Sid Pollitt
2 February 2009
18:5614568With the recent onset of banks sneezing and the world economy catching a cold it must be asked. A few years ago we had the problem of US companies such as Enron posting false accounts so that the executives could pocket loads of money and this current crisis, although not entirely but similarly fueled by greed maybe the system is fundamentally rotten.
Davis Cameron called yersterday for a more moral capitalism. By saying this he isnt he admitting that greed and immorality is a factor with the pursuit of money?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
2 February 2009
19:2214573Capitalism has not failed, regulation has failed as a direct result of Brown's reforms (and Clintons reforms in the USA) and socialistic meddling in the economy including, excessive taxation, excessive red tape, excessive borrowing and spending by Government, discouraging saving and investing resulting in excessive public borrowing. Ans so on...
The way out of this mess is to allow businesses to get on and do what they do best and leave them free to do that. Only businesses can dig us out of it.
As for DC's comments, he is merely following a good solid Conservative principal of personal responsibility and everyone, including business leaders, to take personal responsibility for their actions and yes, there is most certainly a moral dimension to that.
Sid Pollitt
2 February 2009
19:3614575I just ask. I read that when Lehmans Brothers was being bought out by Bank of America the executives' last act was to pay themselves bonuses that ran to over a billion dollars. Was that moral or just good capitalist business? This was a case of allowing businesses to get on and do what they do best and leave them free to do it, so was Enron.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
2 February 2009
20:3014578one word for it,greed.
2 February 2009
21:1314585Well, the bankers would say it was just responding to market forces : you get what you pay for, and if you want a good banker (I am trying really hard with that word.....) you have to pay extra. I have nothing to add to that.....................
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
2 February 2009
21:4214587that is the great thing about capitalism, we all have to be subservient to banks in order to survive.
no-one can get a mortgage or business loan without them, when they totally foul everything up we give them free money so that they can be horrid to us again.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
2 February 2009
21:5014589How true Howard and despite the free handouts they still will not lend.
Barry W. says in his posting that business should be allowed to do what they do best, banks are businesses and look where they have got us.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
2 February 2009
23:2114595Perhaps if Brown had not changed the well proven BofE regulatory system of the banks we would not have half the problems we have now. You cannot blame a shark for acting like a shark after all. Its no good blaming bankers, you really do have to look at the Government who themselves foolishly undermined their bailouts. To charge 12% interest and expect the banks to charge less to the public and businesses is one example. The other stupid thing they did was tell the banks that if they wanted the cash they would not be able to issue dividends. That immediately undermined the share price, including those shares held by the Government..... Even the most experienced investment adviser will tell you that investment is made into banks by income seekers, not for growth, and dividends have always been a key driver for banking investment.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
3 February 2009
08:4214602"As for DC's comments, he is merely following a good solid Conservative principal of personal responsibility and everyone, including business leaders, to take personal responsibility for their actions and yes, there is most certainly a moral dimension to that."
As part of my personal quest to get to the root of Conservative thinking, could you define morality?
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
3 February 2009
09:0314603The problem with David Cameron calling for a more moral capilatism is that its not either deliverable or enforceable. You look at Panorama last night and the capitalist rich are sciphering off millions due in taxes and stashing it all in places like Lichtenstein. The rich wont pay their taxes and will go to any length to avoid paying, so you would have to go a long way getting this lot to come around to any kind of moral responsibility. Shafting the state is the name of the game.
Its almost nice, if I can use that word in relation to anything political, that David Cameron calls for this but its a dreamworld. The pigs are at the trough and not listening.
Even our newly elected US President Obama was disgusted only last week that huge bonuses have just been paid in the US, to bank staff in those banks only recently bailed out. In other words the money went in from taxpayers and it went straight out again in bonuses.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
3 February 2009
11:5614617I THink paulb hasaid it #all.
Although Barryw and others wil say there is no class system wot we do have is one rule for them and another for us plebs.
h
Theres so many instances of it;
To name but a few
Bonus's paid to big company directors even though they are earning(wrong word)100's of thousands before the bonus, and some the compsany could be failing but they still get the dosh.
One thing i always admired maggie for was her determination to smash the plebs but look after her own.
Maybe the labour party couldl learn from it in there people it feels it represents.
