Advanced search

BANKERS have they been naughty boys and girls yet again?

(11 Posts)
fortyfide Thu 21-May-15 11:40:36

See todays papers. I mean I am not into finance. But it does look as though big bankers get away with loads of law breaking. Are they a law unto themselves?

Linguini Fri 22-May-15 08:01:18


The city financiers get away with more crime than the Mafia.

gambling Trading on food futures has lead to the starvation of whole villages in Africa.

They Knowingly allow drug money laundering. The list of crime is endless I honestly don't have time.

But the biggest crime of the millennia has to be stealing trillions of tax-pounds to be bailed out of the financial crash, and keep the housing bubble artificially inflated resulting in... You guessed it poverty, homelessness, cuts to schools, health services, benefits,

Hang on, are you familiar with the austerity measures that only effect the poor and vulnerable but were caused by the financial sector?

Because hsbc etc bribe invest so heavily in the press and gov influence we don't hear half of it.

Isitmebut Fri 22-May-15 09:04:45

What a complete list of uninformed rollocks, especially as the UK was already running a budget deficit/overspend economy, incompetently building only an average of 115,000 homes a year, and banks encouraged to lend too much by GOVERNMENT (fueling home price rises), all BEFORE the financial crash.

Any wrong doing by investment banks individuals, in one of numerous business areas within individual has to be punished, especially if in concert with other investment banks - other than just losing their jobs.

But that is a separate issue to the benefits of the international capital markets on lifting billions globally out of poverty and funding governments and companies to employ billions over the past 30 odd years - and why global governments could not have let global banks fail, mainly due to a liquidity crisis.

May I suggest that you do yourself a favour and do some informed reading, starting with the business differences of international investment banking, and the services offered on the High Street to SMEs and citizens.

Isitmebut Fri 22-May-15 09:10:08

P.S. When a government like the UK is running a £87 billion a year overspend and has its national debt accumulating DUE to that deficit is now £1,500,000,000,000 - who do you think is handling the financing and trading of all that debt, the Co-op on your street corner?

Best we don't put them all up against the wall just yet.

Spanglecrab Fri 22-May-15 09:17:31

On a lighter note my wife rung Natwest to complain we were mid-sold an advantage gold bank account and by the end of the working day they stuck a thousand pounds in our account.

Linguini Fri 22-May-15 09:41:51

Nope. Not rollocks Isitme. You obviously can't see the truth from your red topped Ivory tower made from daily mail pages.

Isitmebut Fri 22-May-15 10:30:30

Yeah right, the truth is in the Daily Mirror, everything is the bankers fault, and we still wish the main European Investment Banking hub based in London for decades, would have taken their tax receipts after the crash, elsewhere.

Btw if I had an 'ivory tower', it would be painted blue, from top to bottom. lol

fortyfide Fri 22-May-15 11:08:13

Is one saying the +ankers are totally innocent? ye gads ecky thump.

Isitmebut Fri 22-May-15 11:57:20

fortyfide ... I guessing that as regarding the latest fraud I said the following, you mean in general, going back to pre 2007?

"Any wrong doing by investment banks individuals, in one of numerous business areas within individual has to be punished, especially if in concert with other investment banks - other than just losing their jobs."

Let me say the following and you make up your mind;

Investment Banking finances the world via the issuance and trading in the bond, equity, money market, forex and commodity markets, providing services to those that need capital, and those who want to provide it.

But generally speaking, this was not a crash called by the more risk/profitable/bonus paying investment banking side, the problems began with high street loans.

The global crash basically began when markets/investors could no longer trust the individual mortgage loans made by mainly U.S. banks to the poorest in U.S. society, called Sub Prime loans, an activity managed and sold on by quasi U.S. government agencies since the 1930's - that large banks had then also packaged up WITHOUT the proper repayment checks in place, into large bond issues, and sold to investors.

In the UK, to meet the mortgage demand, UK banks like Northern Rock, the Halifax and others, whilst not targeting the poorest who might not be able to pay back the loans as in the U.S., followed the U.S. business model in repackaging the individual mortgages into large bond issues and selling them on. This process called 'securitization' was deemed prudent as it transferred the risk from the banks balance sheet to the bond buying investors, and was around 50% of the UK mortgage market by late 2007.

To cut a long story much shorter, all banks are set up to actively manage their many billions of finances daily via the interbank markets.

The banking market could no longer trust the U.S. banks as investors who bought the securitized mortgages could dump them back on the U.S. banks if too many individual mortgages within defaulted - which as a £1 trillion or more of overall U.S. mortgage risk would have sunk those banks, the banks could no longer trust each other and that interbank market closed.

So the facts are; the problem began in the U.S., the threat of inter bank western contagion closed the interbank 'artery' market, which buggered every bank especially those that grew too large due to loans e.g. the UK, even though they thought their risks were being hedged - but even risk hedges can go wrong, if markets shut for the first time in living memory for more than hours, which became months.

Banks especially in the U.S. and U.K were guilty of lending too much to us as they thought the combination of a global consumption 'boom', ever higher asset prices, lower interest rates, and risk hedges to reduced banking risks were in place to protect their banks as fees/profits were being generated - while being encouraged by their respective governments to do so.

Generally speaking individual heads of banks, individually, did nothing wrong other than lend to much too much, which collectively became a huge problem when a (hopefully) once-in-a century financial 'stuff' happened.

Dealers on trading desks knowing committing fraud, which will never be sanctioned by those directors above, are as guilty as hell. IMO

fortyfide Sat 23-May-15 11:33:57

Thanks for fulsome explanation of your views, Isitmebut.

Isitmebut Tue 26-May-15 12:35:48

It is alleged by Tom Hayes that he was a serial offender and by others he was the ringleader.

As someone who knows a little bit about ‘stuff’ like the London Inter Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR), apart from the worst of the financial crash when the inter bank market closed and the reference rate could not be set (as usual) based on the visible trading volume/rates going through system – I would not have believed it was possible TO fix the rate.

I’m guessing that outside the financial crash period the rate fixing could only be in ‘only’ a few hundreds of 1%, but on very large amounts, which provided the returns for large investment banks dealers reporting client transaction going through, setting the rate by consensus – as by more than a few hundredths its would have been spotted earlier.

It’s the acting in concert of dealers in several investment banking institutions, who in the past fiercely competitive against each other, that surprised me.

No excuse, but I wonder if the need to work together to SET the daily LIBOR reference rate through the crash times when few transactions were going through, gave them the idea to fix the rate when financial transactions normalized?

”First Libor fixing trial starts today with UBS suspect facing 10 years in jail if guilty”
• Tom Hayes, 35 from Surrey, faces eight charges as part of first jury trial
• He was arrested in December 2012 as part of Serious Fraud investigation
• Charges relate to his time at Swiss bank UBS and work at Citigroup

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now