Gringo Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 The rate cut will have no effect. A large majority of mortgage customers are on fixed rates and plenty of trackers are hitting their cuffs now. As it will have little or no effect on the supply of credit available at this point it would have been better holding this 'weapon' back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulMcgrathsknees Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Interest rate cut - no savings, pointless. No savings - no deposit for 1st time buyers. Housing market will not recover. Stagnation Not worth saving - spend, spend, spend. Retail recovery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I do think a tax exemption for savings income may help a bit, make it more attractive to savers, increase the banks coffers, improve lqiuidity, loosen the lending policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 isn't that ISA's ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 no **** word removed of a banker should get any bonus's for the forseeable future the excuse for them before was it got the brightest of talents well how shit has that turned out to be ... Nonsense. Most people who work in banks are hard working people on a normal wage. The system is to incentivise workers to do their best so part of your wage is paid as a bonus for your work. You meet targets and you get the bonus, you don't and you wont. Just because it's called a bonus does not mean it's on top of your ordinary salary, it's a guaranteed as your monthly wage. It's part of your income. It's a brilliant system when implemented correctly. Reward people for hard work and don't reward people who don't work hard. It's stigmatised now because certain people get obscene bonuses which is wrong. But don't go think everyone who gets a bonus doesn't deserve it. If you meet your goals and don't get it it's a pay cut simple as that. Since it's in your contract as part of your salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Only difference is the Uions rule thing country and can fight tooth and nail for theirmembers. The workers in the Private Sector dont. They just take it on the chin as there is nothing they can do.Nothing? Are private sector banned from joining unions? No. Well looks like that's where your problem is. If the workers don't get organised they get fkd over. And the ones that get fkd over point at the ones that get organised and howl 'not fair'. Same argument over state pensions has been going in the UK for the past 3 years, all because the private sector workers meekly gave up their pension rights whilst the public sector decided not to be pussies and fought to keep the rights they had been promised. Private Sector have unions but when a company has lost loads of money and simply can't pay their workers anymore what can a Union do? The Company needs to lay people off, cut pay or go bust. The Government are in that situation right now, our tax take is down some 15bln, from around 60bln to just above 40bln. How can they now borrow to pay public sector wages? By doing so they will have to pay higher interest on that borrowing and there by worsening the financial situation. They've already raised taxes and are now broadening the tax base too. So please tell me what they should do if they can't cut any public sector pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Private Sector have unions but when a company has lost loads of money and simply can't pay their workers anymore what can a Union do? The Company needs to lay people off, cut pay or go bust. Were these companies losing money for the last decade? Why didn't private sector workers do something then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Now do you agree with that? I see nothing wrong in performance related bonuses IF things are going well .... the banking sector is not unique in that regard ... Thing is , lets say you work in a department that has made £100m profit for the year and you've worked hard to help it achieve that .. the department next door makes a loss of say £100m .. should you be penalised for that other departments loss ? or should you get paid a bonus ?? as to his comment " it risks alienating ordinary people if it gave its traders and bosses "exorbitant" bonuses " I wonder what the ordinary people think about MP's expenses ... MP's are not really in any position to preach ...are they ? Spot on. To delve into that a bit more, what about back and middle office areas that do the same work regardless of the profit and loss of traders? People there get paid bonuses based on how hard they worked that year. S o the person who sat around not doing much doesn't get paid as much as the guy who worked hard. It's a system that incentivises people to work hard and they will be rewarded. And remember there is no paid overtime, so sticking round to do that extra work after your working day is over can only rewarded in the bonus. Someone tell me how that system is wrong, how those people are the reason for the ills of the world and why they should be denied modest bonuses of 10-20% for their hard work just because traders and executives took huge risks to maximise yearly profits and pay themselves obscene bonuses of 100 or 200%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Private Sector have unions but when a company has lost loads of money and simply can't pay their workers anymore what can a Union do? The Company needs to lay people off, cut pay or go bust. Were these companies losing money for the last decade? Why didn't private sector workers do something then? No these companies are only now in the recession making huge losses and need to cut staff and pay to survive, retail is an example of this. People are not spending and shops have less income and can't afford to pay staff. No amount of Union threats can change that fact. So why is the public sector different? A HUGE hole in the public finances to the tune of 30% appeared in 1 year. How can that be addressed without some pay cuts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykeyb Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Interest rates cut again to new lowest ever level, now at 1%. As previous cuts have made little/no difference, is this now just deepening the problems of savers without creating any actual economic benfit? Jon the BOE and organisations like Institute of Directors, The Ernst & Young Item Club etc all see it still as the right move. Now you could easily argue that the main causes of these problems were the very people who are saying they are the right thing to do, but at this moment you have to listen to them. Savings are being put on hold, but a lot of people are using the benefits they are gaining from lower interest rates on mortgages to increase their payments and lower their debt - so there is a big swings and roundabouts The key still is the banks and their unwillingness to pass on the cuts and lend more money. When we see them still "looking after their own" you can start to question what exactly their motives are. The banking sector are really being shown for what they