Should City Workers Voluntarily Return their Bonuses to the State?

[rabbitstew]

Would that be the Big Society in action? ie an acceptance that the City owes the State a lot of money at the moment which it is only refusing to return in the form of not paying out bonuses because it argues that the problems we now have are not the responsibility of any one individual.

And do City workers genuinely believe they only do a good job in order to get a huge bonus? That it is only the scent of money that makes them financially astute? It's not as if that theory has worked very well to date...

(yes, this is a flagrant attempt to carry on my Big Society thread...).

Oh, honestly. What a tiresome descent back into blaming and self-justification. It's always more someone else's fault, whoever we are. And we never question that. I wanted this thread to be more constructive.

pagwatch - I worked in the City and got bonuses - not big ones, because I was not a banker, particularly not that "type" of banker who gets large bonuses. However, I was paid an awful lot more for what I did in the City than other people outside of the City in the same field of work. Within the City, this is a fair concept. It is not fair when looking in from the outside.

Why should they give back money that they have earnt? Don't they pay a 50% tax on it anyway.

But the 50% they have left is still colossal and undeserved in most peoples' opinion. 50% of something huge is still a lot more than 50% of something small. Can you not understand that?

Sorry, byrel. That was very rude of me and I deserve to be told off!

Who says its not deserved? The amount of bonuses paid are set by the market.

Allthetimethinking - are you being serious? (This is a genuine question, not sarcastic). It's just that it doesn't seem fair to me to say the very intelligent, wealthy bankers who are supposed to be good financially couldn't help lending money to those who are not financially astute. Surely, by overestimating the abilities of those they lent to they are equally to blame?

byrel - you are just stating facts, not opinions. I wanted this to be a thread on opinions. Still, I guess anyone else can use it for what they like!

smallwhitecat - why do you think the opening thread referred to the voluntarily handing in to the State of bonuses? Precisely because they can't in law be forced to be given back. This is a thread based around the concept of the Big Society and how it should work. In other words, ideas should not be taken as literal opinions, anyway, but as ways of bouncing ideas off people.

And sorry if I'm sounding rude. It's not anyone's fault I don't like feeling my threads are being hijacked and going off in a different direction to the one I intended!

The suggestion that people should return their bonuses to HMRC just because they work in the city is ludicrous (I don't work in the city btw). They have earnt that money and so it is theres to keep and do with what they like.

rabbitstew - you can't expect to control a thread on MN... It's about as realistic as expecting anyone to hand back a bonus. I wouldn't and I wouldn't expect anyone else to either.

I know. It gets frustrating when people are talking on different levels without even realising it, though!!!!! And my entire argument is that descending to political point scoring (like accusing someone of being a communist if they suggest bonuses are too big), is totally unconstructive.

But, hey, I guess - long live mumsnet with all its different levels of conversation and hugely differing opinions! I do find it fun posting on here, even when things don't go my way.

smallwhitecat, can I suggest you read the thread from beginning to end? I think my purpose will then become clear to you. If you don't read a developing thread very carefully, you don't understand it however carefully ideas are expressed.

You are very bossy aren't you.

I worked in the city for 18 years and I don't agree with you. Half my team worked in the city, half worked in Essex and greater London. We were paid a bit more not least because commute and associated costs are very high but no - not paid some magic fantabulous wage because of location.

Your experience is not definitive. I know people who get good ( although not banker sized) bonuses because they generate substantial income for staff, shareholders etc. And they all pay their taxes
If you think people are to blame for this mess then find out who and blame them. Don't wander around with a big stick to trash anyone in the same locality

Hey swc how are things. How is the ds?
I didn't know you were an executive city type

?? My point is that I don't think individuals are to blame, pagwatch. I raised the argument so that people would argue against me and we could come to an agreement on this by the end of the thread. One minute I thought we had achieved that (ie that we are all in this together) and the next, everyone was taking what I said at the beginning literally, again. So, my only conclusion could be that people looked at the title thread and then the last few posts without reading the whole thing properly.

I don't see why you think everyone in the City should give back their compensation?

My DH was a prop trader for an inv bank before becoming a hedge fund manager/trader.

His compensation structure is very transparent. The fund charges investors a 2% management fee and 20% of the net return. After costs are paid, DH gets 0.5% management fee and 15% of the net return on the capital he manages. Paid on a total comp basis, the "bonus" is what's left over after his salary. He must reinvest 50%+ of this bonus in his fund to align his interests with the investors.

He can only take all his money out when he unwinds his fund and leaves. If investor's don't like how he or the wider fund is performing they can withdraw capital with 30 days notice.

What's the problem with this? Why should he hand back his compensation? These are private investors giving money to a private company.

I can sort of understand anger with RBS, HBOS and Northern Rock but you can't tar everybody with the same stick. My DH has never lost money since he started. In fact his best years were 2008 and 2009.

Or maybe I really am to blame, because I was trying to be on two threads at the same time (Big Society and this one) and have mixed up what was agreed on one and what was agreed on the other. I will have to look back over the thread again, myself!

Anyway, I think basically we are misunderstanding each other. I am not bossy, just confused because we are not talking about the same thing at all.

People seldom read the whole thread. That is mn .it is a chat room not a debating society.
If you want people to stick to the line of discussion in which you are interested you either have to doggedly keep reiterating your point . But being a bit hussy isn't going to do it.
Besides sometimes the chat moves into far more interesting ares.

Well someone told me yesterday
That when you throw your love away
You act as if you don't care
You look as if you're going somewhere

But I just can't convince myself
I couldn't live with no one else
And I can only play that part
And sit and nurse my broken heart

So lonely
So lonely
So lonely
So lonely

So lonely
So lonely
So lonely

So lonely
So lonely
So lonely

So lonely
So lonely

Arf. Not a bit hussy . Hissy

I think also some people are just saying that they are happy with things staying the way they are, and I basically am not. This doesn't mean I believe bankers should give back their bonuses, though. It is just that I was thinking about the Big Society and its skewed logic and trying to follow its philosophy through to its "logical" conclusion, which might lead you to say that city workers should give back their bonuses as their way of contributing to the Big Society because they don't have lots of spare time to volunteer.

So, in other words, I really, truly am not saying what I believe, I'm just trying to follow a narrative. You may not agree with the usefulness of this, but then you didn't start the thread.