Skip to main content

Vindication for those of us who called for nationalisation and taxpayer-representation on bank Boards -- at last, the Government follows our lead

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3184842/Bank-nationalisation-How-a-bail-out-became-a-buy-out.html

Check out the sub-head to this piece: "October 13, 2008 will go down in history as the day the capitalist system in the UK finally admitted defeat." These are extraordinary days (in fact, the crisis is so fast-moving now, that it would be more accurate to say: 'These are extraordinary hours'...): this blogger's call and then the Green Party's call for the banks to be nationalised -- for no taxation without representation -- have been dramatically vindicated. At last, we the taxpayers are going to get seats on the Boards of banks. At last, banks will be forced to lend to each other, and to their customers, especially small businesses, who are at the moment being either gouged or stonewalled by commercial banks. At last, the obscene profiteering of the banks will be reined in, including dividends and executive bonuses.

I would have preferred a bigger, fuller, more pro-active, earlier nationalisation. As detailed here http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/at-dawn-the-banks-were-back-from-the-brink-958346.html, the 'preference shares' move last week was totally inadequate. If we are to put our money into banks, then we need to be able to exert real control over banks. That is the path that the Government, albeit too tentatively, too piecemeal, and much later than they should have done, has at last embarked upon. I hope that the Government (i.e. us taxpayers) are not over-paying even now for the shares of HBoS and RBS; we may yet rue that a more dramatic total nationalisation has not yet been countenanced.

But what is clear today is: The Thatcherite experiment of finance deregulation has utterly failed. When the _Daily Telegraph_ says, as above, that it is the dawn of a new era of state regulation and control, then you know that something profound has changed in our world...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post-Growth: A new vision for a fairer and more sustainable Britain

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...