Brilliant banking speech by Miliband(149 Posts)
Miliband wants a British Investment Bank and tighter regulation of banking and separation of high street and investment banking. He is addressing the elephant in the room, the real scandal that the public wants addressed. He has real integrity and wants the banks to have integrity again.
Miliband is an excellent Labour leader. I think he will win the next election if he carries on like this. Love the new logo too - a British flag with "realchange" as the logo - no Tory party green tree image, no polar bears, no global warming, no more "building a progressive future", no more spin - just simple, true, "real change". Brilliant
Excellent, and when he's finished installing his Casino to English app he can finish his PowerPoint slides
Our democracy is actually getting healthier as we are learning more and more about what has been going on unbeknown to us for many years.
First we had the MP expenses' scandal, which had been going on for years without the public being told. Then we had the Murdoch thing, which had been going on for years without teh public being told. Now the curtain is being drawn back on what teh bankers have been doing for years, without the public being told.
Little by little, we are discovering the truth, the lies are held up to the light. This is good for democracy, good for the country and good for the people and bad for the spivs.
Once upon a time there was a great leader called Thatcher who was not one for turning back - she told teh socialists "you turn if you want to, the lady is not for turning". Now Miliband is also not for turning, he is sticking to his guns and seeking the truth.
We are living in historic times, we will eventually see "real change" and crooks will be punished for their crimes.
As the legendary, world-respected 'Daily Mail Comment' so wisely said
'it is no exaggeration to say that the banks stand accused of a series of crimes against society itself'
FFS- if the inquiry is run by people with as closed minds as you it won't do anything - you need to see beyond the easy answer of blaming derivatives - it's not that simple-a ppe degree and a lifetime spent in politics doesn't give give him an insight into banking ( or even into politics if the last couple of years are anything to go by!)
We've seen home flipping, New Labour backsliding and backslipping, phone hacking and email cracking and now we hear of low-balling and high-balling, it's enough to get your eyes rolling. Surely there can't be much more left, there must be a limit to the theft.
This low-balling and high-balling crap gives a good name to Gangsta Rap.
'you need to see beyond the easy answer of blaming derivatives'
I have seen beyond, I have seen the spivs' game, it's always the same.
What the spivs want us to think is that it is our fault. They want to blame us for taking up loans that were showered upon us. They want to blame us, tell us we did our bit and if we don't thank them for their "services to banking", then they say they will leave the country.
The problem for the spivs is that the public are sharper than the spivs thought. The spivs can't out-bluff the public anymore. The spivs hold a poor hand, their bluff has been called, and they have had to fold. The true story will be told.
We have seen very powerful people who thought that they held the public's politicians in their pocket. But we have seen some very brave MPs - and frankly most of them are New Labour ones, to their credit - who have stood up for the public.
Three that spring to mind, but there are probably many others are
Ed Miliband, Tom Watson, Chris Bryant - these people are cut from a different cloth.
As Ali G and the entire membership of Da West Staines Massiv would say "Respect. Aye"
Erm, I think you'll find it's the Taxpayer who provides all this largesse. The State mechanism simply spends money that its citizens earn. Unfortunately, in the last 15 years, the government has spent rather more than its citizens earned, despite these years including a period of growth
amicissimma, we have a surplus capital absorption problem of some $50 Trillion, (by 2020 is will probably be $100 Tr) this money sits side by side with unmet social need. It is private money that could be invested into job creation and lending to smaller businesses but very little of this money is being invested in the real economy. In times past the capital surplus was used to fund developers and mortgages, speculating to accumulate over the long term. When it became obvious that the surplus outstripped the areas available for investment, we saw sub-prime mortgages come about. Problem is, governments do not take enough in tax, workers who make up the biggest chunk of tax payers on low wages, workers on P.A.Y.E on higher wages but the surplus is not in their hands. That is why we have "Dave's big society Bank" it is the new frontier for capital and it is the only way the government can meet it's welfare responsibilities, not through tax (they avoid paying through complex systems and off shoring) but through begging for investment. And who will underwrite this massive expansion of capitalist profiteering, we will, the tax payer.
So don't tell me state ownership or taxes are bad, look at who is really picking your pockets.
Claig, I'm so glad, we need the peoples poet on our side
Hi Mini, have missed your input. Good to see you back.
'Last year, a leading fund manager warned that millions of workers could be the victims of a pensions mis-selling scandal, which will halve the value of their investments.
David Pitt-Watson, chairman of Hermes, said employees could be enrolled into schemes with rip-off charges and poor investment strategies.
One of his biggest fears was these fees wiping out the value of savings, leaving workers with a paltry total after a lifetime of carefully saving each month.'
How high will their bonuses soar, how low will their morals sink?
Ordinary people ripped off from pillar to post. Is it any wonder that they will listen to a message of "real change"?
But let's not notice what is being done to us, let's listen to the Reith Lectures 2012, let's volunteeer for the Big Society, let's go and clean up our beach for free, so that the Fat Cats can enjoy their leisure swimmingly.
But the pension issue is entirely different to the banking one! This is simply saying that because a contribution to a pension scheme covers both the actual investment and fees. The fees pay for the investment manager who is making the investment decisions - eg the costs. Is your problem the concept of paying someone, the level of the fees or the entire idea of defined contribution schemes ?
Fee levels in investment banking I think is an area which could be looked at- why are corporates willing to pay such fees , what alternatives are available etc...
Yes, it is different. But my problem is with the level of the fees which result in people being once again ripped off.
'David Pitt-Watson, chairman of Hermes, said employees could be enrolled into schemes with rip-off charges'
Yet again we need good regulation and high standards. People have been ripped off for too long. Read the comments of fine Daily Mail readers, underneath that article, who explain how they have been ripped off and how it has been happening for years.
We need 'real change'.
We need real change not to carry on being short changed by the spivs and scoundrels.
So what fees are you prepared to pay? I thought from something you said earlier that you were a Thatcherite and supported Market mechanism adjusting fees ?
The pension Market is highly regulated - how would you like it changed in particular?
Who are the spivs and scoundrels in this?
How is this miss-selling? Is a defined contribution wrong for these people ? Were the fees hidden? What is the alternative- we already have state pensions?
'I thought from something you said earlier that you were a Thatcherite and supported Market mechanism adjusting fees?'
I support market mechanisms but with regulation. I don't support lowlifes and low-ballers who use lowdown techniques to swindle the public. I don't support market traders who mis-sell products that are not for for purpose. I believe in trading standards and regulations; I don't believe in cowboy builders swindling old age pensioners out of their savings or cowboy casino corporations who swindle workers out of their savings.
Just like the US market institutions who initiated the investigation into the low-balling scam, I believe in a free and fair market that protects the consumer. I don't belive in 'light touch' regulation of low-ballers or soft touch regulation of spivs.
'Who are the spivs and scoundrels in this?'
How long have you got?
Ed wants a judicial inquiry under oath to find out who they are.
'The pension Market is highly regulated'
Yes, and we were told the City institutions were regulated too.
'What is the alternative?'
The alternative is that the government stipulates what the maximum fee percentage can be, just like they impose safety standards on food and consumer goods.
I believe in full transparency of charges and fees, full reporting and full disclosure or lobbyists, clear and concise language for the consumer, not arcane legalese, and full information given to the public. Instead of 'caveat emptor', I think we need a bit more 'caveat spiv'.
I know someone on low wages with some learning difficulties who works day and night and has never taken a day off sick in years of work who was sold an 'ethical' investment fund by the 'ethical' financial advisers. Their hard-earned wages, earned with real sweat, vanished as they read their financial returns. These commission cowboys in comfortable chairs who never sweat for a penny and who con hard-working people out of their small levels of cash and call it 'ethical' are nothing but condfidence tricksters.
There are a lot of words that spring to mind aout red ed but brillant is not one of them
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Join the discussion
Please login first.