Fred Goodwin...sir

[Undisputedtruth]

Looks like BASIC with the program in an infinite loop, Bob.

[katie1997]

Oh and powerpoint. Mustn't forget that one.

[Undisputedtruth]

katie1997 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I can use Excel. Does that make me a computer

> programmer?

Excel has VBA. So the real question is can you use VBA?

[*Bob*]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Looks like BASIC with the program in an infinite

> loop, Bob.

You're SO WRONG

[Undisputedtruth]

I don't think so Bob, I've written a similar program like yours when I was 13 and my teacher threaten to ban me from programming.

To stop the loop you will need to add a condition with an If Then statement.

[El Pibe]

And she would have been right to do so, you could have broken programming for everyone with such irresponsible behaviour.

I guess we all do some pretty crazy things in our teenage years though.

[Undisputedtruth]

In those days it was programming using punch cards. These cards were sent to a nearby computer centre and the following week I received a pile of computer printouts. Yep, my teacher wasn't exactly happy with my first ever program. Fortunately for EDF my computer skills improved.

[*Bob*]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think so Bob, I've written a similar

> program like yours when I was 13.

That is amazing - for a thirteen year-old.

I guess I was a prodigy - at 7 on my VIC20.

[Undisputedtruth]

Bob, I'm so right

[katie1997]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> katie1997 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I can use Excel. Does that make me a computer

> > programmer?

>

> Excel has VBA. So the real question is can you use

> VBA?

Can I use VBA? I practically invented it.

When I was twelve.

[*Bob*]

At 8 - I was doing the seemingly impossible; generating simple greetings and the names of oil giants.. using only an ordinary household calculator, turned upside down.

[katie1997]

Hahaha I could do that one too *Bob* - what memories that brought back. Although I think my brother discovered it first.

When he was seven.

[Help-Ma-Boab]

Think I was spelling boobies on my up turned calculator. Was 12 months old. Must have been hungry, thats what I call talent. (5318008)

[KidKruger]

UDT I have to confess I was programming in assembler from a very young age, practically from when I was an embryo in fact. This included coding the moves for chess pieces, of course, mainly on IBM PDP-11s.

If I needed to drop some code in in straight Hex, not a problem either.

By comparison your computing skills seem ordinary. Bless.

[Damian H]

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Damian H Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Parkdrive Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Damian H

> > > But what about the millions of 'Ordinary

> Joes'

> > who

> > > lied through their teeth to get mortgages and

> > > cynically exploited a lax financial system to

> > get

> > > hands on properties they knew they could not

> > > afford to pay for? What about them? I am sure

> > each

> > > of them would say they are small fry - too

> > > insignificant to have had any impact. Yet

> they

> > > lied and falisifed declarations of income

> > > nonetheless, significantly contributing en

> > masse

> > > to the collapse of the sub-prime market which

> > was

> > > the catalyst for the global financial

> collapse.

> > >

> > > First of all why was such a lax system

> allowed

> > to

> > > be implemented? Probably because those that

> > > implemented it thought there was money to be

> > made

> > > from the poor sods who saw this as the only

> way

> > on

> > > to to the property ladder. As for the

> comments

> > on

> > > here that many of us are jealous of these

> high

> > > earners, yes probably. But it doesn't alter

> the

> > > fact that the culture of paying people for

> > failure

> > > HAS to end. Are these people vilified

> unjustly?

> > > Perhaps, but then I'm sure their salaries

> will

> > > more then compensate for the grief and I'm

> sure

> > it

> > > goes with the territory.

> >

> > Parkdrive,

> > Your response buys into exactly the

> scapegoating

> > mentality that has been described and that I

> > challenged. Effectively you are saying that

> the

> > 'poor sods' are so desperate that no-one can

> > expect them to behave honestly when they are

> given

> > the opportunity to engage in a scam. This

> > completely absolves those who lied and cheated

> > from any moral culpability for their actions

> and

> > blames those they lied to. That is absurd! It

> is

> > the same mentality that says we should

> write-off

> > third world debt as it's unreasonable to expect

> > such countries to repay the loans they took out

> > and promised to repay. It's the same mentality

> > that says it's ok for people to shoplift from

> > Sainsburys because its a victimless crime and

> > Sainsburys are a b****rd corporate so they

> deserve

> > it.

