the position of Sir James was "untenable".
ooo sacking the whistle blower???
Biker Biggles
11-02-09, 05:31 PM
If they bring in more than that to their organisation, then of course they are. Obviously in banking that's fairly hard to judge, but as a sweeping statement the above is in fact, cobblers.
There we disagree.I dont think anyone is worth 600 times the national minimum wage.Its a myth perpetuated by those in very highly paid jobs that they are worth vast salaries and are irreplaceable.Its avery lucrative myth for them as well.
Sid Squid
11-02-09, 05:57 PM
Am I the only one suspicious about the whole business?
Those 'apologies' didn't sound very genuine to me, more as if they had been required by a higher authority; 'Your businesses have had the billions, now just make sure everyone knows it's all your fault' so we'll all argue about that and not look deeper.
As for greedy banks, well, possibly, but let us not forget that they were working within the legal and regulatory framework that they're allowed to, the framework administered by our state.
Apologies? Very convenient in a crisis if someone else falls on their collective swords ain't it?
SoulKiss
11-02-09, 06:09 PM
Am I the only one suspicious about the whole business?
Those 'apologies' didn't sound very genuine to me, more as if they had been required by a higher authority; 'Your businesses have had the billions, now just make sure everyone knows it's all your fault' so we'll all argue about that and not look deeper.
As for greedy banks, well, possibly, but let us not forget that they were working within the legal and regulatory framework that they're allowed to, the framework administered by our state.
Apologies? Very convenient in a crisis if someone else falls on their collective swords ain't it?
Best quote I saw on the news last night was when they were talking to "the man in the street" in Glasgow.
"Anyone who thinks they really meant it should seek psycological help..."
yorkie_chris
11-02-09, 06:29 PM
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/bank-bosses-urged-to-stick-apologies-up-their-****-200902111571/
Flamin_Squirrel
11-02-09, 06:29 PM
There we disagree.I dont think anyone is worth 600 times the national minimum wage.Its a myth perpetuated by those in very highly paid jobs that they are worth vast salaries and are irreplaceable.Its avery lucrative myth for them as well.
You're not making any sense. The only reason for ever employing anyone is that by virtue of the work they do, the result is a net increase in income. If they fulfill that criteria, they are by definition, worth it.
Whether top bankers actually do fulfill that criteria is hard to say and quite frankly unimportant, as the point is people can be worth that much. Just as those on low wages can sometimes not be worth it - e.g. miners.
Sid Squid
11-02-09, 07:09 PM
Best quote I saw on the news last night was when they were talking to "the man in the street" in Glasgow.
"Anyone who thinks they really meant it should seek psycological help..."
Well the man in the street needs to think a bit harder then, it feels very, very strongly that they were required to shoulder the blame, and confess whatever the truth of the matter, so that no others may be seen at fault.
Look deeper, this feels like an attempt to manipulate public feeling, specifically so we'll be of the opinion that the banks, and only the banks, bear any responsibility for our present financial woes.
And if you were to think that you would be wrong, very wrong. The banks chiefs will be the whipping boys, but does anyone seriously think all this **** is their fault and theirs alone.
Be serious.
Biker Biggles
11-02-09, 07:29 PM
You're not making any sense. The only reason for ever employing anyone is that by virtue of the work they do, the result is a net increase in income. If they fulfill that criteria, they are by definition, worth it.
Whether top bankers actually do fulfill that criteria is hard to say and quite frankly unimportant, as the point is people can be worth that much. Just as those on low wages can sometimes not be worth it - e.g. miners.
It makes perfect sense to me.If you are part of a very powerful group you control the workplace and the value put on jobs.Thats what I mean about the myth of these people being worth so much and the "fact" that they are irreplaceable.Its very much in their collective interest to convince the likes of you and me that this myth is in fact true.You seem to believe it.I dont.
One thing the current economic collapse should teach us is that "value" is a Man made concept,just as your house had a value two years ago which is totally unrelated to its value today.These peoples remuneration packages are a Man made amount,and dependant on decisions made by those with vested interests in keeping them high.
dizzyblonde
11-02-09, 07:35 PM
well I don't think they are worth all that money, especially as they are paid more than a heart surgeon, but then I'm just an everyday woman on the street
Flamin_Squirrel
11-02-09, 07:58 PM
It makes perfect sense to me.If you are part of a very powerful group you control the workplace and the value put on jobs.Thats what I mean about the myth of these people being worth so much and the "fact" that they are irreplaceable.Its very much in their collective interest to convince the likes of you and me that this myth is in fact true.You seem to believe it.I dont.
One thing the current economic collapse should teach us is that "value" is a Man made concept,just as your house had a value two years ago which is totally unrelated to its value today.These peoples remuneration packages are a Man made amount,and dependant on decisions made by those with vested interests in keeping them high.
