Poll: Darling announces one-off shock tax to 'break bonus culture'

[=VTA=MANFACE]

I've never voted Labour.

 

[Tefal]

He probably doesn't pay any tax, or have any kind of a credit rating.

Well according to his previous posts he's aspiring to become a benefit fraud

 

[mattheman]

I for one can say I played no part in the events that lead up to the credit crunch. I have no credit card, no personal loan, I've never bought on finance, no over draft and up until the beginning of this year no mortgage. I look after my money, but I agree that lots of people don't.

But ultimately the government and the bankers shoulder the blame for this in equal measures in my eyes. The banks for lending money to people who clearly weren’t suitable in amouts that were unsecure, and the government for letting it happen to the extent it did.

The government and the banks made it easy, the choice was up to the person taking out that loan, mortgage, maxing out that credit cards.
If your in business and you have a product to sell you'll sell it, it up to the consumer to know if he needs it or needs more, its pure consumer greed.
Bankers are there to offer services it you choice to take it or not.

 

[peter_hutson]

The government and the banks made it easy, the choice was up to the person taking out that loan, mortgage, maxing out that credit cards.
If your in business and you have a product to sell you'll sell it, it up to the consumer to know if he needs it or needs more, its pure consumer greed.
Bankers are there to offer services it you choice to take it or not.

For individuals this may be true, but it's a far more complex issue for companies. Company success is benchmarked against others in in the same market. If one player in a certain market starts to grow rapidly due to agressive, borrowing financed growth, it puts enormous pressure on others to follow suit. If they don't they risk losing market share, investor confidence or being taken over. In theory the risk being taken by an organisation should be factored into it's share price. But the last year has shown us that the market can completely failed to asess risk properly.

A prudent, conservatively managed, listed company will not last long when cheap, poorly risked credit is available and taken up by it's competitors. While they may eventually fall over, this will not happen before they have eclipsed their peers or completely altered the performance expectations for a certain market.

 

[mattheman]

For individuals this may be true, but it's a far more complex issue for companies. Company success is benchmarked against others in in the same market. If one player in a certain market starts to grow rapidly due to agressive, borrowing financed growth, it puts enormous pressure on others to follow suit. If they don't they risk losing .

what iam saying that its easy to blame them, if i had to break it down i would say the government should take 40% responsibility consumers 20% banks 10% and investors 30%.

 

[peter_hutson]

what iam saying that its easy to blame them, if i had to break it down i would say the government should take 40% responsibility consumers 20% banks 10% and investors 30%.

I agree that everyone needs to take some share of the blame. While I can't put a figure on it, the banks are significantly more responsible that 10%. It's the job of a bank to make investments (be it loads or whatever) and manage risk associated with those investments. To perform this they were paid very well, on the basis that they were doing a good yob. It's now clear them were not, in many cases they behaved like sheep and followed the crowd. Which to be honest is not surprising, they are after all human.

 

[Dolph]

I agree that everyone needs to take some share of the blame. While I can't put a figure on it, the banks are significantly more responsible that 10%. It's the job of a bank to make investments (be it loads or whatever) and manage risk associated with those investments. To perform this they were paid very well, on the basis that they were doing a good yob. It's now clear them were not, in many cases they behaved like sheep and followed the crowd. Which to be honest is not surprising, they are after all human.

Actually, risk management falls on the credit rating agencies, not the banks. The banks buy based on the rated risk created by people that were supposed to know what they were doing, and indeed the banks were required to use the rating agencies and their ratings.

Unfortunately, market failure within the risk management market (caused by government intervention, regulation and forced use removing any link between rating accuracy and customer use) caused the ratings to be wildly inaccurate, as the market force shifted from conservative ratings for buyers, to optimistic ratings for sellers, and the end result was that banks bought a lot of securities that should have been perfectly safe, but were not.

Blaming this part on the banks is like blaming motorists for speeding when the wrong roadsigns are at the side of the roads.

 

[Seft]

Actually, risk management falls on the credit rating agencies, not the banks. The banks buy based on the rated risk created by people that were supposed to know what they were doing, and indeed the banks were required to use the rating agencies and their ratings.

Given that a large number of investment professionals are CFA Charterholders, would they not be bound by Standard 5a - Diligence and Reasonable basis*? Making an investment based on only one piece of third-party research would surely be in violation.

* Possibly local law too

 

[Rich_L]

Blaming this part on the banks is like blaming motorists for speeding when the wrong roadsigns are at the side of the roads.

Surely a more accurate analogy is blaming motorists for driving at an inappropriate speed (and subsequently crashing) for the conditions, regardless of what the signs are at the side of the roads.

 

[dante6491]

VAT back up to 17.5% on 1st January

1p Corporation Tax rise is delayed...

 

[Duke]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8403127.stm - video and text to follow there.

Increased tax on the middle class and a bit more on the top 2% earners. Classic Labour budget so far.

 

[[TW]Fox]

What a shock - he wont be reducing fuel duty to counter for increased VAT, whereas a year ago he increased fuel duty to counter for reduced VAT.

 

[antijoke]

What a shock - he wont be reducing fuel duty to counter for increased VAT, whereas a year ago he increased fuel duty to counter for reduced VAT.

You didn't really expect it to be lowered did you?

 

[Vonhelmet]

What a shock - he wont be reducing fuel duty to counter for increased VAT, whereas a year ago he increased fuel duty to counter for reduced VAT.

One hand gives, the other takes away.

Then the other other hand takes a bit more.

 

[[TW]Fox]

You didn't really expect it to be lowered did you?

You missed the blatant sarcasm in my first three words I take it?

 

[wildman]

dont you understand what iam talking about?
a fix price for something that you have to pay means it hurts a low wage earner more than a high wage earner and it isnt equal.
It could be 20% of a low wage earns income in proprotion to his income, and 5% of a high wage earner income in propertion to his income.

so what

why the hell should it cost someone on 100k a year more to have their bins emptied thatn someone on 20k when they are both receiving exactly the same service. Thats like saying that anyone who uses the tube for example who earns over 100k has to pay a premium rate fare and everyone else below that pays normal fare.

Do you think thats fair ? If you do then you should go back to mother Russia and drink vodka while saluting Stalin's grave

 

[Vonhelmet]

why the hell should it cost someone on 100k a year more to have their bins emptied thatn someone on 20k when they are both receiving exactly the same service.

Bad example - bins are paid for out of council tax.

 

[[TW]Fox]

All employer, employee and self-employed rates of National Insurance will rise by a further 0.5% from April 2011, but those who earn £20,000 or less will be protected from the increase

Why bother furthering yourself these days? Whats the point? Just get a crap job, get a load of handouts and dodge the tax rises

 

[Vonhelmet]

Why bother furthering yourself these days? Whats the point? Just get a crap job, get a load of handouts and dodge the tax rises

He also promised to get rid of the benefit trap...

Didn't say how, though.

 

[Firestar_3x]

Just seen that