LondonLax Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 There seems to be a fair bit of confirmation bias going on in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It never ceases to amaze how those in the finance sector and those who have right wing views (often the same people) are so quick to attack any sort of criticism of them, even if the criticism is based on fact. It's as though a nerve has been touched and they in true Flashman style as per the PM, like to go into bully mode. But of course non of the problems are due to the finance sector its all down to public sector workers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 So we should generalise the views of an entire sector/populus based on the opinions/views of one somewhat radical element that has been sensationalised by the press to appear as part of the real sector? Sounds a bit too Nick Griffin for me. Just to prove the point. It seems that our IOM members of VT are very much defensive of any comment on the finance sector, even though the finance sector and tax evasion and avoidance are seen by many as major contributors to financial problems faced by members of the UK. To use the Nick Griifin comment is somewhat silly, IMO, a bit like an attempt of Godwin's law to fit in with political views on VT. The reality is simple and it's not one that fits comfortably in the finance sector. The world has been royally screwed by the finance sector, they call the shots, they make and they break society in general. On a daily basis you see them continue to screw with "real" people's lives by gambling with little in the way of any sort of social conscience to their actions. The one thing you have right is that you cannot label the whole sector as following that way of thinking, but the reality is that there are enough in it to ensure that the actions of a few are quite rightly seen as the actions of the majority such is the impact. But as before its not their fault its all the public sector's fault. Maybe we can spend 225 million on being able to throw away Chicken Tikka as a better way of solving the problems and pay for it by sacking many of the military - many of who have just served in Libya. The maths show the cost of one virtually equals the "savings" of the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Why not just say the "banking" sector, as that's what we're talking about. If you're going to drag everybody else into it, let's blame the IT sector for provding them with the IT infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Because Martin as you well know, it's not just the Banking sector. A label has to be attached to parts of society and the finance sector is a fair one because a lot of the sub components of it, such as the banking sector are so interlinked. The problem is that many will get similarly categorised / demonised by the actions of a few, but there is little / no evidence of self policing or action against those who are continuing to cause so many of the problems. The reality is still that so many of these problems have been caused by the finance sector and it would be unfair to blame just the banking sector. Actions and words like that idiot are not those of a sole voice, they are the actions of many who directly affect many people in general society. Humility is not something that fits well in the finance sector (and I would argue right wing politics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 But as before its not their fault its all the public sector's fault. Who said that then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Ah OK, so now that you acknowledge that he's not actually a trader, the goal posts have not only been moved they've been widened to the entire length of the pitch. So he's part of the "parasitic" finance sector is he, and worse, the private sector at that. So are his views representative of the entire private sector, and not those of the totally non-parasitic and completely productive public sector then? I think we should be told. Ludicrous distortion. The goalpost moving seems to be your own work. He told the Beeb he's an independent trader. That seems to be true. Not a very good one, we hear, nor a full-time one, but someone who says he spends several hours a day trading. There is no claim that he is an accredited City trader, an employee in Goldman Sucks or anything else. He doesn't pass himself off as such, he wasn't presented as such. His views attracted attention because he said that he aims to make profits out of other people's losses, that recession offers more opportunities for this, that he therefore welcomes situations like that, and that's how trading works (I paraphrase). The point in question is whether his views reflect those of other traders. The below-the-line comments in places like the Guardian and Torygraph from people who claim to work in the City, or trading, or finance generally, tend to be on the lines that of course that's what traders think, because that's the nature of the work, it's entirely unremarkable, there's no story here. He suggested his views reflect those of traders. He didn't suggest they represent the finance sector more widely, and nor did I. As is your habit, you've made this up in your head, in order to attack it. Your view seems to be that if he's not a real trader, ie employed as such by a trading firm presumably, then it's impossible to judge whether this is what real traders think. Which leaves me wondering whether you think traders do or don't think and act in the