Nhs Bosses See Their Bonus Pot Double In 5 Years ... As Staff Face Cuts

[Cinzano Bianco]

Uh huh. And the total convictions for this are going to be zero. This is why bank presidents get so highly paid, as I said.

Been many convictions, have there?

Or will it all be retroactively made okay because someoen had the foresight to pay excellent wages to get someone to do something incredibly risky but ultimately rewarding if it paid off?

No, the regulations are there to keep others out and therefore wages in the market high.

If you want lower pay for executives, you need less regulation and less power for regulators - end of story.

The pool of available peopel with the right talents, mindest, background, expertise and knowledge to run these things is tiny. We are talking a pool of maybe a few thousand who went to the right schools for a start. And while there is so much regulation and risk, those wages will remain high.

You are talking ******** injin. HMG won't bang up any banksters, because that path leads to the financial services industry finding a new host to feed off, and abandoning the UK.

[Bloo Loo]

I'm torn on the bonus issue. On the one hand I see wunderpup's point and Edward Deming makes the point that they dont' really work. However I like the idea of a company being able to share some of the profits in a good year.. without locking the company in to a higher salary in future years.

For example Honda gives a bonus to employees in good years, and it can be quite substantial, like in 2007.

I guess I support 'bonuses' but no for hitting certain targets.. just when the company is doing well, and wants to give a reward to its workers without locking it in.

employees could buy shares and get their "bonus" that way.

[Cinzano Bianco]

No.

I consider there to be a difference between free markets and coerced ones, however. The key thing is always if the end consumer can refuse without getting attacked and jailed.

Do you agree with Milton Friedman's economic views and theories?

Also, can their be a free market without some coercion making it possible?

[Injin]

You are talking ******** injin. HMG won't bang up any banksters, because that path leads to the financial services industry finding a new host to feed off, and abandoning the UK.

HMG won't bang up any banksters as long as the banksters keep behaving the way HMG wants and continue the gravy train.

Do you agree with Milton Friedman's economic views and theories?

No idea, never read any of his stuff.

Also, can their be a free market without some coercion making it possible?

Sure. There are plenty of free markets around. Sexual partners and food are chosen without any coercion, apart from rapists and some very outlandish force feeding scenarios.

[Democorruptcy]

If I owned a bank and was lending to people for houses I would much rather lend to people like GP's who already had a BTL portfolio.. than to first time buyers.

1 - Someone who has been in BTL for a long time will have huge equity from previous house price appreciation, so no danger of losing my money.

2 - Someone like GP has a very large stable income from the state. Whereas even a successful private businessman, like a developer, the fortunes can change with the market.

3 - Financing BTL is much more financing capital than someone buying a home for personal use. The BTL'er will use the house itself to pay off the loan. Sort of like buying a piece of heavy equipment on credit, you use the equipment to pay off the loan. Whereas an individual buying a home, has to go out and get money from somewhere else in the economy to pay the mortgage.

4 - One BTLer can have many mortgages.. like I've seen ones with 10 or more mortgages. You need far less clients to deal with, instead of chasing a bunch of people in the market. Just have a few big players.

Meanwhile....

We have foreign doctors barely able to speak the language killing people because our doctors don't want to work out of office hours and operations being delayed due to so much of the NHS budget being spent on higher wages for doctors.

[Cinzano Bianco]

HMG won't bang up any banksters as long as the banksters keep behaving the way HMG wants and continue the gravy train.

The banksters have HMG over a barrel, not the other way round mate.

No idea, never read any of his stuff.

Ever heard of the harm that his philosophies have done to countries, when the "free market" has been forced on them? A clear choice has to made, and that choice will almost always be through coercion.

Sure. There are plenty of free markets around. Sexual partners and food are chosen without any coercion, apart from rapists and some very outlandish force feeding scenarios.

Not true; please see "marketing".

[Bloo Loo]

The banksters have HMG over a barrel, not the other way round mate.

Ever heard of the harm that his philosophies have done to countries, when the "free market" has been forced on them? A clear choice has to made, and that choice will almost always be through coercion.

