Follow by Email

Tuesday, 4 August 2009

City AM part 3

Thank you very much for getting back to me. An unexpected pleasure.
My view of the current mess is along the following lines:

too-free markets coupled with too much power concentrated in certain hands, e.g. banks.

I back this up with my view of the excessive payments for failure. Why have we seen failure rewarded with such amounts? I would like to answer this myself, in the mean time I speculate that concentrated, unaccountable power is to blame. Shareholdings is a perfect example as the majority of shares are owned by rich powerful blocks, not numerous poorer people.

I agree that aiming vitriol just at bankers is simplistic and therefore silly. I believe that the blame rests at the feet of bankers, governments, electorates, shareholders, and consumers. But primarily with the bankers because of the prevalence of debt and the excessive leverage against property which has underpinned the consumer boom we have seen. I would include the addiction to debt more widely as another example of this. This is why I blame all the parties involved, and whilst you blame monetary decision makers, I would partly agree but look at the bankers who have exploited this situation for their own ends.

Banks going to the wall has very important implications for staff and savers, who I believe should be protected. There are places like north England, south Wales and Cornwall still recovering from the recessions of the 1980s. All I mean by that is the importance of considering the social consequences of letting large businesses going to the wall.

Bankers are getting hated because they are getting huge bonuses, on top of huge salaries, at a time when people are loosing their homes and jobs. Credit is still squeezed, especially for SMEs. The latter being an important part of my work.

I am certainly sympathetic towards this view, even on a purely emotional level."

No comments: