Sharia(h) lending
 

. . . is reasonably large and growing.

HSBC's Amanah has been around for some time.

"Christian" lending is somewhat meaningless as there are no prohibitions on lending in the New Testament.

However, if you take Shakespeare seriously . . . "neither a borrower nor a lender be" carry on before credit and sophisticated finance and . . . enjoy the 15th century. "More gruel, Master."

Banks and bankers will follow the money . . .

Now as for the potential pitfalls and perils of fiat money, or the possible built-in instabilities of capitalism . . . economists continue to debate those and have for at least 150 years.

Thanks for the book suggestion: I am familiar with some of the ideas, judging by the review below, without having read this particular book.
John (The United States)'s review of Growth Fetish

From that review, I am also pretty familiar with this statement:-
"The greatest danger for consumer capitalism", writes Hamilton, "is the possibility that people in wealthy countries will decide that they have more or less everything that they need"
But, how to achieve such a potential utopia is outside my knowledge.

There was a whole glut of such theories in earlier decades and it is interesting that this one dates from the last decade; within another thread concerning "where is a good place to retire/live on this planet" there is little sign that Australia has adopted the principles and practices of non-growth.
http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...9-3#post408945

Well, again relating to the UK, it is pretty much a non-Christian, secular society nowadays and I was merely pointing out one important origin of western methods of finance, which included Christian banning of the payment of interest.
It is very likely that such Usury principles relate to the old testament which contains the foundations of Islam, Judism and Christianity, hence their common approach to their historic principles of lending.
Lets see what the new Archbishop of Canterbury has to say about this when he is in place later this year (he is an ex-business man).

"Banks and bankers will follow the money" . . . and, therefore, require a lot of regulation in order to bend them to the greater good rather than their own selfish, short term interests.

Through history, no fiat currency has survived; the latest example to test us is the Euro which now demands the full political integration of those countries which are members of that currency. We shall see how that pans out, but I suspect it will all end in tears.
Interestingly, to me anyway, some towns and cities in the UK have introduced local currencies for use in local commerce; arguably a return to the middle ages.
Bristol Pound - Our City. Our Money

And ................
 

................. Max Keiser has just appeared on UK TV to say that this country is heading into a financial crisis (yep, another one).
His basic premise today is that the bond markets have driven out all productive activity and interest rates have nowhere to go but up, and up.
We can still devalue our currency, unlike those countries who signed up for the Euro; in fact, such devaluing is happening now on the markets - just look at the Euro/£ exchange rate over the last week or so.
He also made mention of the gold standard and how European governments so distrust each other that they are buying up gold and silver to stock their own vaults; all this against the day that the Euro splits asunder.

If you are interested in what he has to say about global finance he runs a show on Russia Today and he is all over youtube.

We are all pawns on this particular chessboard.

A joke . . .
 

there's a reasonably popular joke in investment banking circles over the past 5+ years.

"What's the world's largest hedge fund ?"

The UK.

"What's the difference between a pigeon and an investment banker ?"

The pigeon can still leave a deposit on a Ferrari.

The bond markets have, ahem, brought discipline to govts for a long time. Napoleon felt their wrath, too.

Marc Faber, aka 'Dr Doom' lives here in Chiang Mai. His prognostications have been VERY negative for some time and especially so recently.

Somehow I've overlooked this thread until now, how fun! I have to say that the OP's prejudices are ill-informed and offensive...how would his rant have gone over if he had replaced "banker" with "[pick your least favorite race/nationality/religion]"? How is it any different? One of my favorite sayings applies here: "I hate intolerant people!!".

And for once I'll have to disagree with Colebatch: everyone knows that the key to a high quality of life is not bankers, but lawyers!

That's fine chris, it is an insulting post, if you think it's past the line of acceptability for the hubb then delete it. It was specifically a response to colebatch after his previous post. I think it was an appropriate reply, and whilst the reasons being might be lost on everyone else, colebatch might have an idea.


I respond to questions and discussions throughout the hubb when I see that I can add a viewpoint to the discussion or share an experience. I wasn't really trying to make the hubb a 'better place' in this thread, but I didn't think I needed to either as the the description for the bar is 'no useful content required'. But I do strongly disagree with colebatch's assertion that we owe our high quality of living to bankers and should be grateful to them for it, and think it's right to challenge such views.

I don't understand what you mean about misquoting? I thought someone's post was a load of rubbish, and a neat way of expressing that appeared to be to use the quote tool but replace the text with 'a load of rubbish'. I don't see how that counts as 'misquoting' at all, since I was obviously not attempting to confuse anybody into thinking that was what was actually written, particularly since the 'quote' and response would then cease to make any sense...

