Portrait Of A Weak Man

[bogbrush]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8324491.stm

Particularly I like this comment;

He also pledged to take action against excessive bank bonuses and end "sharp practices" by credit card operators.

Now how long has it been since bonuses were identified as a key driver of destructive behaviour? And how long is it since he became the biggest shareholder in a number of banks? Yet what has actually been done in that time, except an almost constant stream of this kind of rhetoric?

Just remember, it would take about a week at most to "take action against excessive bank bonuses". For a start you could announce that any bank needing more help that has paid bonueses will be scrutinised to see whether the Directors have failed in their duties and are persobnally liable to be sued for costs.

The guy is bad and stupid, sure everyone knows that, but his greatest failing is actually that he's just so bloody weak.

[Guest happy?]

http://news.bbc.co.u.../uk/8324491.stm

Particularly I like this comment;

Now how long has it been since bonuses were identified as a key driver of destructive behaviour? And how long is it since he became the biggest shareholder in a number of banks? Yet what has actually been done in that time, except an almost constant stream of this kind of rhetoric?

Just remember, it would take about a week at most to "take action against excessive bank bonuses". For a start you could announce that any bank needing more help that has paid bonueses will be scrutinised to see whether the Directors have failed in their duties and are persobnally liable to be sued for costs.

The guy is bad and stupid, sure everyone knows that, but his greatest failing is actually that he's just so bloody weak.

So are you conceding that the successive policies of market de-regulation followed on both sides of the atlantic since Reagan and Thatcher are wrong, and that people do not always act rationally in their own best interests. Certainly, events of the last two years have shown that those of us who have argued for intervention and regulation have been proved right.

Brown's problem is that he's a late convert to a failed creed - free markets are capable of self-destruction and they need to be managed in such a way that they don't present a moral hazard (and a financial liability) to the rest of us.

I'm with Mervyn on this one - time to separate healthy business banking from casino capitalism.

[bogbrush]

So are you conceding that the successive policies of market de-regulation followed on both sides of the atlantic since Reagan and Thatcher are wrong, and that people do not always act rationally in their own best interests. Certainly, events of the last two years have shown that those of us who have argued for intervention and regulation have been proved right.

Brown's problem is that he's a late convert to a failed creed - free markets are capable of self-destruction and they need to be managed in such a way that they don't present a moral hazard (and a financial liability) to the rest of us.

I'm with Mervyn on this one - time to separate healthy business banking from casino capitalism.

No.

I believe that the problem here has not been from deregulation but from insulation of people from the consequences of their decisions, and from the legalisation of fraudulent lending. The management of the banks has clearly been deficient and this should result in their bankruptcy with consequent loss of all value to shareholders, and sueing of Directors for their personal failure. Had that been a clear outcome all along there'd have been little or no irresponsibility.

People have very clearly acted rationally in their own interest; the state just set it up so that behaviour would be destructive to everyone else.

What you suggest will fail - ordering the structure of businesses is impossible anyway when they can incorporate themselves anywhere on the planet.

And who insulates the bank directors and shareholders from the consequences of their actions? Why, it's the state, best friend of vast corporations.

EDIT: The point about the weakness of Brown is not so much whether he should do this or that, but that he talks about doing it endlessly but does nothing. Rather than behaving as the Chief Executive Officer of the country (which is precisely his function) and doing stuff, he acts like the bog cleaner and moans impotently from the sidelines.

Edited October 25, 2009 by bogbrush

[Si1]

So are you conceding that the successive policies of market de-regulation followed on both sides of the atlantic since Reagan and Thatcher are wrong, and that people do not always act rationally in their own best interests. Certainly, events of the last two years have shown that those of us who have argued for intervention and regulation have been proved right.

Brown's problem is that he's a late convert to a failed creed - free markets are capable of self-destruction and they need to be managed in such a way that they don't present a moral hazard (and a financial liability) to the rest of us.

I'm with Mervyn on this one - time to separate healthy business banking from casino capitalism.

by far the worst problem was that key areas were NOT regulated - but we were assured they were by the weak govt

individuals would not have taken out 6x salary mortgages if they did not feel the govt would (or indeed could) look after them

but having said that I do feel stronger regulation is required, as the banks themselves were complicit in encouraging this situation

Edited October 25, 2009 by Si1