Politics is dieing cos people see no diffrfence in the parties(of course theres big diffrences) and the lack of engagement, i rarely if ever see a cllr or candidate imn my road.
But back to the posting, I hope it doesmn't sutrvive if it means those weorking people will have to suffer lolw wages, p;oor conditions., poor working practices, anyti trade union legislation, the list is endless
So i wsill pleased to see end to capitalism sooner the better
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
3 February 2009
14:0714624Old Labour prejudices are still alive I see....
I do not consider it in any way moral for any Government to excessively tax its population. If such 'taxploitation' takes place then I dont blame anyone for acting in a way that protectes their interests.
I note this week that the favourite newspaper of the left, The Guardian, in the form of Polly Toynbee is waging a tax campaign against 'tax avoidance'. Interesting that seeing that the Guardian is itself a part of a huge tax avoidance scheme involving off-shore trusts. It is commented about on Guido's website who has a page of their annual report posted.
In their annual report Guardian Media Group made £306.4 million before tax. They use a trust and a Caymans Islands offshore corporation to avoid stamp duty. They managed to obtain a rebate of £800,000 in tax last year, less than they paid their chief executive who earned £827,000. They paid just £800,000 in corporation tax.
I call that hypocritical. Once again, as we have seen from the four Labour Peers, it is socialists who are in there with their noses in the trough with the worse of them.
What is moral by way of taxation is for the Government to use tax only to raise the revenue it needs to deliver essential services and not as a cash cow or a means to 're-distribute' wealth. Taxes should be at a minimum level.
It was shown that lower taxes on higher earners actually increases the level of tax revenue raised from the higher earners.
That does not of course answer DT's question about defining morality. That is too big a question to answer here and would bneed a lot of thought for which I dont have the time. But for me in my business it can be summed up by not recommending an action that I would not take if I was in the client's shoes and conversely, to recommend the actions that I would take if in a clients position. OK, there is more to it than that and indeed other aspects to morality that transend the rule books but in my business that is a good place to start.
Sid Pollitt
3 February 2009
14:2614626I'm not sure if BarryW is trying to muddy the waters or doesn't understand what capitalism is. What the Guardian does in a capitalist system doesn't make it a capitalist business, the same applies for the likes of the Co-op and the Nationwide.
And the question is, I think, whether capitalism cant help itself and will lead to the excesses by its nature.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
3 February 2009
14:4614627errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..............Sid...
Are you trying to excuse the Guardian for its hypocracy in waging a campaign against tax avoidance while being a big tax avoider itsef simply because you regard it as 'outside the capitalist system'? I see.....
Sid Pollitt
3 February 2009
14:5914628I'm not sticking up for anyone, I'm posing a question. I think BarryW is calling for more regulation and red tape for business from a big government here I think.
Can capitalism be responsible and moral? As BarryW pointed out earlier 'You cannot blame a shark for acting like a shark after all'. Should we bring in new laws and regulation or should be let the sharks do their worse and wring our hands?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
3 February 2009
17:3614631No Sid - I am calling for less red tape and beaurocracy. What I want is greater personal responsibility and less interferance by big Government. Nothing I have said suggests the opposite.
I dont see anything wrong with anyone minimising their tax burden through legitimate and legal means and I am advising people how to do that every day (though not on the scale that the Guardian acts!)
Governments should restrain their impulse to legislate interfere and tax.
Sid Pollitt
3 February 2009
18:4114634Well I suppose BarryW managed a different answer this time, he usually comes up with Gordon Brown whatever the the question is. I'd have thought 42 was more of a correct one to 'is capitalism finished' than the suggested 'it was the Guardian'.
I suppose the thread is now finished. Maybe we could have a seperate Barry Politics section where BarryW can debate issues with himself.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
3 February 2009
19:1014636Afterr reading BarryW's posts and Sid's replies, it appears Sid, that either you are just being obtuse, or you don't understand what he is saying.
You purposely don't answer any of his questions, just come back with an inane response, hence the comment above.
Roger
Sid Pollitt
3 February 2009
19:1514639Maybe you should read again Roger, the question/ subject isnt tax or the guardian or gordon brown. The clue is in the topic heading.
Sid Pollitt
3 February 2009
19:1614641Maybe you should read again Roger, the question/ subject isnt tax or the guardian or gordon brown. The clue is in the topic heading.