This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Give me advice on what you would do in my position
- which would be the highest paid out of these jobs?
- WJEC eduqas english literature predictions 2023
- my girlfriend sends pictures to my best friend
- What is the difference between Grim Reaper and Satan?
- What is the student culture at Edinburgh like
- History degree to become an investment banker?
- motivation for a levels
- I want to get into LSE
- I am insecure about my nose - is a sin in Christianity to get a nosejob?
- Is THIS form of “magic” actually magic/haram?
- A warning on investment banking (M&A) careers
- TIPS ON HOW TO GET AN A IN THESE A LEVELS thanks!!
- what's the most useless job?
- [Golden Thread] Which TSR users quoted you in the last 12 months?
- Considering Degrees - English
- Mark my Jekyll and Hyde essay please
- The Student Room
- Bad dreams in Islam during ramadhan 2024
- Should I apply to Oxford for economics and management?
why do people think bankers are evil scum?
why do people believe bankers are evil scum?
(edited 5 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Nobody actually thinks that. However if you did understand what happened in the financial crisis, you'll realise that one of the world's biggest global recessions in modern history happened purely down to the greed of senior bankers and brokers.
Original post by rhaegar447
Nobody actually thinks that. However if you did understand what happened in the financial crisis, you'll realise that one of the world's biggest global recessions in modern history happened purely down to the greed of senior bankers and brokers.
nah i do dw b we out here hatin bankers
Original post by nikki haley
why do people think bankers are evil scum?
Because they live in London which is where the evil scum live and work.
I don't personally think that, but I could tell you why.
It could be because they would think that the final goal of a banker is to bring in interest as much as possible and extract as much money from the smaller population.
It could be because they would think that the final goal of a banker is to bring in interest as much as possible and extract as much money from the smaller population.
Original post by MyKidsCumFirst
nah i do dw b we out here hatin bankers
Because you're gonna be broke xx
I've slightly more nuanced but negative view of them.
If you want to know why animosity exists, look at how banks were run in the lead up to the financial crisis and how the general public sufferered for it.
Fred Godwin is my favourite example. Lauded as Britain's greatest banker, he oversaw Britain's greatest business failure.
If you want to know why animosity exists, look at how banks were run in the lead up to the financial crisis and how the general public sufferered for it.
Fred Godwin is my favourite example. Lauded as Britain's greatest banker, he oversaw Britain's greatest business failure.
Original post by Sulfolobus
I've slightly more nuanced but negative view of them.
If you want to know why animosity exists, look at how banks were run in the lead up to the financial crisis and how the general public sufferered for it.
Fred Godwin is my favourite example. Lauded as Britain's greatest banker, he oversaw Britain's greatest business failure.
If you want to know why animosity exists, look at how banks were run in the lead up to the financial crisis and how the general public sufferered for it.
Fred Godwin is my favourite example. Lauded as Britain's greatest banker, he oversaw Britain's greatest business failure.
How was it worse than the East India Company?
Or the South Sea Company?
Did you know that the collective noun for Bankers is a "Wunch"?
Original post by rhaegar447
Because you're gonna be broke xx
that's a sensitive topic watch what you're sayin...
Original post by MyKidsCumFirst
that's a sensitive topic watch what you're sayin...
looooool sn, you're good anyway
People are generally uninformed about what the financial services industry even does.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Right. First, let's get this out of the way:
Bankers aren't evil scum. An ethical bank is a huge benefit to the community in which they live: They help develop new businesses, they help people buy homes and establish themselves. They allow a more efficient exchange of economic goods and services.
An unethical banker, however, is playing with what is essentially 'Monopoly Money'. You can take home a multi-million pound payday if you earn money for your investors. If you don't, you simply go to another company and try again.
This has resulted in people looking for consistent earners - Like, say, Construction - And putting more money down on it until it over-saturates the market and causes a crash. Why? Because it's easy money. You can get 6 good years and 1 financial crash doing that. This sort of investment is malinvestment, and the consequences can be terrible.
The dotcom bubble. The real estate bubble. People lose their jobs, their homes and tragedy ensues worldwide when bankers are unethical. Compare that to an unethical rubbish bin collector or an unethical store clerk. There are probably the same number of unethical people in all of those - The difference is in the impact the unethical investment banker makes compared to the other.