Nath,
For what it is worth I think you have done a pretty good job in this regard, over there in Honda tech for instance regarding the NC700 bike.
I have read your blog, cover to cover, and it is a good read IMO.
I would suggest that you leave the W word out of the writing style though; it doesn't add value to any particular argument or discussion.

It's easy to blame the Banks and Bankers for the misfortune of the last few years, but lets be totally honest...

The fraudulent, the badly managed and arrogant bankers who created the issues that led to the economic woes of so many are a small minority of those who work in the financial sector that was responsible for the stupid and dangerous practices that were allowed to go ignored, despite rumblings of discontent and warnings for many years.

The real responsibility for these failings hangs on the shoulders of the Regulators, who are universally corrupt, the Politicians, who are indolent, ignorant and corrupt, and the general public who fail to hold those in public office to proper account...remember, in a democracy the Politicians are elected/employed to run the country on our behalf, and they work for us...

Ultimately everyone has a hand in what went on, the greed of all sectors of society had a hand in it all, we all benefited in some small way from the excesses until it went wrong because the wheels fell of the cart and someone shot the horse. Government spent recklessly for decades, Greece was the worst, but they were not alone, Socialist Government have spent, spent, spent public money and religiously failed to keep some in the kitty for rainy days, and the public has failed to make them responsible for this criminal negligence.

Don't take my comments wrong, I am no lover of the bankers who operated so recklessly, I lost more than £580K from my pension as a result of their actions, and over £400K I had personally paid in over a more than 20 year period, most of my overtime, money paid for my time in the Army reserves on active service and money made from wise investments...I was to retire at 54...now it'll be more like 154, but there is no point finger waving when the responsibility goes beyond just those who acted criminally, recklessly and negligently...

Look in the mirror, you will see someone looking back who has a small level of blame...

That has been the direction of my most recent input on this subject; the pawns on the chessboard must still take some interest in, and responsibility for, the game in play.
Nevertheless, I have high expectations that the UK courts will be the place of last resort for those who are criminally culpable, just as has been occurring in the USA.

Broadly, I totally agree with the gist of your post and I am very sorry to learn of your massive losses.
You do remind me of the old saying "nations get the politicians they deserve".
Right now they are all mixing with the great and good in Davos to have yet another meeting to share ideas about what to do next; watching Tony Bliar give a sound bite was a joy - he had nothing new to say, and handed down a few old platitudes concerning the future of the EU (did he really preside over 13 years of waste and profligate spending).

Yes, and the population of this country let him, and many would have him back in a heartbeat because they are failed communist muppets who ignore reality, history and the fact that he and his cronies did so much harm to this country and it's reputation it should be considered treason...especially with the Milliblands and Ed "Talks" Balls joining Tony against the wall...

:oops2:

"Challenge such views"--is that how you refer to calling someone (who I presume you have never met) a wanker? I think that is a very--extremely--charitable description of your conduct in this thread.

WTF? I understand at this point that you didn't go to Harrow, but what don't you understand about the word "quote"?? The words "quote" and "replace the text" are not compatible, get it?

Well then you dont understand why I included that example. Your attempt to criticise the financial sector implied the LIBOR scandal tainted the sector with corruption (see above).

My point is thats no more valid that saying the priesthood is malfunctioning because of the child sex scandals, the academic university research world is malfunctioning because of corruption in academic research, the high school world is malfunctioning because to student -teacher relationship scandals, the medical world is malfunctioning because of doctors taking improper sexual advantage of their patients or in the case of Shipman, just killing them. The police are malfunctioning because of corruption scandals, because of the de Menezes scandal etc. According to your logic, society as a whole, without exception, is malfunctioning.

My point is that its not valid to conclude because of a scandal or number of scandals that a sector of society is malfunctioning, because all segments of the economy and society are subject to scandals and cases of abusing their position. Including Doctors, nurses, priests, teachers, police, engineers, academics, etc etc etc etc etc .... ad infinitum

Do you think there are some industries or professions that are immune from wrongdoing?


If Hollywood is to be believed?? Thats kinda destroys any credibility behind an argument right there.

"The bankers?" ... who are the bankers? Genghis tried to point this out but conveniently you Nath Drwnite et al dont seem to bothered to have read (or maybe not bothered to understand) his post. Where does a banker begin or end? The old lady who works behind till number 3 in the local Natwest is a banker. Has she acted in a manner akin to drug addicted rollers of the dice?

The officer who sits in the loan processing centre and tells you yes or no to your mortgage ... he is a banker. Has he acted in a manner akin to drug-addled "rollers of the dice".

The guy who sits in a dealing room in the City, in a sharp suit, who the big corporate clients call up and ask at what price they can buy 20 million EUR. He is a banker. How has he acted in a manner akin to drug-addled "rollers of the dice". He just tells British Airways and companies like them at what price they can buy 20 million EUR against sterling.

The investment banker who has worked for the last 2 years on a potential deal to merge British Aerospace with EADS, making sure the terms of the deal are clear with both parties and the pricing is agreed and transparent ... How has he acted in a manner akin to drug-addled "rollers of the dice".

What about the team of investment bankers who worked for years on a deal to raise money for Tube expansion and improvement ... How have they acted in a manner akin to drug-addled "rollers of the dice".

You dont even know what bankers do.

Of the million or so people in the UK who are bankers ... how can you claim to have any understanding of the matter when you blanket pronounce ... (the bankers) have acted in a manner akin to drug-addled "rollers of the dice" ..... Its a ridiculous oversimplification and generalisation that has absolutely zero truth in it in 99.9% of cases.

If one biker in 100 is a drug dealer and a anti society gangster, should we all be labelled like that? Would you accept that labelling from someone who know nothing about bikers in general? Let say your local conservative party politician just showed you a newspaper clipping showing a biker gang robbing an old peoples home as blanket evidence that Bikers are scum? ... and he is going to propose outlawing them. I assume you would look at the guy, shake your head, and say you have no clue what you are talking about.

Well, thats how it is trying to explain banking to you. I mean lets never never let the truth get in the way of propaganda and ignorant hatred. Its the cornerstone of populism.

It just demonstrates you not only dont understand the topic, but in order to hide your lack of understanding you throw a black blanket over a million people.

That is about as sensible and logical as saying the medical profession are murderers - Harold Shipman anyone?

In that case, I wonder how many 'bankers' it took to miss-sell PPI to 12 million customers? Some of which were elderley and were lied to outright about 'what is best for them' in order to fleece their cash. I think those f*ckers have acted worse then your drug-addled roller of the dice!

Oh Dear
 

Just for the record, nothing posted in here so far has come as a surprise to me concerning the nature of banking; I'm sorry to say that it is all too familiar.

If you choose to go into the depths of collateral debt obligations and/or credit default swaps then we may get to a position that needs some further explanation, but, so far, so good.

And certainly this thread has more or less agreed that malpractice occurs in each and every walk of life; but the thread is about banks and banking.

It did seem from recent posts that we were on the way to agreeing that the problems within that activity are the fault of all of us, via ignorance, apathy and the fact that we get the politicians we deserve (who ultimately are responsible for everything that is wrong in the world).

But, oh dear, best not to choose British Aerospace for an example of best practice!
Below is an extract from Wikipedia and I remember this case all too well, including the very active intervention of a certain politician who has already been named in earlier posts (if you get my drift).

Corruption investigations
[edit]
Serious Fraud Office

BAE Systems has been under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office, into the use of political corruption to help sell arms to Chile, Czech Republic, Romania, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Tanzania and Qatar.[131][132][133] In response, BAE Systems' 2006 Corporate Responsibility Report states "We continue to reject these allegations...We take our obligations under the law extremely seriously and will continue to comply with all legal requirements around the world.[134] In June 2007 Lord Woolf was selected to lead what the BBC described as an "independent review.... [an] ethics committee to look into how the defence giant conducts its arms deals."[135] The report, Ethical business conduct in BAE Systems plc – the way forward, made 23 recommendations, measures which BAE has committed to implement. The finding stated that "in the past BAE did not pay sufficient attention to ethical standards in the way it conducted business," and was described by the BBC as "an embarrassing admission."[136]

In September 2009, the Serious Fraud Office announced that it intended to prosecute BAE Systems for offences relating to overseas corruption. The Guardian claimed that a penalty "possibly of more than £500m" might be an acceptable settlement package.[137] On 5 February 2010, BAE Systems agreed to pay £257m criminal fines to the US and £30m to the UK. The UK already massively benefited from £43 billion contract in tax receipts and jobs in the UK, and had dropped an anti-corruption investigation into the Al Yamamah contracts later taken up by US authorities.[138][139] Crucially, under a plea bargain with the US Department of Justice, BAE was convicted of felony conspiracy to defraud the United States government and sentenced in March 2010 by U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates to pay a $400 million fine, one of the largest fines in the history of the DOJ. U.S. District Judge John Bates said the company's conduct involved "deception, duplicity and knowing violations of law, I think it's fair to say, on an enormous scale".[140][141] BAE did not directly admit to bribery, and is thus not internationally blacklisted from future contracts. Some of the £30m penalty BAE will pay in fines to the UK will be paid ex gratia for the benefit of the people of Tanzania.[142] On 2 March 2010 Campaign Against Arms Trade and The Corner House were successful in gaining a High Court injunction on the Serious Fraud Office's settlement with BAE. The High Court may order a full review of the settlement.[143]
[edit]
Saudi Arabia

One of 24 Panavia Tornado ADVs delivered to the Royal Saudi Air Force as part of the Al Yamamah arms sales.
Main article: Al-Yamamah arms deal

BAE (and British Aerospace previously) has long been the subject of allegations of bribery in relation to its business in Saudi Arabia. The UK National Audit Office (NAO) investigated the Al Yamamah contracts and has so far not published its conclusions, the only NAO report ever to be withheld.[144] The MOD has stated "The report remains sensitive. Disclosure would harm both international relations and the UK's commercial interests."[145] The company has been accused of maintaining a £60 million Saudi slush fund and was the subject of an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). However, on 14 December 2006 it was announced that the SFO was "discontinuing" its investigation into BAE. It stated that representations to its Director and the Attorney General Lord Goldsmith had led to the conclusion that the wider public interest "to safeguard national and international security" outweighed any potential benefits of further investigation.[146] The termination of the investigation has been controversial.[147] In June 2007, the BBC's Panorama alleged BAE "paid hundreds of millions of pounds to the ex-Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan" in return for his role in the Al Yamamah deals.[148] In late June 2007 the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) began a formal investigation into BAE's compliance with anti-corruption laws.[149] On 19 May 2008 BAE confirmed that its CEO Mike Turner and non-executive director Nigel Rudd had been detained "for about 20 minutes" at two US airports the previous week and that the DOJ had issued "a number of additional subpoenas in the US to employees of BAE Systems plc and BAE Systems Inc as part of its ongoing investigation".[150] The Times suggested that such "humiliating behaviour by the DOJ" is unusual toward a company that is co-operating fully.[150]

A judicial review of the decision by the SFO to drop the investigation was granted on 9 November 2007.[151] On 10 April 2008 the High Court ruled that the SFO "acted unlawfully" by dropping its investigation.[152] The Times described the ruling as "one of the most strongly worded judicial attacks on government action" which condemned how "ministers 'buckled' to 'blatant threats' that Saudi cooperation in the fight against terror would end unless the ...investigation was dropped."[153] On 24 April the SFO was granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords against the ruling.[154] There was a two-day hearing before the Lords on 7 and 8 July 2008.[155] On 30 July the House of Lords unanimously overturned the High Court ruling, stating that the decision to discontinue the investigation was lawful.[156]
[edit]
Others

HMS Coventry was one of two frigates sold to Romania.

In September 2005 The Guardian reported that banking records showed that BAE paid £1 million to Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator.[157] The Guardian has also reported that "clandestine arms deals" have been under investigation in Chile and the UK since 2003 and that British Aerospace and BAE made a number of payments to Pinochet advisers.[158] In 2003, HMS Sheffield was sold to the Chilean Navy for £27 million, however the government's profit from the sale was £3 million, after contracts worth £24 million were placed with BAE for upgrade and refurbishment of the ship.[159]

BAE is alleged to have paid "secret offshore commissions" of over £7 million to secure the sale of HMS London and HMS Coventry to the Romanian Navy. BAE received a £116 million contract for the refurbishment of the ships prior to delivery;[160] however the British taxpayer only received the scrap value of £100,000 each from the sale.[161]

BAE ran into controversy in 2002 over the abnormally high cost of a radar system sold to Tanzania.[162][163] The sale was criticised by several opposition MPs and the World Bank;[164] Secretary of State for International Development Clare Short declared that BAE had "ripped off" developing nations.[165][166] In December 2010, leaked US diplomatic communications revealed that Edward Hoseah, the Tanzanian prosecutor investigating misconduct by BAE, had confided in US diplomats that "his life may be in danger" and was being routinely threatened.[163]

In January 2007, details of an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office into BAE's sales tactics in regard to South Africa were reported, highlighting the £2.3 billion deal to supply Hawk trainers and Gripen fighters as suspect.[167] In May 2011, as allegations of bribery behind South Africa's Gripen procurement continued, BAE partner Saab AB issued strong denials of any illicit payments being made; however in June 2011 Saab announced that BAE had made unaccounted payments of roughly $3.5 million to a consultant, this revelation prompted South Afric

It's a bit long, but you get the idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems