Thetownend.com

I find it sad that a proffesional like Sir Fred should be hounded out of his £700,000 ayear pension just because he was incompetent.
This sir, is the thin end of the wedge.

Agreed. He worked hard for that - taking a profitable company into £24bn debit and the loss of over 20,000 jobs. If we look at it, if he'd done jack he probably couldn't have done that, so he must have worked at it. Stirling work.

I'm incompetent and I don't/won't get a 700k/year pension either.

likewise.

Fred the shred is entitled to it. He's is undeserving of it.

Assuming its a 'normal' pension, you and I wouldn't lose our pension if we were sacked/rubbish.

That said, I won't shed a tear if he loses it.

Not just Sir Fred that shouldn't get his pension and the other dodgy bankers. What about our 'glorious' leader Gordy Brooon. He was responsible for the lack of regulation, and at the same time taxed yours and my pensions to the hilt, and now the country has debts approaching £2trillion.

Only fair that he and his cabinet give up his as well.

May well be a controvertial post here - but I think he should get his pension - and should stop being made the fall guy...

Fact is that he also resided over many billions in profit that the bank made.  His takeover of ABN was done in a different economic climate and was a good deal at the time...

The GLOBAL recession has killed that - but let's be fair it was hardly Fred's doing !

Gordon Wanky Brown has far more to answer for - after all it was HIS policies that have helped to put us in this mess - but have we had even 1 apology from the Scottish tosser - of course not !!!

However even he escapes some criticism - as ultimately it was more what happened in the USA that has dragged everyone into this mess.......

That's not strictly true though. He IS part of the reason the global recession happened. He and other Fred equivalents in banking were the men in charge who allowed free rain when the sub-prime was seemingly affluent. Yeah, the highs wouldn't have been so high if he and his contemporaries kept a tighter control on what their staff were doing,  but the lows wouldn't be the disaster they are now either.

The government should have regulated things better, but the financial institutions should have had a grip on their risk management.

Agreed - but it's not his fault alone.

Fact is when the government bailed RBS out they knew exactly what Fred's pension was and didn't say a word about it at the time  -- it's hardly fair to pull him up on it now and try to block it....

The Government look pretty fucking stupid about this.  Seemingly they didnt check the small print regarding his departure and the small matter of the £650k a year pension. Now they want to do something about it but cant.

Theres no way the bloke deserves it but I'd be inclind to keep it in his position too as a big fuck you to the government that is trying to make him a scapegoat (he's not blameless mind) when the goverments own fuck ups are far more responsible for the situation, not least that they allowed him to keep the pension in the 1st place.

It's a fair enough point and obviously the media have been all over it for a year or so now, but how were the banks and the state supposed to model for a scenario that had never happened before?

I saw some programme on BBC2 late last year about hedge funds which was about risk management. One hedge fund in Canada was supposed to be cutting edge in that they'd got a couple of maths geeks to build a complex risk model that would allow them to see risks and opportunities before anyone else. For months it worked and they were making millions in profit every day, but all it took was some small misdemeanour in Russia which not even their computer system could model for and they lost everything within the space of a couple of hours.

Conversely, they also interviewed a hedge fund manager in London who predicted the slump in the sub-prime mortgage market and whilst everyone else suffered last year, he earnt £24 million.

If Freddy boys pension was agreed in his contract then he's entitled to it and I think it's extremely harsh to take it away from him because he didn't have the foresight (like almost everybody else in the banking industry) to see that the market was going tits up.

Legally, he's clearly entitled to it.

Morally, he should nationalise his personal assets (except perhaps the roof over his head...I'd give him that much) and take up a job in B&Q for the next 20 years to support himself and his family.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/

Says here that it wasnt in his contract, that it was discresonary as part of his serverance terms whether he recieved full or part pension and other benefits.

The fact that he is recieving the full £16m pension pot is a massive fuck up basically

They certainly fucked up, it seems that 'leaking' of details by someone in the Government of the £693,000 pension, to spin and 'hide' the massive injection of extra taxpayers funds for RBS yesterday has gone er a little wrong.

Personally, I think however morally dubious it is, he's legally entitled to it and the Government agreed to it. And frankly Fred's pension is peanuts in comparison to what the government is committing us taxpayer to underwriting.

Fucking hell......is that a quote from the Daily Mail??????

I like to remind everyone that the last time the economy went to Rat Shit the Torys were in power and the time before that Labour etc etc.

All politicians are Wankers but to blame an individual party is madness.

Banks and World finance have alot to answer for....and of course Governments throughout the world for allowing them to 'get away with it'.

Flash - Labour didnt start the global crisis but their policies of the last 11 years mean they've sure as hell made it that Britain will suffer worst than most in my opinon.  They fully deserve any blame that comes their way.