are The BOE made a huge mistake 12 months ago when they put rates up to try and keep inflation in check when everyone in business was saying they needed cuts rather than hikes. They need to do something to stimulate the economy, and they are hoping this will help. What is the alternative for the BOE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 my company made 200m profit last year, I got no bounus's, I see no justification for them in any business at all, they do not encourage hard work but just greed That is utter nonsense Ian. I work damn hard in work and nothing makes me prouder than when my boss does my anual review and puts my contribution down for the year as exceeds expectations. I'm rewarded for my hardwork for that year, I'm happy and I try to maintain that level of hard work, because I know I'll be rewarded for it. People work hard to get promotions, but they don't come ever year, bonuses are there to reward you every year for your work. I think capping them at 20% is necessary though. That is enough to incentivise people to work hard. Anything more would be excess and are only paid to traders based on "profits" for that year. Incentivising them to take risks for short term profits. It's wrong and this mess has proved it wrong. But hammering all bankers and all people who recieve bonuses because of this abuse is just plain wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I have never taken a sick day in my life Have you ever been ill? No I seem to have a very strong immune system but I've felt unwell before but nothing to stop me going to work. I was trying to say I've never taken casual sick leave like most people do from time to time. Usually after a nights drinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwistedLogic Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 i think a lot of the problem is down to drive. in my job, for example...there are about 6 people out of our 13 staff members off sick with "stress" "advanced flu" "bone idleitis" (okay i made the last one up) and it piles the pressure on us as a busy store. many people can't be arsed to do a job and do it well, these days. easy money is what matters most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 No these companies are only now in the recession making huge losses and need to cut staff and pay to survive, retail is an example of this. People are not spending and shops have less income and can't afford to pay staff. No amount of Union threats can change that fact. So why is the public sector different? A HUGE hole in the public finances to the tune of 30% appeared in 1 year. How can that be addressed without some pay cuts? Perhaps they are different because they got together and showed that they were not going to be shoved around by those people making decisions about their jobs and pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 but frankly CV compalins because his bonus has dropped, tough, he works in an industry that has caused us all massive harm I was complaining because our contractual bonus was posponed indefinitley, it is part of my salary that I will always get if I meet the goals set for me. I don't get it all if I don't meet my goals. Simple incentive to work hard. Now because of the stigma associated with the word Bonus I'm not getting it because of the public backlash on the Government. It is, quite simply, a pay cut. It's happened, I'm not going to complain to the bankers Union, times are tough and if a pay cut helps the Government in the Public Sector pay talks which will benefit the country as a whole then it's a fair price to pay. But the Public Sector don't see it that way, the public finances have to be sorted out without cutting their pay. They're used to getting what they want so all this is new to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I have never taken a sick day in my life Have you ever been ill? No I seem to have a very strong immune system but I've felt unwell before but nothing to stop me going to work. And how do you know that by going to work 'feeling unwell' you have not carried in something which has spread like wildfire to those people who do not claim to be unbreakable? I was trying to say I've never taken casual sick leave like most people do from time to time. Usually after a nights drinking. Well done. Next thing will be the demand for everyone to work through their lunchtime, never get time off for hospital appointments/dental appointments, never be given compassionate leave, get up half an hour before going to bed, eat a handful of gravel, live in a hole in the middle of the road, &c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 No these companies are only now in the recession making huge losses and need to cut staff and pay to survive, retail is an example of this. People are not spending and shops have less income and can't afford to pay staff. No amount of Union threats can change that fact. So why is the public sector different? A HUGE hole in the public finances to the tune of 30% appeared in 1 year. How can that be addressed without some pay cuts? Perhaps they are different because they got together and showed that they were not going to be shoved around by those people making decisions about their jobs and pay? I don't understand that statement? Please explain to me how a 30% budget defecit can be tackled by not cutting public sector pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 hang your bonus whether contractual or not surely has to be dependent on performance I doubt any bank is performing well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Only difference is the Uions rule thing country and can fight tooth and nail for theirmembers. The workers in the Private Sector dont. They just take it on the chin as there is nothing they can do.Nothing? Are private sector banned from joining unions? No. Well looks like that's where your problem is. If the workers don't get organised they get fkd over. And the ones that get fkd over point at the ones that get organised and howl 'not fair'. Same argument over state pensions has been going in the UK for the past 3 years, all because the private sector workers meekly gave up their pension rights whilst the public sector decided not to be pussies and fought to keep the rights they had been promised. Private Sector have unions but ...So tell me, which union are you in CV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I don't understand that statement? I was making the point that you were only talking about now with regard to the effectiveness of unions in a private sector scenario whereas you had been complaining that over the past x years a gap had occurred between public sector and private sector pay. Perhaps the private sector workers might have got together in those times if they were indeed being screwed over by their bosses (highly likely) and stood up for themselves. In those circumstances they might now be railing against the system which has failed them rather than against other people who are not allowing themselves to be screwed over as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts