Do You Think That Banks Are Crooks?

[Stephanie739]

YES!! Its VERY wrong! Don't ya know you're supposed to mooch off the govt and get welfare and food stamps!!!
You looser, Ed!!

Keep working Ed.. and be proud that you do...

Do you not see the hypocrisy? Our government waste so much money. One of the latest scandals dealt with some federal agency taking many employees to Vegas for a retreat or something at the cost of hundreds of thousands of tax payers dollars. This was their job. Chickened never did answer...perhaps he too watches shrimp on a treadmill for a living or is paid a 6 figure salary to determine mating rituals of sea turtles, at tax payer expense. Keep working? Do you fail to see government inefficiency as a major contributor to our debt? I don't see the humor in this. I believe I make a very valid point.

 

[Royd]

Yes it's wrong you should move in to the work camp for your 3 hots and a cot and a little spending money.

Save me a spot.

 

[thaiturkey]

I don't believe the answer is found in taxes and/or tariffs. We need to rethink what people need and want, and construct business models to meet these needs. Our labor laws are failing to meet the needs of the people and have made doing business in America too expensive to compete. People want security of food and shelter, and some happiness (vacation and spending money) Consider how many people would take a factory job if room and board was provided, a decent work schedule, and some spending money. Think of how much money a business could save if they no longer had to pay factory workers $20 a hour (when those in other countries are hired for less than $20 a day)

Quakers created just this in Britain as a way of improving on the hard conditions that workers endured during the industrial revolution. They provided what at the time were very good working conditions, homes and shops. There were no bars in those towns. Houses had gardens, streets were tree lined and there were green spaces.

The system worked well. Working people until then had been willing to work for the same employer for life and accept a paternalistic management style. Businesses were stable. You could expect a job for life and so the tie of company homes and other job-related benefits were very welcome after the brutal employment regimes of Victorian times and in the absence of a State safety net for those in need. However, all this changed with the Great Depression. Companies closed and people lost all of their company benefits as well as their jobs. Stability and security had gone. By the end of WWII, people in Britain had not only stopped trusting employers but they had also had enough of the country's elite and right wing politics. They wanted independence from any single employer and the freedom to move from job to job or stand a chance of keeping their homes if they were forced to seek work with a different company.

Britain's Garden Cities were a great social experiment that worked very well in its day. I doubt whether many people today would want such paternalism from an employer or gamble on his job lasting until retirement. You can't even be sure that your pension fund will escape the notice of thieves nowadays. Benefits in employment are taxed now too. The Garden Cities still exist but most of the Quaker businesses have gone, new employment has moved in and the homes are privately owned.

This is a pic. of Welwyn Garden City taken in the 1950's. It was built in the 1920's It shows the quality of environment that the Quaker employers were willing to provide for their employees and their families.

 

[Royd]

I bet there are a lot of people who would work in exchange for a cool place to live with modern luxuries, food, vacation and a modest pay. I would design the facility so that money wouldn't even be necessary; all that is earned can be saved or spent on other wants. I would even set it up to accommodate small families, different shifts or roles (maintenance, cafeteria, etc.) so that children will be cared for.

You don't seem to have much concept of the lifestyles of the poor and less fortunate, Chickened. This type of arrangement would be a major safety net, a privately run/business guided community, which in theory will help bring us back into competition in the global market by keeping labor costs low - buy American might once again be affordable.

They've already got it...It's called HUD housing a welfare check and foodstamps. Most have all the luxuries of life, that you would provide in your world. Why join you, where work is required? That's crazy talk.

 

[thaiturkey]

Do you not see the hypocrisy? Our government waste so much money. One of the latest scandals dealt with some federal agency taking many employees to Vegas for a retreat or something at the cost of hundreds of thousands of tax payers dollars. This was their job. Chickened never did answer...perhaps he too watches shrimp on a treadmill for a living or is paid a 6 figure salary to determine mating rituals of sea turtles, at tax payer expense. Keep working? Do you fail to see government inefficiency as a major contributor to our debt? I don't see the humor in this. I believe I make a very valid point.

Many people preoccupy themselves with their imagined abuses of a welfare system to the extent that they don't see who really is ripping off the taxpayer. It's like pointing your guns at China when the destruction of your country is already happening from within.

 

[Royd]

Quakers created just this in Britain as a way of improving on the hard conditions that workers endured during the industrial revolution. They provided what at the time were very good working conditions, homes and shops. There were no bars in those towns. Houses had gardens, streets were tree lined and there were green spaces.