way he describes, or if you think it's just one of life's great mysteries, unknowable and forever hidden from human understanding. Or at least yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 He suggested his views reflect those of traders. He didn't suggest they represent the finance sector more widely, and nor did I. As is your habit, you've made this up in your head, in order to attack it. it's helpful that he's so frank about it, for anyone who had the slightest doubt about his sector. Oh? Is he perhaps an outreach officer for a local authority? A development worker for one of your hated third sector organisations? An engineer in part of the productive economy? A producer of local, organic, fair traded food? Or is he in fact part of the finance sector? It's rather obvious from your first comment, which is then reinforced by your second point, that contrary to your assertions, you have indeed taken that bloke's comments and ascribed them to a sector as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Maybe we can spend 225 million on being able to throw away Chicken Tikka as a better way of solving the problems and pay for it by sacking many of the military - many of who have just served in Libya. The maths show the cost of one virtually equals the "savings" of the other. or maybe we could have let the banks fail and saved £850 BN ? could probably have paid back savings to investors and and paid off everyone in Britains mortgages with that amount ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 or maybe we could have let the banks fail and saved £850 BN ? yes. they failed, and that money has done naff all but line the pockets of those that work in the banking sector. if the banks were lending to small buisnesses and pushing this 'project merlin' idea forwarded by Gideon, then you could argue that it did at least some good in getting the country back in shape, but it hasn't. the whole system is rotten from top to bottom. we should've let them fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 or maybe we could have let the banks fail and saved £850 BN ? yes. they failed, and that money has done naff all but line the pockets of those that work in the banking sector. if the banks were lending to small buisnesses and pushing this 'project merlin' idea forwarded by Gideon, then you could argue that it did at least some good in getting the country back in shape, but it hasn't. the whole system is rotten from top to bottom. we should've let them fail. Spot on IMHO. "Too Big to Fail" made riveting viewing on Sky a couple of weeks ago. Would recommend it to anyone as it's a real eye opener. Politicians no longer hold sway on the world stage anymore.......they are merely puppets being manipulated by mego-lithic financial power houses like Goldman Sachs et al. The occupation of Wall Street has been largely ignored by the mainsteam media outlets. Photos of champagne sipping Wall Street execs openly mocking the protestors from their office balconies this week summed everything that is wrong with the world we live in today. Also a little bird has told me that he's been told Greece and Cyprus are to leave the Eurozone in the coming months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's rather obvious from your first comment, which is then reinforced by your second point, that contrary to your assertions, you have indeed taken that bloke's comments and ascribed them to a sector as a whole. I suspect your misunderstandings are wilful, which calls into question whether it's even worth responding. However... My comments, repeated several times, were about whether his views reflect what traders think. Got it? Not the entire finance sector (which he is part of), nor the entire private sector (which he is part of), but the trading sector bit of the finance sector bit of the private sector. I do not believe, and have not suggested, that his views reflect for example the Co-op Bank or Airdrie Building Society, Diageo or Pizza Express. But I do think it's likely that his views reflect how traders think, because they certainly seem to reflect how traders act. As several commentators in the newspapers have said, the astonishment about the remarks has been about someone identifying themself as a trader saying what he said so bluntly, rather than whether his comments reflect a wider mindset. Had he been an employed trader rather than a self-employed "independent trader", no doubt there would have been a more tactful company line to tread. Your response seems to be that he doesn't fall within the definition of what you see as a trader, and therefore we can have no idea whether traders actually think like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Photos of champagne sipping Wall Street execs openly mocking the protestors from their office balconies this week summed everything that is wrong with the world we live in today. agreed ..Champagne is horrid French stuff and should be outlawed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 or maybe we could have let the banks fail and saved £850 BN ? could probably have paid back savings to investors it would be interesting to know if that would have been cheaper. or how about just compensate British savers... or would that be illegal under European law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 My comments, repeated several times, were about whether his views reflect what traders think. but that guy isn't a Trader .. he is a bloke who happens to buy and sell shares ...his views are irrelevant