Fred Goodwin...sir

[El Pibe]

You can't claim to agree with me and then contradict that immediately.

You have to understand that few laws were broken. Where regulations were broken this was done with the tacit approval of the regulators leant on by politicians keen to appease the voters who wanted everything to carry on. Everything that was being fuelled by the success of the financial sector and the apparently inexorable rise in the prices of their houses.

Where you see criminal intent, I see mass delusional optimism. That's not criminal, its just very, very human.

I'd love to have seen you at the height of the boom as prime minister, go slapping the handcuffs and killing the golden goose (though obviously in retrospect that might have been a wise move).

You are a paragon of the lynch mob, baying thoughtlessly for blood because it's easy and vents anger and it looks cool.

Without the financial services this entire country is down the pan. The economy needs rebalancing for sure, but do it badly and too quickly and the whole country will look like barrow-in-furness [bus depot raaawwwwwrrr].

As regards the font, nope it's because it's big.

[Undisputedtruth]

I agree with the quoted italic text. It doesn't mean that I agree with other aspects of your points.

I really find it shocking that you think that these banking criminals should be let off scot-free just because you they were making money. It's a bit like letting drug dealers off the hook because they made money while ignoring the misery these people have caused to others. Fraud is fraud, and is a criminal matter regardless whether a company is making a profit.

There is mounting evidence that these bankers knew these mortgage security products were worthless before selling them off for a profit. That is fraud if you don't know EP. Yet these bankers expect to receive their bonuses as though nothing has happened. I don't buy that and given the mess they've created for the economy then there is no reason why they should not be subjected to criminal investigations. Only then can we get closure on the banking crisis.

[El Pibe]

The point being, my italic text was referring to all of us who fuelled the boom by geting into debt we couldn't necessarily afford if either a)if things stopped being rosy, or b)at all.

You then follow that up with a straw man backed up by an irrelevant analogy.

Yes there were sub prime mortgages sold in the us by dodgy salesmen with unsound practices.

What it seems to me is that you want to jail bankers the world over for dealing in structured products that were tied into the risk management of these mortgages by some remove.

Effectively (if you want to analogise, this is iffy rather than incorrect) you want to jail everyone who buys a cotton shirt because 7% of the cotton used in the manufacture is grown by indentured labour in India.

There is no 'mounting evidence' there is merely hindsight. I was calculating VaR against mortgage backed securities in the early 00s and I said at the time "err doesn't this rather go against the small print about prices going down as well as up" and people shrugged their shoulders because prices kept going up and it was always a niche part of any portfolio anyway.

This wasn't fraud, this was large scale optimism.

For fucks sake we voted in a chancellor who promised us the end to boom and bust, and you think its just the bankers who were idiots?!

Get a grip and admit you weren't screaming about the sub-prime market until it had all gone tits up!

[Loz]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> 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.

I had to solve the 8 queens problem using assembler on a PDP 11/73 at uni. But, since I was 19 at the time, I think that makes me a late starter around this group of prenatal prodigies.

(PS PDPs were made by DEC, not IBM...)

[El Pibe]

The only thing i remember about the vic 20 was a game so advanced that things actually moved on the screen sometimes

http://members.chello.at/theodor.lauppert/games/ptrooper.htm

and i can't believe one of the levels was called ganja farmer...how naive was i back then?!?!?

[Undisputedtruth]

Maybe it was fraud after all

The above link gives the Economist their take on what constitutes fraud.

Moving on, the Tories started the financial crisis time bomb during the mid eighties by deregulating the banks. Gordon Brown wanted support of the City in order for New Labour to become an electable force. Further deregulation of the banks was a convenient part of this deal. Funnily enough, George Osborne, as Shadow Chancellor, was asking for more deregulation of the banks in the year before the crisis started. Both Labour and the Tories have played their part in setting the right conditions before the banking bomb exploded.

It's true Gordon Brown thought he had an end to recession by skillfully using immigration while the US had suffered a couple of recessions during the term of Alan Greenspan, one of America's greatest ever Federal Bank's Chairman. Shame Gordon didn't see the big one around the corner and to be fair no one else had seen it either.

I followed the Banking crisis just before it started. Mainly because the interest on my mortgage had risen. Around May 2007, I couldn't figure out the true scale of the banking crisis based on foreclosures on the sub-prime market. In August 2007, I thought it was funny that banks couldn't trust each other in terms of lending and concluded that these idiots were going to cause a recession. By January 2008 I fully understood the true scale of the losses as soon as I learned gearing was used.