The system worked well. Working people until then had been willing to work for the same employer for life and accept a paternalistic management style. Businesses were stable. You could expect a job for life and so the tie of company homes and other job-related benefits were very welcome after the brutal employment regimes of Victorian times and in the absence of a State safety net for those in need. However, all this changed with the Great Depression. Companies closed and people lost all of their company benefits as well as their jobs. Stability and security had gone. By the end of WWII, people in Britain had not only stopped trusting employers but they had also had enough of the country's elite and right wing politics. They wanted independence from any single employer and the freedom to move from job to job or stand a chance of keeping their homes if they were forced to seek work with a different company.

Britain's Garden Cities were a great social experiment that worked very well in its day. I doubt whether many people today would want such paternalism from an employer or gamble on his job lasting until retirement. You can't even be sure that your pension fund will escape the notice of thieves nowadays. Benefits in employment are taxed now too. The Garden Cities still exist but most of the Quaker businesses have gone, new employment has moved in and the homes are privately owned.

This is a pic. of Welwyn Garden City taken in the 1950's. It was built in the 1920's It shows the quality of environment that the Quaker employers were willing to provide for their employees and their families.

The paternalistic movement got lazy and hired a nanny, and she don't take no guff. You will wash your face, comb your hair, and be on time for your welfare check.

 

[thaiturkey]

The misdeeds at Barcalays are now the subject of criminal investigation which appears to be including other financial institutions. This is from the BBC website:

6 July 2012 Last updated at 16:00 GMT
Serious Fraud Office launches Libor investigation

A number of financial institutions are being investigated by regulators and criminal prosecutors

Libor scandal
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has confirmed that it has formally launched an investigation into the rigging of inter-bank lending rates.
The case could lead to criminal charges being brought against individuals.
Its involvement follows an investigation by US and UK regulators into the manipulation of Libor, which resulted in a record fine for Barclays.
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, said he was "delighted" by the decision.
"As a government, we will make sure the SFO has all the resources it needs to conduct this investigation in full," he said.
"I want the SFO to follow the evidence wherever it goes, to bring prosecutions if they can."
Last week the bank agreed to pay £290m in penalties after its traders tried to rig inter-bank lending rates, sometimes working with staff at other financial institutions.
Regulators are continuing to look into possible rate manipulation at other banks, while the US Department of Justice is carrying out its own criminal investigations.
An SFO spokesperson confirmed that a dedicated case team had now started work, but would not say whom it was investigating.
Its short statement said only: "The SFO Director David Green QC has today decided formally to accept the Libor matter for investigation."
The Libor affair, described by the prime minister as a scandal, has led to the resignation of three of Barclays' most senior executives in a matter of days, including chief executive Bob Diamond.
He appeared before MPs on the Treasury Select Committee this week, when he called the behaviour of those responsible for Libor rigging at the bank "reprehensible".
Regulators in the UK and the US found that Barclays staff had tried to affect rates over a number of years, first for profit and then to reduce concerns about how much it was being affected by the financial crisis.
The SFO is responsible for investigating allegations of serious and complex frauds. It considers whether to prosecute using a number of criteria, including whether it is a matter of public concern, and whether the value of any fraud is more than £1m.
The government agency said a few days ago that it was considering whether a criminal prosecution was appropriate and possible, and said this could take a month.
"Normally when there is such a public outcry, the law enforcement agencies manage to act in a more accelerated pace," said Bradley Simon, a former US federal prosecutor who now defends clients in fraud cases.
He said the SFO would be sensitive to criticism that it had been slow to respond in the past.
"They have to show they are on top of this. There are a lot of angry people out there," he told BBC News.

 

[Stephanie739]

Many people preoccupy themselves with their imagined abuses of a welfare system to the extent that they don't see who really is ripping off the taxpayer. It's like pointing your guns at China when the destruction of your country is already happening from within.

That was a very well worded post. Thank you.

 

[hemet dennis]

Do you not see the hypocrisy? Our government waste so much money. One of the latest scandals dealt with some federal agency taking many employees to Vegas for a retreat or something at the cost of hundreds of thousands of tax payers dollars. This was their job. Chickened never did answer...perhaps he too watches shrimp on a treadmill for a living or is paid a 6 figure salary to determine mating rituals of sea turtles, at tax payer expense. Keep working? Do you fail to see government inefficiency as a major contributor to our debt? I don't see the humor in this. I believe I make a very valid point.

So anyone that works for the government should be jailed or shot ?

 

[Stephanie739]

Who will receive the fine from Barclays? Are those claiming harm from the rigging suing? I think this is how I would handle it, but I guess if it is the public who was harmed, the government has a duty to step in, right?