I think the main issue with bailouts like for example the 2008 bailout of Citigroup, is not actually the bailout itself, because there are plenty of consumers who cannot afford a bankrupt Citigroup. But its really the accountability of the banks that is the problem. During the year when they lost 18 billion dollars, the very same year, they paid almost 800 execs at least 1 million in bonuses. I think that would be the action that wonders why tax payers are bailing them out and these people who might have mismanaged the bank still got such huge payouts. PS: and just before the bailout, the CEO of Citigroup resigned and received 10mil. Maybe they can hide behind contracts and agreements, but it makes me wonder how contracts of these executives are not linked to actual survival and financial health of the company.
My position over bailing out the banks is that it costs too much. I believe in the end it costs more than 3 maybe even 4 time what you âgiveâ them as all that money goes out the system and doesnât circulate. The tax payer ends up picking up the bill for years to, come and i believe that was borne out in the aftermarth. This is paticularly true in countries that have economic âbufferâ systems like France, others who have very liberal systems like the USA have false dawns where here and there there appears to be a boom but itâs false because it doesnât get down to the people who actually make the economy work (by spending money that pays wages).
If there had been more realiseation of what was going on (rather all that surfing ao one wave) and hence more time would the answer have been bail out. I would say nationalisation of some let others sink might have been a better way forward. Certainly a tightening up of the âsystemâ.
The bonuses and dividends paid out after the bail outs were grotesque (some up to 60% greater than previous years). I believe this is because the people who got them are living in a different world. Their contacts, ability to persaud and perverse the narrative to get what the banks want being so important that on a company scale they are indisposible. Yet due to these pay out itâs evident itâs not the economy let alone the people and even worst the investors in the economy that count but the company. Governments should and should have given much more protection than they did and yet they still donât.
Iâm no economist so could have all this wrong. However I am convinced the narrative we are feed is wrong as well. The truth is all this is very complicated and is lead by greed an power of a few. That just hasnât changed.
This is the point I was trying to make. The executives also received handsome severance pay after the banks went bust. Also, I wonder how much of that money (bonus, severance) was taxable.
None of it! 
No shit SherlockâŚ.
If white working class children are under performing in school, maybe they just need to try harder? I mean, anyone can achieve if they put more work in. They problem is that white families donât support their children and there is a culture of defeatism and excuse making that is holding back white kids. Look, Iâm not racist - some of my friends are white - but maybe we just need to accept that, genetically, white people just have less motivation and drive than ethnic minority kids?
(Can any racists confirm Iâm doing this right?)
Anyone can achieve if they put more work in assuming theyâre not seriously disabled to start with.
I think the report has been widely criticized for its misrepresentation of the data. Some of its comments about how billionaires behave may apply to people like Trump but not to many of the others.
Not all of them are against higher taxes either (Warren Buffett has frequently said they should pay more).
The large salaries of the fortunate and skilled and the limited tax they may (or may not) pay, doesnât worry me as much as the inequality that is seen in just about all countries. Thereâs a part of Glasgow where the life expectancy ranges between two neighbourhoods from 55âish to 85âish⌠The separating line is a railway and if anyone is interested, they are Maryhill and Bearsden. This sort of statistic is found everywhere, Edinburgh, Birmingham, London and so on. They are not confined to areas within cities, it is also in towns in the north vs those in the south and so on. These discrepancies did not materialise overnight - they are decades and multiple governments in the making. Itâs almost like every government since the end of WW2 has punted the problem to the next government. The main problem being jobs and industry.
To me the solution is clear but I guess everyone has a solution that they feel is clear, obvious and will work - and - maybe what is needed, is a vision rather than a solution, any vision. Currently there is anything but a vision and the messaging is more about pointing out the obvious and sowing discord, âoh, thereâs a problem with this demographic or that one. What shaaaall we do???â. The vision can be anything, let go to Mars, lets become a technology driven society, lets lead the world in green technology, lets invade India (again)⌠Currently there is a complete lack of a positive and/or inspiring vision and this is depressing and a scary (in equal measure), as the only path this is leading down to is the generation of a completely divided society similar to that currently seen across the pondâŚ
Thatâs a bit harsh on the post war Atlee Govt, who probably did more to elevate the working class that any government before or since.
Literally the origin of the saying âborn on the wrong side of the tracksâ - poor people one side, rich people the other.
Frankly, if this is where its going in Henley now, Iâm glad I no longer work there.
Theyâll be wanting to wear stupid blazers next.*
Pff.
*they wonât
I had no idea this was a thingâŚ
So are they saying that Romans didnât bathe? or the Pursians?
I guess so. Just came across an incredibly racist thread which if it were about any non-white ethnicity would provoke outrage.
So now we are hating each other for taking a bath 
