Re: Europe

by skully Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:52

Gnomist.

by horace Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:56

now now ...i did not say they were brown nosed

by skully Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:56

by The One Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:05

JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

that would be bailing out banks instead of allowing them to collapse, as they would in a free market

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:32

JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

I have no problem with paying bonuses, my own company has been pretty generous the past couple of years. Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

by Brass Monkey Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:34

taipan wrote:Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

My main problem.

Back in the heady days of a non-stingy boss, I had to earn my bonus - shit performance, shit bonus.

Simple as that.

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:38

Brass Monkey wrote:
taipan wrote:Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

My main problem.

Back in the heady days of a non-stingy boss, I had to earn my bonus - shit performance, shit bonus.

Simple as that.

RBS are still paying massive bonuses despite 5 straight years of losses.

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:47

taipan wrote:
JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

I have no problem with paying bonuses, my own company has been pretty generous the past couple of years. Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

Unless you are a shareholder what business is it of yours?

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:48

The One wrote:
JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

that would be bailing out banks instead of allowing them to collapse, as they would in a free market

That is a different issue and I don't entirely disagree. But there are plenty of banks who are highly profitable who will be affected.

by Brass Monkey Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:50

JGK wrote:
Unless you are the shareholder what business is it of yours?

As 'the taxpayer' who 'bailed out' such banks, I'd rather they chipped in and waived their bonuses.

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:50

Henry wrote:JGK is worried about funding the planned extension to his Mosman mansion. What with the need to buy the second Mercedes already weighing heavily on his mind.....

Phurt. We have a Mazda. And there are no plans for any extensions.

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:51

Brass Monkey wrote:
JGK wrote:
Unless you are the shareholder what business is it of yours?

As 'the taxpayer' who 'bailed out' such banks, I'd rather they chipped in and waived their bonuses.

Again, some banks, not all and the governments who did it would mostly have made a profit as the world settled down.

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:52

JGK wrote:
taipan wrote:
JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

I have no problem with paying bonuses, my own company has been pretty generous the past couple of years. Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

Unless you are a shareholder what business is it of yours?

Could say the same to you. Also I very much doubt the bonuses reach the lower levels, at least they don't in SA.

So you are saying you support bonuses for non performance.

by Brass Monkey Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:53

Meh. I don't care about all banks - I got into this debate late. I hate RBS though - it's personal.

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:56

Brass Monkey wrote:Meh. I don't care about all banks - I got into this debate late. I hate RBS though - it's personal.

Personal for me as well. My wife is getting screwed over by the bank she works for.

by Brass Monkey Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:59

taipan wrote:
Personal for me as well. My wife is getting screwed over by the bank she works for.

Ahh.. shame man. With me, it's more of a stand-off, that I won, but at the next opportunity they f*cked me.

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:01

Brass Monkey wrote:
taipan wrote:
Personal for me as well. My wife is getting screwed over by the bank she works for.

Ahh.. shame man. With me, it's more of a stand-off, that I won, but at the next opportunity they f*cked me.

She hasn't had a bonus for years. Every year they shift the goalposts midstream. But the farkers at the top still cash in.

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:05

taipan wrote:
JGK wrote:
taipan wrote:
JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

I have no problem with paying bonuses, my own company has been pretty generous the past couple of years. Do have a problem with paying bonuses for non performance.

Unless you are a shareholder what business is it of yours?

Could say the same to you. Also I very much doubt the bonuses reach the lower levels, at least they don't in SA.

So you are saying you support bonuses for non performance.

I'm not saying that at all. I am saying that I don't support artificially capping bonuses for good performance.

If banks are paying bonuses for bad performance then their shareholders should walk. Totally different issue.

by taipan Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:07

Normally I would agree with you, but the banks have brought this onto themselves by not self regulating.

by lardbucket Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:22

JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

That's what socialists do. Do you want to corral the banking sector from their malevolent and inept interventions?

by Big Dog Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:25

Not many bonus's in retail banking. Sad

by JGK Fri 01 Mar 2013, 07:42

lardbucket wrote:
JGK wrote:It's a socialist intervention into the operation of the free markets.

That's what socialists do. Do you want to corral the banking sector from their malevolent and inept interventions?

Farken' Pinkos.

by Paul Keating Fri 01 Mar 2013, 08:47

It is total crap.

Get rid of claw back and spreading bonuses over a few years.

Farkin intervention and regulation is killing my plans of retiring early.

by Sponsored content