You've not listened to a word I've said, or at least not understood it.
You may be right that in the case of of top bankers, that their salaries are kept artificially high by... well themselves. If this is the case then clearly they are replaceable and aren't worth what they are paid.
However, despite understanding that the value of something is based on whatever we're prepared to pay for it, why can't you make the link that that value in turn is often based on how much money said thing can make you if you invest in it?
Biker Biggles
11-02-09, 09:14 PM
Do you not think that the remuneration of CEOs and Directors of large corporations in general has been decided by commitees of like minded people often on or aspiring to similar salaries?You seem to think there is some sort of rational absolute behind all this,when actually it is people making it up as they go along and thus far getting away with it.
punyXpress
11-02-09, 09:32 PM
The only thing I know about this for sure is:
I'd have a job making a sincere-sounding apology in front of people I knew were just as ( if not more ) culpable as myself.
Flamin_Squirrel
11-02-09, 10:06 PM
Do you not think that the remuneration of CEOs and Directors of large corporations in general has been decided by commitees of like minded people often on or aspiring to similar salaries?You seem to think there is some sort of rational absolute behind all this,when actually it is people making it up as they go along and thus far getting away with it.
Yes! FGS. I'm simply saying that it's not always the case.
northwind
12-02-09, 12:17 AM
I thought it was a bit of a shame today, Lloyds boss Eric Daniels announced he's declining his 08 bonus... Good PR stunt. Except that nobody noticed :mrgreen: He must be well annoyed.
There we disagree.I dont think anyone is worth 600 times the national minimum wage.Its a myth perpetuated by those in very highly paid jobs that they are worth vast salaries and are irreplaceable.Its avery lucrative myth for them as well.
mate, you're missing the point of capitalism and business. If a business has £500,000 to invest and they could get a 5% return on saving it, but they could pay someone £500,000 and that person could make more money on it, then the individual is 'worth it'. I don't like it either, but generally those who get paid high salaries earn it one way or another
Flamin_Squirrel
12-02-09, 12:44 AM
mate, you're missing the point of capitalism and business. If a business has £500,000 to invest and they could get a 5% return on saving it, but they could pay someone £500,000 and that person could make more money on it, then the individual is 'worth it'. I don't like it either, but generally those who get paid high salaries earn it one way or another
Much better explanation. That's what I was trying to point out, you've done it more concisely than I managed :thumbsup:
That said, why don't you like it? I mean sure if someones fiddling the system that's not on. But why when someone makes lots of money is the general feeling that it shouldn't be allowed, rather than how can I do that too?
Some very interesting views - Sid, I too detect a conspiracy theory. Who made all these ar$eholes fall on their swords, so much so that they all said pretty well the same thing?
I think that there's a need for a public debate on how we value people generally. Say a CEO of a bank is good at creating money where none really exists. That 'achievement' is then rewarded by very tangible payment of bonus. Hornby saying that he has lost a fortune is really a sham because the underlying assets creating the 'wealth' were never really there in the first place, and so why should he have bonus for something that never existed? More smoke and mirrors... Compare to Dizzy's heart surgeon where the achievement is obvious. There is a self-perpetuating myth and still a closed shop - whoever sponsors it - that needs more research.
FS will say that that he's banging his head against a brick wall here, but FS I think you rather assume too much - I mean, that the fact of wealth creation justifies it, when we all know that the wealth wwasn't there to start with.
Edit - another interesting development http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7885059.stm
yorkie_chris
12-02-09, 10:11 AM
Lol... so now everything's f##ked, people start to play the age old game of pass the book.
Warthog
12-02-09, 10:33 AM
Much better explanation. That's what I was trying to point out, you've done it more concisely than I managed :thumbsup:
That said, why don't you like it? I mean sure if someones fiddling the system that's not on. But why when someone makes lots of money is the general feeling that it shouldn't be allowed, rather than how can I do that too?
The reason I don't like it is that if they make the company tons of money: fine. But then when they cause the company to go bust or have to be bailed out with public money otherwise the world economic system would collapse they still keep all their money, bonuses and huge salary! Shouldn't they be punished by the same degree they are rewarded if it goes wrong?
The other problem with huge amounts of money being involved with no checks or punishment is that it prompts greedy individials to take huge risks in the short term that caused this crash. I promise you, if a CEO was taken on and promised a huge pension and bonus in 30 years if the company was bigger and healthy in 30 years, they would not have undertaken half of the actions they did this last year.
Surely we should just behead them and move on?
yorkie_chris
12-02-09, 10:39 AM
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/bank-bosses-urged-to-stick-apologies-up-their-****-200902111571/
"Thank you for coming here today and I only wish there was a seething mob outside with a can of petrol, a large wooden stake and a box of Swan Vestas."
Something along those lines?
jimmy__riddle
12-02-09, 10:41 AM
to use the heart surgeon example again.