Yeah, I really miss the Tory government that was in charge the 16 years prior to that. Everything was fucking rosy back then. Why did people vote them out? It sure is a fucking mystery! I might need someone's help in explaining that to me. Never mind though, they'll get back in next time, and 10 years down the line we can all moan about them and vote Labour back in etc etc etc etc nuclear war, mutants, Mad Max scenario.

I agree completely.

http://thetownend.com/index.php/topic,31250.msg609142.html#msg609142

OOOOH !  feel that witty satire.

Every Government normally has their good and bad points, but this Government is certainly leaving us with the biggest pile of shite EVER, and I cannot think a good point of this Government, unless you're a civil servant.

Exactly. I might be a bit of a Tory at heart, but I'm a lot more anti Nu-Labour than I am pro-tory.

Past Goverments of all parties have royally fucked things up in the past, but the fact that the tories fucked up in the late 80's / early 90's dosnt mean that nuLabour are any less culpabable for the current situation.

Judging by the latest opinion polls a lot of people are going to vote conservative at the next election. I dont think thats because they have any great confidence that the tories will ride into town and make everything brilliant, more like just vote to get labour out and hope that the tories cant be as bad

All I know is my pension has been decimated, I'm paying twice the council tax what I did in '97, and getting less services and the NHS is a mess despite throwing loads of money at it, with hospitals a MRSA blackspot.

This is just the logical conclusion of the Thatcher/Reagan "the market is king" policies of the 80s. Sure Labour didn't help by extending "light-touch" regulation (ie no regulation), and there's been serial incompetence along the way by both parties, but the whole bunkum of the free market radicals of both parties has caused this shit. They've managed to introduce a kind of reverse socialism where they've privatised profit and nationalised risk - Thatcher and Reagan started it, Labour and Clinton/Bush failed to stop it or put in appropriate safeguards

That's exactly right. People voting for a government based on who they hate the most rather than who they think can do a better job. People are always going to hate who's in power the most, which is why it will just carry on and on and on, nuclear war, mutants, Mad Max scenario. Personally I could never bring myself to vote Conservative due to the fact that they are the spawn of the Dark Prince and despite their comfortable lifestyle, are jealous of the poor and needy. Seriously, the sight of someone in need of help from the state is enough to make them choke on their Fois Gras.

Does that make you racist sheepshagger?

Agree about the nuclear war, mutants, Mad Max scenario.

But people dont always hate who is in power the most. The last 2 goverments have lasted 3 terms

Have to say I have had a lot to thank the NHS for in the past four years, I feel it has improved considerably!!  Anyway, I am so disappointed - I thought this was a thread about Elliott!!

Hahaha yes it was the tory's wot dunnit....hilarious.

The problem with the torys is that anybody who votes for them is horrible scum.

Good shout althuogh a bit lenient

 :D  As opposed to the fine examples of human beings who vote labour?

Exactly.

Is it socially acceptable to vote for anybody these days?

does having all this toxic debt (500 billion) mean that we all have a timeshare in a house in the US - can I have one in Oregon please? Let's repossess America

The problem with the tory's is that they're vitually identical to labour.

I think it's more that the problem with labour is that they've become almost virtually identical to the torys.

But it's the tory's who are no longer conservative.  Or unionist.

Anyway. It's all labours fault and the sooner they fuck off and die, the happier I'll be. Provided we don't end up with the liberals who will prove to be an even bigger bunch of cunts.

Nope - just xenophobic against the jocks :)

Fair point. I guess there's the matter of the memory fading of the last lots failures before the other lot get the blame. A part of me wants the Tories to get in just so I can laugh at the people that voted for them. Another part of me thinks that's a ridiculous thing to say and stabbed me in the leg.  

I am genuinley confused who is actually going to vote labour these days. 

All the old labour far left socialist types would be much better off voting lib dem as they have much more in common with them than they do with nu-labour.  Floating voters and previously converted tories arnt going to vote labour either. which I guess just leaves people "who always vote labour"

People will vote Labour to keep the Tories out. That's my only motivation.

Point of fact: What strted it all was a new way of funding mortgages.  Traditionally building societies have savers who get X-Y (Bank base rate less a bit). The Societies then lent this out to mortgage borrowers at X+Z (Bank Base plus a bit) to make a profit. problem was mortgages were hard to get & then were only at standard variable rate.
Then banks came along and joined in, which was great because it made rates more competetive. Then they thought up a new wheeze. The banks started selling their mortgage books to investment companies & other banks so they could lend the money back out again. The main benefit to this was that their was more money available to lend driving rates down & making mortgages more freely available. Problem was that it became all about market share, & since the lenders were going to be selling the mortgage books they were less worried about credit risks - they's have moved the mortgage on before it defaulted. In fact in the US they weren't bothered at all. The problem spread when banks in the UK strted buying American mortgage books.
Regulation in the UK is VERY tight, but not in the right area. The FSA focus on the way a mortgage is presented, not the lending criteria. I know, because every mortgage I arrange resulkts in a about 100 pages of paperwork in triplicate!
The problem here began with Northern Rock, Savers wanted their money back & the bank had lent it all out & then some so it wasn't there. (They NEVER did 125% mortgages, but they did lend upto 30% unsecured at the same rate on top of a 95% mortgage.).
The mistake oyr government are making is that as they all too often do they say different things to different people desparately trying to remain eleectable. They tell the Nation the banks should lend more, but through the FSA, they tell the banks to retain more, so they have the "liquidity" to pay out to savers who want to cash in or in case they lose more monety in "Toxic" debt.

Unless things change dramatically in the next 18 months (i dont think they will)  then thats pointless because the tories will win with a landslide regardless.  If you are that way inclined then you might as well vote lib dem, at least they will actually be left wing rather than a tax and spend version of the tories with added scoial engineering.

It's probably best not to vote. All that you don't have a right to complain stuff is complete bollocks. By voting you're only legitimising whichever numpties get in.

i agree.i could never vote tory,but think there aint much between the labour of now and the tories of the 80's and 90's.
i might just spoil my vote?

You're probably right, but I can't vote Lib Dem on the grounds I'm not a student and I don't still live with my parents.

I might vote BNP

There is nothing left wing about the Liberal Democrats. It is a sign of how far the political consensus has moved to the right in the last 30 years that anyone would think there was. Unfortunately, there isn't much left wing about the Parliamentary Labour Party either...

The only chance Labour have got, given how bad things have become, is that there might still be just enough people left with the foresight to recognise that things would probably be even worse under the other lot.

you could try one of the other parties ie not Lib Lab or Con.

Some suggestions

www.lpuk.org The libertarian party
www.greenparty.org.uk The Green party
www.respectcoalition.org The Respect Coalition (a bunch of utter cunts)
www.englishdemocrats.org.uk The English Democrats
www.bnp.org.uk The British National Party

And my personal favourite
www.thegrumpyoldmenpoliticalparty.org.uk/

There's loads of choice out there and nobody like the current parties so why not try something different?

 :doh: Cock...

That slogan really doesn't do them any favours.

I'll vote Tory to get labour out !
My heart says UKIP tho'
I detest Labour they have wrecked this country.
LiberalsThey make a mess of councils so why trust them with the country.

In truth they are all poor, & I have a theory that this is because most politicians are in it for the money - Career politicians who haven't done a proper days work in their lives. At least Tony Benn & Margaret Thatcher had principles. This lot to day just keep their snouts in the trough. At least when wealthy self made people ran the country you knew they could create wealth.

As to who would vote Labour. They have been busy "buying" votes since they came to power. They promised less Quango's. When they came in we had a bout 80, now there are about 800.
They have created about 1,000,000 non jobs in the civil Service/ councils.
All those above will vote for them, plus those who vote according to dogma.

Its True.  What are they about anyway? Cant get on the website. 

They sound like hippies from the party name.

hopefully thats because people have realised that old school socialism was / is shit and dosnt have a place in todays society.

Rock 'n' Roll!

Too true. No one needs governments to get involved in anything, just leave it to the bankers and 'wealth creators' to get on with whatever the fuck they like and we'll all benefit in the long run.

As opposed to no-one ever getting wealthy because the top rate of tax is 80% which is then re-distributed to the lazy and stupid ?

dragging everyone down to the same low level will never work

Tell me Toddy im No Labour lover....but does that mean you only use private health care cos Labour gave us the NHS against huge opposition by the Tories?

Theres always bad and good....give in one hand and snatch it back in the other

My folks bought their Council house under the Tories and now live in a four bed house in a Wiltshire village......it was the making of them...but i still think the Tories are cunts and the others a close second.  I voted LibDem in all elections because in Wiltshire the Tories could put a Chimpanzee up for Election and it would get in.

I cant bring myself to vote labour, I havent done since blair became mini-thatcher. Fucking sold the majority of his supporters down the fucking river.

Thankfully in Brighton there is a viable 4th choice in the green party who do actually stand a decent chance of winning here, its not that i agree with the majority of their policies but i couldnt bring myslef to vote lib dem and i would rather suck off a scabby cock than vote tory.

I suppose its all comes down to where you want your corruption. Do you want it for an elite funny handshake bunch of arrogant cunts or drilled down to lazy fuckers. On the basis I don't do funny handshakes and don't like it wallopped up my arse then I'll take the corruption with the lazy fuckers.

The wisest post on here!