Not true; please see "marketing".

the banksters only have HMG over a barrel because the HMG give way to anyone who threaten a hard decision.

[Injin]

The banksters have HMG over a barrel, not the other way round mate.

HMG have tanks and an army.

Ever heard of the harm that his philosophies have done to countries, when the "free market" has been forced on them? A clear choice has to made, and that choice will almost always be through coercion.

There are no countries, and anything yu force people to do isn't part of the free market by definition.

Free market means free from coercion.

Not true; please see "marketing".

Free market means free from coercion - you are free to persuade others to sleep with you and this is part of the free market. Hitting them over the head isn't.

So it is with marketing - craft yourself a really appealing message that people go for without being forced to and it's free.

I suspect you are taling about someone who talked a lot about free markets but was actually a facist nutjob hypocrite, such as reagan or thatcher.

[Injin]

the banksters only have HMG over a barrel because the HMG give way to anyone who threaten a hard decision.

HMG are choosing to let the banksters run wild because it gives them more overall income (or it has in the past) there is naff all stopping them waking the lot of them up at 3am and taking everything they have. Fred the shred versus a chieftan tank is something a lot want to see, but that's the reality of the situation.

[@contradevian]

the banksters only have HMG over a barrel because the HMG give way to anyone who threaten a hard decision.

The bankers are not going anywhere. Their liabilities are too huge and the regulatory system here too soft. Any country would have to make good on their bets, and unlike the UK that would come at a severe price.

In many respects our banks are far too big for the UK, it would be good to see the back of them, not least we might get our democracy back.

[Riedquat]

HMG are choosing to let the banksters run wild because it gives them more overall income (or it has in the past) there is naff all stopping them waking the lot of them up at 3am and taking everything they have. Fred the shred versus a chieftan tank is something a lot want to see, but that's the reality of the situation.

They can't take down the banksters without taking themselves down. An addict won't attack his dealer even if he's physically capable of it if he'll lose his drugs. He's entirely under the dealer's control.

[Injin]

They can't take down the banksters without taking themselves down. An addict won't attack his dealer even if he's physically capable of it if he'll lose his drugs. He's entirely under the dealer's control.

This is co dependancy.

The bankers need HMG to create demand for their product.

HMG enjoy the extra income from the bankers various schemes.

Rest assured, when the bankers stop paying out, they will all lose everything. See - Pecora et al.

Edited April 18, 2011 by Injin

[Bloo Loo]

The bankers are not going anywhere. Their liabilities are too huge and the regulatory system here too soft. Any country would have to make good on their bets, and unlike the UK that would come at a severe price.

In many respects our banks are far too big for the UK, it would be good to see the back of them, not least we might get our democracy back.

their liabilities are huge.

all the better to default with.

just think...ALL the worlds governments decided instead to bail the banks, to let them all go.

what would happen....chaos for a time, then with the monket off everyones back, we could all start trading again...debt free. bankers on the dole, looking for a job as a farmhand.

[Cinzano Bianco]

HMG have tanks and an army.

Strange that they are still scared shitless of the parasites leaving the country. Maybe because they are free to leave? Please note, I am absolutely not defending banksters or HMG in any way.

There are no countries, and anything yu force people to do isn't part of the free market by definition.

Free market means free from coercion.

I would love for there to be something such as the free market free from coercion, but it is not plausible because humans are involved. It exists only theoretically, and could only be brought about by coercion (of HMGs tanks and armies for instance).

Free market means free from coercion - you are free to persuade others to sleep with you and this is part of the free market. Hitting them over the head isn't.

So it is with marketing - craft yourself a really appealing message that people go for without being forced to and it's free.

Where does "appealing message" end, and coercion start? How is this different from how companies behave today?

I suspect you are taling about someone who talked a lot about free markets but was actually a facist nutjob hypocrite, such as reagan or thatcher.

Probably yes. Apparently he believed in absolutely no government intervention in the markets at all, and democracy. Having this doctrine rammed down their throats didn't do any test countries much good.