A persons life is priceless, should doctors performing life saving surgery be given a blank cheque each month? They get a good salary, but not ridiculous amounts like these £2 million salaries.
Mr Speirs
12-02-09, 10:43 AM
Four bankers saying sorry eh???
I reckon they should form a boy band and sing that. 'Sorry, is all that I can say, words don't come easily, like forgive me...forgive me... but you can say baby, baby can I hold you tonight'
Okay its goes off on a tangent a bit calling the taxpayer baby but you get my drift.
yorkie_chris
12-02-09, 10:53 AM
to use the heart surgeon example again.
A persons life is priceless, should doctors performing life saving surgery be given a blank cheque each month? They get a good salary, but not ridiculous amounts like these £2 million salaries.
I wouldn't say priceless, but they are given a wage that reflects their skill and training. I have met a few surgeons of varying seniority, and none of them are poor...
What I do wonder is what are these mega-salary people to the banks, what can they do that normal people can't?
Biker Biggles
12-02-09, 10:58 AM
I wouldn't say priceless, but they are given a wage that reflects their skill and training. I have met a few surgeons of varying seniority, and none of them are poor...
What I do wonder is what are these mega-salary people to the banks, what can they do that normal people can't?
Now you clearly understand my point YC.These people are not superhuman and dont deserve superhuman wages.They are part of an organisation and they couldnt function without the support of every other part of the organisation.They may be well trained and experienced at what they do and I have no issue with them being well paid for that.But there are plenty of others who are equally able and would do the job for less money if given the chance,but then we get the smoke and mirrors of the powerful defending their own.
SoulKiss
12-02-09, 11:00 AM
Well the argument used to be that they get the big money for taking the big risks.....
Except that I dont see them down the Social because they have lost their Houses, their Cars etc..............
yorkie_chris
12-02-09, 11:01 AM
Big risks? Lmao.
Flamin_Squirrel
12-02-09, 11:07 AM
Hornby saying that he has lost a fortune is really a sham because the underlying assets creating the 'wealth' were never really there in the first place, and so why should he have bonus for something that never existed? More smoke and mirrors... Compare to Dizzy's heart surgeon where the achievement is obvious. There is a self-perpetuating myth and still a closed shop - whoever sponsors it - that needs more research.
IIRC, banks are capable of creating money. For example, you invest £10 with a bank, they will be permitted to loan out £100, secured on your investment. The bank has literally created £90, generating wealth that as you say, isn't really there.
It might sound like madness, but this is how a capitalist economy grows. It's all very easy for you to say it's ********, but the fact is that without the banks the economy won't develop, you wouldn't be able to buy a house and the country wouldn't be in a position to build hospitals staffed with heart surgeons.
FS will say that that he's banging his head against a brick wall here, but FS I think you rather assume too much - I mean, that the fact of wealth creation justifies it, when we all know that the wealth wasn't there to start with.
How many times do I need to repeat myself. You may well be right that bankers are all self serving so and so's - I don't dispute that. I was simply saying that there will be cases where people are 'worth' their large salaries.
How many times do I need to repeat myself. You may well be right that bankers are all self serving so and so's - I don't dispute that. I was simply saying that there will be cases where people are 'worth' their large salaries.
It's how we assess and value that 'worth' that I'm interested in, rather than the sophistry that we have got used to - so used to in fact that it has become an established norm.
Biker Biggles
12-02-09, 11:21 AM
It's how we assess and value that 'worth' that I'm interested in, rather than the sophistry that we have got used to - so used to in fact that it has become an established norm.
True.Not just a norm,its now seen as indisputable fact that if we dont pay these people vast sums our world falls apart.I dont believe that "fact"
SoulKiss
12-02-09, 11:28 AM
Simple answer.
If your boss came up to you and said "We've had a think on it, we want to pay you £100,000 a year because we think you bring more than that to the company".
Would you say no?
Me, I would ask why I have to take a pay-cut :p :twisted: :smt040 (I wish)
Dappa D
12-02-09, 12:32 PM
interesting debate, good read, cant comment much on the bankers as dont know much about it / not interested.
but i will say that if i owned a company that £600,000 start-up capital. and I could employ someone for £600,000 a year who made me £2m a year....i would....
however, finding someone genuinly worth that much and it all isnt based on myth etc could be tricky!
That said, why don't you like it? I mean sure if someones fiddling the system that's not on. But why when someone makes lots of money is the general feeling that it shouldn't be allowed, rather than how can I do that too?
I got a bit mixed up at the end - what I meant to say was I don't like what appears to be happening at the moment with these guys continuing to get bonuses / high salaries when they have failed so badly. They are (oe were) making money at our expense which is what I don't like. I've no problem with people earning loads if it doesn't impact negatively on me :)
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.