Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

You are far too polite to be allowed to interview people. You let GB get away with murder the other morning - chivvy you not. Boom and Bust was but a small hit in what should have been a devastating interview. He got away with far too much. There are people out here losing their houses, jobs, pensions, savings, families and you let him rabbit on while the bloated state is ever increasing and a tsunami of tax is about to engulf us all - after the election, naturally. Are you not, perhaps, a little too pally with him? Hasn't that closeness disarmed you?

Hi Evan, I've struggled to find a 'Contact me' link so I'm posting an entry on your blog. I just wanted to congratulate you on the fantastic series 'City Uncovered', which we just caught on the IPlayer. Extremely interesting and informative. So much so that it prompted me to start looking for books about the various subjects dealt with on the series - actually any suggestions for a neophite coming from the IT industry are more than welcome. Great stuff!!

Alberto

P.S. Great shirts! Where do you get them??

Evan,

With reference to 'Respect for Bankers' I think it is best to remember where we are as a result of their collective actions.
This does not promote any reason for respect or trust towards Bankers.
as follows

The Bankers missed out on their primary objective of 'the responsibility of business is to make profit' (Friedman)

They failed in their business investment reponsibilities of adequately assessing and covering the riskiness of their investments.

They ignored normal business P and L practice by requiring bailout from external sources (taxpayer funds) to cover their mounting and unsustainable losses.

The required level of governance was absent

Thus, there is no reason to offer any respect at all to the generic collection of Bankers in either their business practices or in their ethical practices

That is not to say that all Bankers qualify for the same disrespect and some individuals may indeed be trustworthy and ethical.

However as a collective noun 'Bankers' have shown themselves to be unsuitable and untrustworthy.

So, it is necessary to draw distinction between 'Bankers' and 'Banking'

'Bankers' as the above has illustrated, have shown themselves to be untrustworthy, and/or incompetent. and/or reckless, and/or unethical in pursuit of profit which overrode standards of acceptable business behaviour.

Whereas 'Banking' as a system certainly has the ability to produce wealth, ease credit flows, provide security of deposit, etc.

But 'Banking' must be properly managed within a financially sustainable manner; and managed by players of a sufficiently suitable business ethics disposition.

The system vehicle ('Banking') can be used for beneficial purposes and must be retained, reshaped and rebuilt,
The reckless system drivers ('Bankers') must be replaced.

Conclusions

'Banking' as a process is beneficial.
'Bankers' as a collective bunch are unworthy of any respect.
Sea-change needs to occur from the top down, starting with policy changes from Banking Leaders at Davos.

regards

Evan
if quantitative easing" merely"changes some of the relevant bank's assets from gilts and corporate bonds to the intended loans and if ,as I believe, gilts (and bonds dependent upon their risk rating) require less capital under the basel rules than typical commercial loans, then how can that bank be expected to make those loans? surely the bank will require more capital for the same size but riskier balance sheet?
hence the desired multiplier effect will be minimal at best, and at worst we run an increased risk of, as the old city joke has it,going back to the banks losing money the old fashioned way, by lending it.
(great work on the today show, by the way)

Unfortunately it seems to be that the corporate banks have a large strangle hold on the young - I am young therefore [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] is that I cannot afford to buy