Bankers aren't evil scum. An ethical bank is a huge benefit to the community in which they live: They help develop new businesses, they help people buy homes and establish themselves. They allow a more efficient exchange of economic goods and services.
An unethical banker, however, is playing with what is essentially 'Monopoly Money'. You can take home a multi-million pound payday if you earn money for your investors. If you don't, you simply go to another company and try again.
This has resulted in people looking for consistent earners - Like, say, Construction - And putting more money down on it until it over-saturates the market and causes a crash. Why? Because it's easy money. You can get 6 good years and 1 financial crash doing that. This sort of investment is malinvestment, and the consequences can be terrible.
The dotcom bubble. The real estate bubble. People lose their jobs, their homes and tragedy ensues worldwide when bankers are unethical. Compare that to an unethical rubbish bin collector or an unethical store clerk. There are probably the same number of unethical people in all of those - The difference is in the impact the unethical investment banker makes compared to the other.
Original post by ThatOldGuy
Right. First, let's get this out of the way:
Bankers aren't evil scum. An ethical bank is a huge benefit to the community in which they live: They help develop new businesses, they help people buy homes and establish themselves. They allow a more efficient exchange of economic goods and services.
An unethical banker, however, is playing with what is essentially 'Monopoly Money'. You can take home a multi-million pound payday if you earn money for your investors. If you don't, you simply go to another company and try again.
This has resulted in people looking for consistent earners - Like, say, Construction - And putting more money down on it until it over-saturates the market and causes a crash. Why? Because it's easy money. You can get 6 good years and 1 financial crash doing that. This sort of investment is malinvestment, and the consequences can be terrible.
The dotcom bubble. The real estate bubble. People lose their jobs, their homes and tragedy ensues worldwide when bankers are unethical. Compare that to an unethical rubbish bin collector or an unethical store clerk. There are probably the same number of unethical people in all of those - The difference is in the impact the unethical investment banker makes compared to the other.
Bankers aren't evil scum. An ethical bank is a huge benefit to the community in which they live: They help develop new businesses, they help people buy homes and establish themselves. They allow a more efficient exchange of economic goods and services.
An unethical banker, however, is playing with what is essentially 'Monopoly Money'. You can take home a multi-million pound payday if you earn money for your investors. If you don't, you simply go to another company and try again.
This has resulted in people looking for consistent earners - Like, say, Construction - And putting more money down on it until it over-saturates the market and causes a crash. Why? Because it's easy money. You can get 6 good years and 1 financial crash doing that. This sort of investment is malinvestment, and the consequences can be terrible.
The dotcom bubble. The real estate bubble. People lose their jobs, their homes and tragedy ensues worldwide when bankers are unethical. Compare that to an unethical rubbish bin collector or an unethical store clerk. There are probably the same number of unethical people in all of those - The difference is in the impact the unethical investment banker makes compared to the other.
Not sure you quite understand the multiple party and personality dynamics that caused the crash. Also, booms and crashes are just a natural part of human centred economics.
Original post by Princepieman
Not sure you quite understand the multiple party and personality dynamics that caused the crash. Also, booms and crashes are just a natural part of human centred economics.
Thank you for the comment, so allow me to clarify: I do!
Now that we've got that out of the way, I need to clarify something with you: When you say that booms and busts are just a natural part of human centred economics, are you suggesting that all economic subgroups necessarily and will always benefit from booms and busts?
Like, for instance: There will always be a cycle where too much wheat(As a for instance) is created until it becomes worthless and then wheat as a commodity will cease to be?
Original post by ThatOldGuy
Thank you for the comment, so allow me to clarify: I do!
Now that we've got that out of the way, I need to clarify something with you: When you say that booms and busts are just a natural part of human centred economics, are you suggesting that all economic subgroups necessarily and will always benefit from booms and busts?
Like, for instance: There will always be a cycle where too much wheat(As a for instance) is created until it becomes worthless and then wheat as a commodity will cease to be?
Now that we've got that out of the way, I need to clarify something with you: When you say that booms and busts are just a natural part of human centred economics, are you suggesting that all economic subgroups necessarily and will always benefit from booms and busts?
Like, for instance: There will always be a cycle where too much wheat(As a for instance) is created until it becomes worthless and then wheat as a commodity will cease to be?
No, I'm saying cycles of prosperity and austerity will always exist as long as humans are at the helm of the multitude of decisions that ripple into everyone's existences on this piece of rock.
Take happiness for example. No human has ever, in the history of mankind, achieved constant happiness. It is a volatile state that speaks to what kind of creature we are on a fundamental level.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Princepieman
No, I'm saying cycles of prosperity and austerity will always exist as long as humans are at the helm of the multitude of decisions that ripple into everyone's existences on this piece of rock.
Take happiness for example. No human has ever, in the history of mankind, achieved constant happiness. It is a volatile state that speaks to what kind of creature we are on a fundamental level.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Take happiness for example. No human has ever, in the history of mankind, achieved constant happiness. It is a volatile state that speaks to what kind of creature we are on a fundamental level.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Great! But that's very different to saying that economic boom and bust cycles are inevitable and are not driven by malinvestment.
For instance: The speculation on the dotcom bubble were not driven by the vagaries of fate or the whimsy of natural order.
They were driven by speculative investment primarily driven by group investors operating on behalf of other investors. Can you agree, for instance, that the dotcom bubble was overinvestment in a specific and new industry and that the people involved were not primarily investing their own money?
the issue for me is not that people think 'bankers' are all bad.. but that people think all people who work for banks are 'bankers'
Really only a very small subset of investment bankers, and top level managers/business leaders were responsible for the financial crisis.. the vast vast majority of bank employees had nothing at all to do with it.
My father works in a bank, and is a manager at quite a high level - for a good few years after the financial crash, he/the family were always a bit hesitant to say what he did in public, because when you did - you got an awful backlash. Especially when you mentioned what bank he worked for. But he works in commercial banking, not investment banking.. his area, never once, through the whole financial crisis, made a loss. Commercial banking is very stable, reliable and regular when done properly.. but because of the massive losses that the investment banking side caused, everyone got tarnished.
During the crisis his side of the bank were loosing employees by the dozen, mass cuts, huge redundancies and lay-offs... when they had done nothing wrong. They were affected just like the general public were, but unlike the general public, they were tarnished with the brush of 'bankers'
--
Yes, some bankers ****ed up.. no not all people who work for a bank should be given the negative connotation attached to being a 'banker'
Really only a very small subset of investment bankers, and top level managers/business leaders were responsible for the financial crisis.. the vast vast majority of bank employees had nothing at all to do with it.
My father works in a bank, and is a manager at quite a high level - for a good few years after the financial crash, he/the family were always a bit hesitant to say what he did in public, because when you did - you got an awful backlash. Especially when you mentioned what bank he worked for. But he works in commercial banking, not investment banking.. his area, never once, through the whole financial crisis, made a loss. Commercial banking is very stable, reliable and regular when done properly.. but because of the massive losses that the investment banking side caused, everyone got tarnished.
During the crisis his side of the bank were loosing employees by the dozen, mass cuts, huge redundancies and lay-offs... when they had done nothing wrong. They were affected just like the general public were, but unlike the general public, they were tarnished with the brush of 'bankers'
--
Yes, some bankers ****ed up.. no not all people who work for a bank should be given the negative connotation attached to being a 'banker'
Related discussions
- Give me advice on what you would do in my position
- which would be the highest paid out of these jobs?
- WJEC eduqas english literature predictions 2023
- my girlfriend sends pictures to my best friend
- What is the difference between Grim Reaper and Satan?
- What is the student culture at Edinburgh like
- History degree to become an investment banker?
- motivation for a levels
- I want to get into LSE
- I am insecure about my nose - is a sin in Christianity to get a nosejob?
- Is THIS form of “magic” actually magic/haram?
- A warning on investment banking (M&A) careers
- TIPS ON HOW TO GET AN A IN THESE A LEVELS thanks!!
- what's the most useless job?
- [Golden Thread] Which TSR users quoted you in the last 12 months?
- Considering Degrees - English
- Mark my Jekyll and Hyde essay please
- The Student Room
- Bad dreams in Islam during ramadhan 2024
- Should I apply to Oxford for economics and management?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
I think I have a Cifas Marker on my name , can I still open any banks ?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Has anyone had their student finance paid into their partners or parents bank?Last reply 1 month ago
Introduction to UK Financial regulations and professional integrity SCAMTrending
Last reply 1 week ago
I think I have a Cifas Marker on my name , can I still open any banks ?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Has anyone had their student finance paid into their partners or parents bank?Last reply 1 month ago
Introduction to UK Financial regulations and professional integrity SCAM