Bankers are not above the law and hindsight is not a defence for fraudulent criminal behaviour.

[KidKruger]

Loz:

"...PDPs were made by DEC, not IBM..."

I realised, once born, that they were DEC machines after all.

Fair point.

[*Bob*]

You are John Parker, fearless rasta soldier, and this is your last stand! The Man has come to destroy your humble herb field and you must stop him! You have mounted a 20mm machine gun atop your 1969 VW microbus and will blow the hell out of anyone or anything, that tries to kill you or your herb.

Stand strong against an army of facists with only the rastafarian god Jah at your side. Declare war on the war!!!

[Otta]

First post on this, and haven't read the whole thread. But going waaaaaaaay back,

How about because he brought the

honours system into disrepute?

Is this a joke?

The honours system is the biggest old boy's club going! A person who does real good and makes a real difference is given an MBE / OBE, whilst football managers, business men turned TV stars, and old Estonians are made Knights.

Doesn't take a shadey banker to bring that in to disrepute, it's already disreputable.

[Jeremy]

There's no way that's a VIC20 screenshot...

[Jeremy]

Otta Wrote:

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

> old Estonians are made Knights.

Estonians?

[El Pibe]

I think he's referring to the 14-15th century monastic military order of the Teutonic Knights who carved out a kingdom in what is now Estonia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/Teutonic_Order_1410.png/690px-Teutonic_Order_1410.png

[Damian H]

El Pibe Wrote:

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

> The point being, my italic text was referring to

> all of us who fuelled the boom by geting into debt

> we couldn't necessarily afford if either a)if

> things stopped being rosy, or b)at all.

>

> You then follow that up with a straw man backed up

> by an irrelevant analogy.

>

> Yes there were sub prime mortgages sold in the us

> by dodgy salesmen with unsound practices.

> What it seems to me is that you want to jail

> bankers the world over for dealing in structured

> products that were tied into the risk management

> of these mortgages by some remove.

>

> Effectively (if you want to analogise, this is

> iffy rather than incorrect) you want to jail

> everyone who buys a cotton shirt because 7% of the

> cotton used in the manufacture is grown by

> indentured labour in India.

>

> There is no 'mounting evidence' there is merely

> hindsight. I was calculating VaR against mortgage

> backed securities in the early 00s and I said at

> the time "err doesn't this rather go against the

> small print about prices going down as well as up"

> and people shrugged their shoulders because prices

> kept going up and it was always a niche part of

> any portfolio anyway.

>

> This wasn't fraud, this was large scale optimism.

>

> For @#$%& sake we voted in a chancellor who

> promised us the end to boom and bust, and you

> think its just the bankers who were idiots?!

>

> Get a grip and admit you weren't screaming about

> the sub-prime market until it had all gone tits

> up!

Beautifully put. Unfortunately in UDT's eyes, bankers are inherently evil. Therefore, the bankers were gulty of fraud and should go to jail, whereas those who lied and manipulated the products but who aren't bankers are innocent victims even if they engaged in fraudulent activity.

UDT is defending an ideology he can't let go - dont expect reason from him. I think your description of the situation as run-away optimism is very accurate - that is what typifies every bubble. CLearly the ordinary people who jumped on the bandwagon in order to make a quick buck and were happy to lie to achieve that were carried away by exactly the same optimism and contributed to the collapse. In UDT's eyes, for whatever reason, they were NOT guilty of greed (in fact were all completely illiterate whose souls were bought with coloured beads and shiny thinks by unscrupulous bankers) whilst the bankers were the 'greedy' ones. Strange dichotomy.

[Damian H]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

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

> 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.

I don't think it is me who is making myself look ridiculous or who needs to do research. Your 'research' appears to redound to a desperate Google search which has identified the fact that three bankers were charged with fraud. Gee-whizz! Well, that confirms it then. The banking system was clearly rotten to the very core.

I agree that criminals should be prosecuted and sentenced accordingly - and that should INCLUDE the hundreds of thousands who lied to and swindled financial institutions in order to defraud them of funds for personal gain. In your eyes, it seems owever, that the man on the street is INCAPABLE of wrong-doing so must have been co-erced, manipulated, deceived or exploited into criminal acts by Big Bad Bankers with gilt cuff-links, coloured braces and smoking big cigars.