> >

> > Yes, I have no doubt that banks entered the

> > sub-prime market in order to make money. In

> fact,

> > of course they did, they are commercial

> > organisations. That does NOT excuse the

> > exploitation of their products by dishonest

> > people. If we take this sort of mentality of

> > allowing people to shrug off any responsibility

> > for their actions and simply claim 'victim'

> status

> > there are going to be consequences (apart from

> the

> > obvious financial meltdown). One, if we

> write-off

> > third world debt there is just about zero

> prospect

> > of anyone lending these countries a penny in

> > future. They have got out of their current

> > obligations but have made themselves credit

> > pariahs in the eyes of the world. In terms of

> > sub-prime defaulters - go ahead, blame the

> banks

> > and march on Wall Street. The fact is that no

> > financial institution will touch the sub-prime

> > market ever again so those who wanted to get on

> > the property market will be shafted.

> >

> > If people act as if they cannot be held

> > accountable or behave responsibility, if they

> > default to 'victim' status the moment things go

> > wrong, they will not be given responsibility

> (in

> > this case that means credit opportunities).

> >

> > It's one reason why I can't stand this 99%

> > movement that emerged from Occupy Wall Street.

> > The message from that is "we, the 99%, are

> > wonderful, decent, honest people and the 1% are

> > villians who should be hung by their own

> > intestines from a lamp-post." It's claptrap.

> I

> > have no doubt that a great many of the 99% had

> > their snouts in the trough as much as anyone,

> just

> > on a smaller scale per individual.

> >

> > I have no problem with bonuses being tied to

> > achievements - that is as it should be, but a

> > great many people simply don't want to see

> bonuses

> > to bankers AT ALL. Full stop!

> >

> > In terms of whether people should take

> > vilification if they are paid enough - I don't

> > think that is anyone's job description. People

> > should be held reasonably accountable,

> certainly,

> > whatever their level in society. When someone

> is

> > used as a political football and has their

> > property attacked as an act of scapegoating for

> > others to conceal their culpability that is

> > unacceptable.

>

> I don't buy into any such scapegoating. At the end

> of the day any institution or group of individuals

> that really believes it ok to let people take on a

> mortgage/loan without due diligence or robust

> financial checks deserve all it gets. Taking as

> gospel a claim that an individual earns 4 or 5

> times their actual earnings, because the the way

> the product is pitched actually encourages them to

> do is bordering on criminal negligence. That

> doesn't excuse the applicant, but pitching such a

> product and then expecting nobody to apply for it

> sort of defeats the object of the exercise. I've

> never said or even hinted that anyone, bankers

> included, shouldn't receive a bonus for a job well

> done. But very few people in the UK today get a

> bonus full stop. I haven't for the best part of 10

> years and I'm not really fussed as I knew that

> when I took my jobs on.

>

> I find your remarks somewhat patronsing. Going

> back to the sub prime thing, you seem to suggest

> that the fault should be laid at the door or those

> that bought into the product and that those that

> pushed it are blameless, try and get your balance

> right and you might find some support. Bonuses are

> a sore point and that will remain the case while

> only a small perecentage of the population have

> any chance of getting one. I speak as someone that

> has enjoyed packages that included an end of year

> bonus in the region of 10% of gross salary and 15%

> non contributory pension plan, and free BUPA from

> family and I. This is no longer is the case, so I

> can understand both sides of the argument, but I

> don't try to lay the blame on a single entity of

> individual, I'd settle for proportional

> responsibility weighted against those that sell

> the product.

If that's what you think I was saying you obviously haven't read what I have posted properly. I have been putting forward exactly the balance that you claim I am lacking. My purpose has been to counter the ridiculous vilification and scapegoating of the banks and point out that there are many others who also bear responsibility for what happened. It seems,however, that there is a great desire to exonerate from ANY responsibility those who lied and misrepresented their circumstances in order to get mortgages to make a quick buck or get a house knew they could not afford. Sure, the banks should have engaged in a bit more DD on the claims that were being made but that does NOT alter the fact that many, many people lied to get financial products and then defaulted on them. No-one is doubting that the banks played a role - what I am pointing out is the need for balance and a recognition that the deceit of many customers who hoped to access some type of get rich quick magic through property speculation was also a significant factor. As was the negligence of the same politicians who are now posturing as guardians of the public and scapegoating the banks. To claim (as has been pointed out) that the banks are solely to blame for not identifying the fact that people were lying through their teeth is like a terrorist who blows up a plane blaming airport security for not catching him.

You know, this whole affair is uncomfortably reminiscent to be honest of the same mentality that pertained in Germany in the 1930s. There was economic hardship and disatisfaction and that situation, which was a complex cocktail of many factors, was manipulated and simplified down, for cynical political reasons, to pointing the finger at one group. In Germany it was Jewish financiers - in the current climate it is financiers of any type. What is the difference except for scale between Fred Goodwin having his windows broken and the events of Crystalnacht? What is the difference between depicting Jewish financiers as rats and the depection of bankers as Fat Cats? It is a cynical over-simplification of affairs to divert attention away from wider culpability by scapegoating one group.

My postings, which identify the culpability of a wide range of people - banks, customers, regulators and politicians - reflect much greater balance than those posters who claim that all those who took out mortgages they couldn't pay are innocent illiterate victims who didn't know what they were signing, those who claim the banks are solely to blame if they didn't detect that someone was defrauding them and those who effectively just say that bankers are b***ards who deserve anything they get.

[Jeremy]

UDT = programming god

[El Pibe]

Parkdrive, if you quote that message in reply I am going to throw my toys out of the pram!

[El Pibe]

Ooh ooh damian godwinned it.

[Annette Curtain]

katie1997 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Undisputedtruth Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > katie1997 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > I can use Excel. Does that make me a computer

> > > programmer?

> >

> > Excel has VBA. So the real question is can you

> use

> > VBA?

>

> Can I use VBA? I practically invented it.

>

>

> When I was twelve.

No Katie

That was "VPL"

At thirteen I was wearing a thong though.

I know, chaffed but way ahead of the game.

My teachers weren't happy, specially at netball.

To much info ?

NETTE:-S

[katie1997]

Don't you mean NETTEball? ;)

[maxxi]

No, No Nette that was - http://www.packagingdigest.com/photo/151/151355-pdx0708dtrends2.jpg-See? PLJ not VPL - ooh that stuff really made your lips pucker.

mind you, come to think of it...

[Annette Curtain]

I know maxxi

That stuff was vile-o

Imagine, upstair & downstairs puckered.

NETTE::o

[Undisputedtruth]

Damian H Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Your comments are risible. Are you actually

> saying that all those with sub-prime status who

> took out mortgages are illiterate and didn't

> appreciate that when you take out a loan you have

> to pay it back???? Have you the slightest

> evidence whatsoever to back up that position???

> Or any of the statements you make? Has it not

> occurred to you that when a large number of small

> scale deceptions and defaults add up you have a

> major problem such as the sub-prime crisis? And

> the allegation of 'greedy'? No 'greed' on the

> part of those who said "Sod thbis, I can fiddle a

> mortgage, get a house and worry about paying for

> it later."???

>

> You say bankers should be investigated for fraud.

> What fraud specifically? Do you actually know the

> meaning of the word fraud? Let me give you

> something that would fit the definition - falsely

> claiming a level of income you don't actually earn

> in order to deceive a lender into giving you a

> mortgage. THAT is fraud!

>

> You clearly have a need to engage in exactly the

> type of scapegoating I have discussed in order to

> exonerate the 'ordinary Joe' fom any sort of

> accountability for his/her behaviour and and THAT

> is plain disgraceful.

>

> You really should change your Username, you know.

Damian H, you definitely need to do some research on the financial crisis. Here's what the New York Times have to say on banking fraud during the financial crisis.

3 Former Traders at Credit Suisse Charged With Bond Fraud

To blame the ordinary people for the bank's role in the financial crisis just makes you look ridiculous, Damian. Hopefully jail is the best place for these criminals.

[El Pibe]

2 things UDT.

One, Damian was taking the reasoned and nuanced point of view that 'things aren't simple', that more people need to hold their hand up and admit they were part of the problem than is currently the case, what with everyone pointing at the nearest hate figure.

And two, ease up on the font tag, it's really ugly. Bold will suffice.

[Undisputedtruth]

EP

I do agree that "more people need to hold their hand up and admit they were part of the problem than is currently the case". The sooner we can put these crooked bankers in jail the more confident we can feel about the banks putting their house in order. Blaming ordinary people for the financial crisis shows an extraordinary misunderstanding of the crisis.

With regards to the fonts, I think it has more to do the with the font typeface.