Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009
I'm getting a bit fed up with this
The Times: Restructure of banking sector set to cost taxpayer an extra £40 billion
The Government will today announce plans to inject a further £40 billion of taxpayers’ money into Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group as part of a fresh, wide-ranging restructuring of the UK banking sector.
Posted by quiet guy @ 01:45 AM (817 views) Add Comment
8 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. devo said...
"Restructure of banking sector": aka "further bailouts for the banks".
How will they spin the next round of tax giveaways to prop up this failed system?
2. fallingbuzzard said...
But bankers with salaries greater than £39k will be taking their bonuses in shares rather than as cash payments. Now thats another fine compromise by the government. After all, its very difficult to convert shares to cash. The bankers will never be able to work out how to do that!
3. Righttoleech said...
We are slaves to the Bankers. Time for a Civil rRghts movement.
4. inbreda said...
on the plus side, 40 bil is a drop in the ocean compared to what they already have got.
So that's good isn't it? They're robbing us, but not as much as they were. You could almost call it green shoots.
5. mountain goat said...
'Never has so much money been owed by so few to so many' - Mervyn King, 20 October 2009.
6. mark wadsworth said...
I wouldn't bother getting fed up just yet, this is going to go on for another couple of years.
7. timmy t said...
Personally I don't think this is just about scale - I'd have preffered a Glass-Steagall type break-up to separate the "utility" operations from the speculative.
8. Fra Paolo said...
Actually, I disagree that Glass-Steagall would necessarily be preferable. I think it's a 'one or the other' deal here. If banks don't want to be prohibited from speculative investments, then they have to accept limits on size of market share.
And, in this case, it's better from a competitive, consumer orientation to have lots of institutions competing for business, even if they are more likely to go bust, than a few large institutions that can charge what they like.
This is a good move. The government deserves some credit for taking this step. But it almost certainly needs to go further than it will. Timid Labour, rather than New Old Labour.