There is culpability across the board here but you seem to want to represent a special interest group and excuse them from the consequences of their criminal behaviour and paint them as victims. EVen when it is clear that such people engaged in criminal fraud you attempt to justify it by saying the banks should have been smarter and should have caught them. Tht is pathetic. It is a criminal's charter. Effectively you are saying that no criminal is responsible for their actions if the victim was dumb enough to be taken in. Interestingly, that type of thinking is a very common trait in sociopathic conditions.

[Otta]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Otta Wrote:

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

> -----

> > old Estonians are made Knights.

>

> Estonians?

Ha ha, must check what my phone is writing in future!

[Otta]

Anyway, having now read the rest of the thread...

To blame the ordinary people for the bank's role in the financial crisis just makes you look ridiculous, Damian.

Not that Damian did do that in the first place, but calling anyone ridiculous, when you've said

I disagree. The 'Ordinary Joes' are the victims in this whole matter. Most of them barely able to read or write much less able to commit fraud on a massive level that caused a financial crisis not seen since the 1930s.

Frankly beggars belief.

You are very very special UDT.

[katie1997]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

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

> I followed the Banking crisis just before it

> started. Mainly because the interest on my

> mortgage had risen. Around May 2007, I couldn't

> figure out the true scale of the banking crisis

> based on foreclosures on the sub-prime market. In

> August 2007, I thought it was funny that banks

> couldn't trust each other in terms of lending and

> concluded that these idiots were going to cause a

> recession. By January 2008 I fully understood the

> true scale of the losses as soon as I learned

> gearing was used.

You 'followed the banking crisis just before it started'. How can you follow a crisis that hasn't started yet?

Can you see into the future as well as the numerous other skills you've claimed to have?

In January 2008 when you 'fully understood the true scale of losses as soon as you learned gearing was used', were you working in the financial sector? I assume not, as all this mess could have been avoided I 'spose. What a pity.

What's next?

[????]

UDT - you knew about Gearing in the 90s and then were surprised theat the banks were using it in 2008 :-S

[????]

Anyway, Dave 'junmp on any passing bandwagon' Cameron has achieved sometinhg I never thought possible, I actually feel a bit sorry for Fred Goodwin. You can see why Blair is Cameron's hero, it's not govt by principle or even with a strategy it's just politics for the mob.

Apostrophes etc

[red devil]

Otta Wrote:

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

> I disagree. The 'Ordinary Joes' are the victims in

> this whole matter. Most of them barely able to

> read or write much less able to commit fraud on a

> massive level that caused a financial crisis not

> seen since the 1930s.

>

> Frankly beggars belief.

>

> You are very very special UDT.

I think you'll find he's part of Harry Redknapp's defence team...

[El Pibe]

Doubtless we'll soon learn that he's known about habeas corpus since 1987.

[Parkdrive]

Damian H wrote

"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."

It certainly isn't anything like the same thing. To invite people to apply for financial products such as sub prime product, WITHOUT stringent and robust checks being made is folly of highest order. While we're about it I would suggest its more like a drug dealer who blames the addict for leading the dealer into criminality.

[Damian H]

Parkdrive Wrote:

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

> Damian H wrote

>

> "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."

>

> It certainly isn't anything like the same thing.

> To invite people to apply for financial products

> such as sub prime product, WITHOUT stringent and

> robust checks being made is folly of highest

> order. While we're about it I would suggest its

> more like a drug dealer who blames the addict for

> leading the dealer into criminality.

My analogy holds perfectly well. In my analogy someone knowingly commits a crime through subterfuge and then blames others for having failed to spot their deception and prevent the act.

In the case of someone lying and misrepresnting their income and status in order to fraudulently obtain a mortgage and then being exonerated by the likes of UDT on the grounds that the banks should have spotted the deception is EXACTLY the same type of pattern.

Let me put it this way - assume that our imaginary terrorist had got through airplort security because there was a serious security lapse, would you then exonerate the terrorist from responsibility for his actions? Of course you wouldn't!!! You would say that there was negligence by those in charge of security AND downright criminality on the part of the terrorist.

The same applies to the financial situation. Yes, the banks and financial institutions should probably have been much more thorough in their checks but that does NOT excuse those who willfully lied and committed fraud. Unless, of course, you are UDT who believes that it is fair game to attempt to criminally defraud the banks and if you succeed you are completely innocent (perhaps even an illiterate 'victim') and the banks are guilty for allowing themselves to be cheated.

Talk about blaming the victim!!!!!!

[karter]

What Damian H said. :)-D

[Undisputedtruth]

Ah, the world according to bankers, hey Damian. Manipulating the truth just to preserve their obscene bonuses.