It seems to come across, like the banks fill there coffers to such a limit (Backdoor deals, selling debt) that it leads to total mealt down on the stock exchange's, and as a result they have to be helped out by funding from central banks (taxpayer monies). Nice!!

We need banks to be strong, but at the same time we do not want them to go roughshod over the law that goven's the land.

What they are looking for in this (OFT) test case, is that banking charges are exempt. They will present an argument that say's these charges are needed, to keep people in line.

At the moment, we are in, a weird position. It's in the hands of the courts,It will no doubt run for atleast two years with appeals blah blah

However these banks aren't it! The Goverment collects 520billion a year from tax. Compare that to Lloydsicon profits....2 bill...4 bill. Who has the biggest source of income? Profit!

We need the banks, but do the banks want more regulations? They are no doubt going to be quizzed at a select committee, following which I think a few more controls and taxes should be leved on their activities.

For those of you who think there's a con going on, yep, you are probably right. On my meetings with the 'Head of Bank America' 'Uniphase' etc. To them it is 'money' not 'people'.

Corporations rape and pillage, that is their remit. They answer to no-one, as you can sack the guy in charge if he's found to be bad, and put someone else in who's even worse. If only I could do that with myself. If I commit crime I go to jail, if a company commits crime, it doesn't ever go to the clink.

Shareholders should be held to account, in Nazi Germany many US and probably UK companies did biz with the Reich, funding the killing of people and making money out of it.

Oh well, welcome to greed hell


My MP in Bromley Bob Neill has been really good, he's got on the case so to speak. Maybe he's going through the motions, but it's good to know he's taking some kind of interesticon.

Similar Threads: