• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
One percent

Financial secotor and government privatisation come together in a perfect storm. Result=workers shafted again

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43060272

British Steel pension scheme members were targeted by "vulture" financial advisers after Tata was allowed to offload its retirement fund, MPs say.

In 2017 the Indian firm announced a restructuring of the £14bn fund to keep its UK loss-making operations afloat.

But the government, Tata and regulators failed to protect 124,000 members from a "major mis-selling scandal", the Work and Pensions Select Committee said.

The UK government has yet to issue its response to the "neglect" claim.

 

so, not only has the government fucked up the steel industry by flogging it off to a bunch of Indians, they have also allowed crooks from the financial sector to steal rom and ruin workers. 

Good job there establishment 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Nothing really to do with UKGOV. BS is/was a private company.

Its more to do with the greed and stupidy ofthe low rent financial advisors and the miners.

Ive looked at the reported numbers. Its about 60 who have gone for a dubious one.

And, rather than being a  private sector thing, the bloke setting up the meetings was an ex copper.

The government , BS and regulator had tried to guide these people. Most are OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, spygirl said:

No.

Nothing really to do with UKGOV. BS is/was a private company.

Its more to do with the greed and stupidy ofthe low rent financial advisors and the miners.

Ive looked at the reported numbers. Its about 60 who have gone for a dubious one.

And, rather than being a  private sector thing, the bloke setting up the meetings was an ex copper.

The government , BS and regulator had tried to guide these people. Most are OK.

Government began this by privatising the steel industry. 

Gordon Brown undermined pensions with his tax grab

government to blame 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, One percent said:

Or government for failing to lesgislate financial services properly 

You can't legislate against human failings, best thing that can be done is to educate. 

I've always been deeply suspicious of the financial services industry. It was confirmed when I realised that one of the first things newcomers to the industry were told was to buy an expensive watch. Obviously so that potential customers could see the salesman was a person of means and not desperate for your cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

You can't legislate against human failings, best thing that can be done is to educate. 

I've always been deeply suspicious of the financial services industry. It was confirmed when I realised that one of the first things newcomers to the industry were told was to buy an expensive watch. Obviously so that potential customers could see the salesman was a person of means and not desperate for your cash.

Agree. And the evidence should be looked at in every one of these cases and if it is found that these advisers deliberately misled and stole, they should be stripped of everything they own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, One percent said:

Agree. And the evidence should be looked at in every one of these cases and if it is found that these advisers deliberately misled and stole, they should be stripped of everything they own. 

Its finding if the advisors deliberately misled. There is so much legislation to try and curb these abuses. Take out a financial services product and tsee the reams of paper produced to ensure that you are given "best advice", the reams for "know your customer". 

The legislation is there, but people are still cheated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Its finding if the advisors deliberately misled. There is so much legislation to try and curb these abuses. Take out a financial services product and tsee the reams of paper produced to ensure that you are given "best advice", the reams for "know your customer". 

The legislation is there, but people are still cheated.

I know. That’s why I have never been near one and keep what I have in cash. 

Its also why I think that there should be massive repercussions if they are found to be dishonest. 

In this case, I would think it clear.  There were two other ‘approved’ schemes and they clearly should have been advised to go into those. As they were not, I would say that the evidence is fairly strong that they have been defrauded 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The financial services industry is meant to be an asset.  Over history it has done this amazing function where it recycles surplus wealth ('savings') into those new businesses and older businesses that need cash for moving into new areas.  It manages this through intelligent selection of which businesses can most safely give the return given the opportunity and the size of potential return.

That's actually quite difficult and as a result they've been paid quite well to do it.

But how big a sector should that be?  Exactly how many people are required to do that function?

In the UK the financial services industry has grown into a monster.  It no longer serves its original function, but searches out opportunities to fleece the savers.  It demands returns and when it doesn't get them demands to be protected by the state.  If there are no areas where there is a return it demands that the state invents one.   All the state sponsored cash is now so big a sum that there is no actual need to do their original function -- hence small businesses can't get investment (growth), while BTL portfolios are supported (asset price inflation).  Worse, it takes so much out of the economy, and there are so many who have taken so much wealth from the real economy, that 'normal' people can't buy stuff they'd like because the prices have been inflated.  

It is all madness.  The shrinking proportion of little guys that actually create wealth are feeding a bloated monster that doesn't know how to behave any more.  It is like a second state, desperate to take the fruit of everyone's efforts. 

We'd probably be better off without it right now.

Edited by dgul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dgul said:

The financial services industry is meant to be an asset.  Over history it has done this amazing function where it recycles surplus wealth ('savings') into those new businesses and older businesses that need cash for moving into new areas.  It manages this through intelligent selection of which businesses can most safely give the return given the opportunity and the size of potential return.

That's actually quite difficult and as a result they've been paid quite well to do it.

But how big a sector should that be?  Exactly how many people are required to do that function?

In the UK the financial services industry has grown into a monster.  It no longer serves its original function, but searches out opportunities to fleece the savers.  It demands returns and when it doesn't get them demands to be protected by the state.  If there are no areas where there is a return it demands that the state invents one.   All the state sponsored cash is now so big a sum that there is no actual need to do their original function -- hence small businesses can't get investment (growth), while BTL portfolios are supported (asset price inflation).  Worse, it takes so much out of the economy, and there are so many who have taken so much wealth from the real economy, that 'normal' people can't buy stuff they'd like because the prices have been inflated.  

It is all madness.  The shrinking proportion of little guys that actually create wealth are feeding a bloated monster that doesn't know how to behave any more.  It is like a second state, desperate to take the fruit of everyone's efforts. 

We'd probably be better off without it right now.

You need to draw the line between retail and wholesale.

Then banking and trading/investment banks.

And you need to keep them seprate from each other and ensure that you dont get too large - having the like of RBS circa 2007 massive retail, trading, nvestment, assets (i.e. liabilities 4x the size of UK GDP).

The UK finance retail has been lousy. Think life insurers - personal pension and endowment mortgages.

The LI have been shutdown, taking one of the major UK scmas with it.

The remaining scam areas are relate to commission sales people, which the above insurance would sort out.

The FCA did ban commision based sales, or at least make it transparent.

Sadly, 80%+ of people dont grasp compounding interates.

And the current biggy - SIPP providers, who seem to have inherits the staff and scmster fro mthe LI industry.

The best way to handle the likes of the scam scum is to insist that pension sales men purchase indemnity insurance that lasts for 10+ years even if they are insolvent. There's a rreal problem with limited liability and leverage.

On the finsec in geenral:

https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2015/02/finance-sector-and-growth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By One percent
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43739963
      Fast food giants, coffee shops and retailers are relabelling low-skilled jobs as apprenticeships, a report says.
      The study by think tank Reform says many firms have rebranded existing roles after being obliged to contribute cash to on-the-job training.
      The study says 40% of the apprenticeship standards approved do not meet traditional definition of such skilled on-the-job training courses.
      The government says "quality" is at the heart of its apprenticeship reforms.
      As part of the changes, it introduced an apprenticeship levy on organisations paying more than £3m in salaries a year. 
      They have to pay 0.5% of their wages total into a "digital account" held by HMRC.
      They then "spend" these contributions on apprenticeship training delivered by registered providers. They can also get back up to 90% of the cost of training.
       
      The report says: "As part of the government's wider package of reforms to apprenticeships, groups of employers came together to write the new 'apprenticeship standards'. 
      "Some used this opportunity to generate high-quality standards, but others appear to be simply rebadging low-quality, low-skill and often low-wage roles as 'apprenticeships' instead."
      In 2013, the government said apprenticeships had to be skilled roles, requiring substantial and sustained training of at least 12 months, leading to full competency and should provide the apprentice with transferrable skills in an occupation.
      But a quick glance at the government's official apprenticeships website shows many high street firms advertising for apprentices in what appear to be unskilled roles.
      For example, KFC is advertising for an apprentice hospitality team member.
      The advert describes the apprenticeship as "a structured, learner and employer-focused development programme designed to create opportunities for lifelong knowledge, skills and behaviours".
      But the role is described as cooking "fries" and other products and serving customers front of house, or cooking and assembling KFC products, while maintaining clean, sanitary working conditions. 
      It says training is based around day-to-day duties, but will also involve one-to-one interactions with a specialised trainer every four to six weeks.
       
      and the government does nothing to stop these exploitative practices  
       
    • By mooncat69
      When visiting Japan, I spent a lot of time visiting shrines. Without exception, these are immaculate and intact, even though the ornate decorations must be worth a few bob. I can't imagine that happening in England.
    • By Thombleached
      Whever I go shopping and using the self serve I always (without fail) steal a new "posh" bag. I've no idea why I do it but I do know that the boot of my car looks like I'm about to clean up a murder.
      AIBU?
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.