really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 My comments, repeated several times, were about whether his views reflect what traders think. but that guy isn't a Trader .. he is a bloke who happens to buy and sell shares ...his views are irrelevant really Laughable attempt to try and deflect - as normal Tony. As Peter has rightly pointed out what this guy does, does he have to carry a fully paid up membership card of the Traders Club to be called a trader? It's interesting that as normal the right wing on VT are hell bent on trying to deflect away from any sort of criticism or conversation regarding those in the finance sector, especially as we all know which party has a keen interest in that sector. And your comments about banks failing were equally laughable in their content and context. Eric Pickles - who must be up there as one of the worst politicians ever to hold office - was ripped apart on Breakfast TV this morning regarding his apparent magic trick of producing millions to fund a headline grabbing thing re bin collections. On the same day we see mass redundancies in the armed forces announced which surprise surprise seem to equate to the same figure of cost vs savings. Pickles then tries to claim the weekly bin collection as some sort of human right, which is frankly shocking, but not unexpected from a man who is as odious as he is large. The economic situation trundles on with whiplash Gideon seemingly having no idea what to do and reliant on distractions to keep the people realising what a cock up job he is doing. His comments previously about being tough on the finance sector seem now to be more of a sexual wish on his behalf rather than a realistic policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 As Peter has rightly pointed out what this guy does, does he have to carry a fully paid up membership card of the Traders Club to be called a trader? I well yes actually I suppose if we use your (and Peters) logic , we could ask if your views posted on here reflect the views of IBM ..or are they in fact the views of someone who just happens to work for IBM ..and that IBM has zero relevance to the matter You buy shares ... does that make you a Trader ..or a bloke who buys shares I used to play tennis ..did that make me a tennis player ..or a bloke who played tennis and so on of course you won't get it but no matter how much you want him to he aint a trader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Laughable attempt to try and deflect - as normal Tony. As Peter has rightly pointed out what this guy does, does he have to carry a fully paid up membership card of the Traders Club to be called a trader? It's interesting that as normal the right wing on VT are hell bent on trying to deflect away from any sort of criticism or conversation regarding those in the finance sector, especially as we all know which party has a keen interest in that sector. Which party is it that you think DOESN'T have an interest in the finance sector Ian? I'm not going to get into the old argument of who is to blame for the current mess, but even you cannot deny that under the last Labour government, the financial services sector grew both in absolute terms and also in relative to the rest of the economy at a rate that we'd never been seen before. And the point about the trader is, he isn't a proper one. If you want to find out what proper traders think, ask a proper trader. I mean, I teach my kids to read and have done some part time private tutoring in the past, and if the BBC asked me to go on and speak about teaching I would do for a laugh, but that wouldn't make my views on teaching representative of teachers, would it? And I've probably made more money from teaching than that bloke has from trading..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Mart - yes the finance sector grew and yes there were mistakes, but as per many previous discussions the blame was not solely down to the last Gvmt and despite what many said neither were the problems facing the world economy. The point is now when a Gvmt has been elected on promises of changing the way that the finance sector works, and then we see that many of it's financial backers are from the sector, is it any real surprise that the claims were nothing more than a sound bite to gain votes? This Gvmt have little / no incentive to regulate the finance sector, have little / no incentive to change the ideology that this man was a perfect example of and is seen in quite a few others in that industry. You say he isn't a "proper" one as though that really is an excuse. The reality is that his views are echoed across sufficient within that sector for them have a major effect on the man in the street is the key point. His views are perfect examples of what many seem to have and do. The impression is that your defence of saying that is not what happens is because he isn't employed as a trader for a large company. You may have answered it but I can't remember seeing it but what about the stance that his views are a perfect example of what many in the industry think and how they act. There seem to be many well connected people in the media who think that his views are clear reflections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 BBC asked me to go on and speak reminds me now ..didn't they interview a taxi driver once mistaking him for an IT expert :-) I wonder if Ian and Peter think that his views are now the views of all IT experts :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts