The Student Room Group

Why do people hate bankers and traders?

Is it jealousy? Were bankers (by banker i am talking about those working in investment banking and sales and trading) responsible for the financial crisis? What did they actually do to get this reputation as greedy, bad people? I hear so many people complain about them and their bonuses. Why is this?

Scroll to see replies

I don't understand why people criticise them.
They've worked hard to get to the position they're in now, and imo shouldn't be criticised.
I guess that's just life.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 2
Can never trust a suit, they only look after themselves
The problem isn't the bankers and traders themselves, the problem is the lack of regulation in the industry. I mean, it's undeniable that day traders in particular are just social parasites, but I don't blame them considering it seems fun, and, for professionals, profitable. What we need is a stronger state limiting what can be done in their position.
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
The problem isn't the bankers and traders themselves, the problem is the lack of regulation in the industry. I mean, it's undeniable that day traders in particular are just social parasites, but I don't blame them considering it seems fun, and, for professionals, profitable. What we need is a stronger state limiting what can be done in their position.


Social parasites? Why? They are not hurting people...
Reply 5
Bankers are responsible for all the economic blows within the economy.


This is a fact.
Original post by Coollad1999
Is it jealousy? Were bankers (by banker i am talking about those working in investment banking and sales and trading) responsible for the financial crisis? What did they actually do to get this reputation as greedy, bad people? I hear so many people complain about them and their bonuses. Why is this?


Because bankers are "briefcase bankers"
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
The problem isn't the bankers and traders themselves, the problem is the lack of regulation in the industry. I mean, it's undeniable that day traders in particular are just social parasites, but I don't blame them considering it seems fun, and, for professionals, profitable. What we need is a stronger state limiting what can be done in their position.


Why is a day trader more of a social parasite than a recipient of welfare?
Original post by hoping4Astars
Social parasites? Why? They are not hurting people...


They're not producing anything either.

Original post by generallee
Why is a day trader more of a social parasite than a recipient of welfare?


They're not. However, the day trader tends to be a day trader by choice.
theyre jelly
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
The problem isn't the bankers and traders themselves, the problem is the lack of regulation in the industry. I mean, it's undeniable that day traders in particular are just social parasites, but I don't blame them considering it seems fun, and, for professionals, profitable. What we need is a stronger state limiting what can be done in their position.


there is a massive amount of regulation in the financial services industry, it is currently over the top how much regulators are controlling investment banks (ever since the 08 crisis of course)
Reply 11
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
The problem isn't the bankers and traders themselves, the problem is the lack of regulation in the industry. I mean, it's undeniable that day traders in particular are just social parasites, but I don't blame them considering it seems fun, and, for professionals, profitable. What we need is a stronger state limiting what can be done in their position.


Actually the financial sector is already one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the country. The problem in my view is that there is too much regulation. The government sets so many rules and restrictions that the smaller banks find it impossible to compete with their larger counterparts. Then you get the small banks merging with the big banks and you have a very unstable situation where the banks are "too big to fail". Deregulate the industry, allow the market to decide how many banks there are and you'll have far less problems.
Original post by frigg113
there is a massive amount of regulation in the financial services industry, it is currently over the top how much regulators are controlling investment banks (ever since the 08 crisis of course)


Original post by djh2208
Actually the financial sector is already one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the country. The problem in my view is that there is too much regulation. The government sets so many rules and restrictions that the smaller banks find it impossible to compete with their larger counterparts. Then you get the small banks merging with the big banks and you have a very unstable situation where the banks are "too big to fail". Deregulate the industry, allow the market to decide how many banks there are and you'll have far less problems.


In a country where the state is effectively adopting the moral hazard of banking failure, both through deposit guarantees and through bailouts, equilibrium strategy for financial services becomes a strategy with much higher variance as there is no longer any need for providers of capital, whether institutional investors or individual depositors, to be convinced their deposits are safe. This is why the industry needs regulating.
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
In a country where the state is effectively adopting the moral hazard of banking failure, both through deposit guarantees and through bailouts, equilibrium strategy for financial services becomes a strategy with much higher variance as there is no longer any need for providers of capital, whether institutional investors or individual depositors, to be convinced their deposits are safe. This is why the industry needs regulating.

I agree it needs regulating, but I was highlighting that it is already heavily regulated, when you implied it is lacking in regulation
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
They're not producing anything either.



They're not. However, the day trader tends to be a day trader by choice.


So do lots of welfare recipients. Have you never seen Benefit Street?
Original post by generallee
So do lots of welfare recipients. Have you never seen Benefit Street?


No, I've never seen Benefit Street, but I do know it's a lot of sensationalised right-wing tabloid fodder, and not at all representative of welfare claimants as a whole, the vast majority of whom are legitimate.
Original post by TheDefiniteArticle
No, I've never seen Benefit Street, but I do know it's a lot of sensationalised right-wing tabloid fodder, and not at all representative of welfare claimants as a whole, the vast majority of whom are legitimate.


Hard to know how you can form such a strong opinion about a programme you have never even seen, but let's leave it at that. :smile:

Coming back to your substantive point, though, you clearly feel day traders are not " legitimate" and "social parasites" and yet it is unclear why?

Trading is a zero sum game. The only party that loses in a financial trade is another trader. Day traders had no impact on the financial crash which was caused by a handful of irresponsible rogues. If it is wrong to tar all welfare recipients with the scrounger tag because of a minority leeching on the rest of us, even more so is it to do so to thousands of traders because of the actions of individuals that you could count on the fingers of both hands.

Day traders contribute to the social good though transaction charges which go back into the wider economy, and taxation if they are successful, which pays for all the welfare recipients amongst other things.

So why are they parasites exactly?
Most people dislike them out of jealousy, I however, question the merits of having an economy based on abstractions rather than physical creating of goods.
Because the overwhelming majority of the population have no idea how the financial (more specifically banking) industry actually works.
Original post by generallee
Hard to know how you can form such a strong opinion about a programme you have never even seen, but let's leave it at that. :smile:

Coming back to your substantive point, though, you clearly feel day traders are not " legitimate" and "social parasites" and yet it is unclear why?

Trading is a zero sum game. The only party that loses in a financial trade is another trader. Day traders had no impact on the financial crash which was caused by a handful of irresponsible rogues. If it is wrong to tar all welfare recipients with the scrounger tag because of a minority leeching on the rest of us, even more so is it to do so to thousands of traders because of the actions of individuals that you could count on the fingers of both hands.

Day traders contribute to the social good though transaction charges which go back into the wider economy, and taxation if they are successful, which pays for all the welfare recipients amongst other things.

So why are they parasites exactly?


They're not creating any good (except for paying tax, which can barely be commended). Many of them are extremely intelligent. It's a massive waste of their talents. Moreover, day trading, precisely because it is a high-variance zero-sum game, attracts a significant number of people who are either prone to, or already do suffer from gambling addiction.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending