Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

[jtabeb]

Should be pounds instead of dollars, but you get the idea.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...earchers.html#

The report says advertising executives and tax accountants destroy even more of society's wealth as they create their own.

Childcare workers, by contrast, free up potential wealth by helping parents keep working - generating up to £9.50 for every pound they are paid.
Waste recycling workers help promote recycling, reducing carbon emissions and the amount of goods being thrown into landfill.
This helps society now and in the future - so they generate £12 for every pound.

The foundation said there needs to be a 'fundamental rethink' of how people are paid.
Its report, A Bit Rich?, said: 'We found that some of the most highly-paid benefit us least, and some of the lowest-paid benefit us most.
'Although this will not always hold, it points to a massive flaw in the system and highlights the need for reform.'
Using investment bankers as an example, it said: 'Far from being "wealth creators", City bankers are being handsomely rewarded for socially -damaging activity.
'They are not just overpaid; they are overpaid at the expense of others.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0b0MXxdXE

[Chris]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ics_Foundation

[jtabeb]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ics_Foundation

Umm, I don't understand.

Are you seeking to discredit the research paper, or add to it's validity?

The fact check link you provided only seemed to do the latter, so I am confused as to the point you were trying to make.

[Chris]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

I should have commented with the link.

The New Economics Foundation may or may not do some interesting and worthy research but the founding members and many of their funding contributions come from strongly Leftist parties in the UK, like the Socialist Workers Party for example. The are very much anti-capitalist.

That may or may not be a "Good Thing" but I thought I would point out who were behind the NEF given the outcome of their research.

[jimmygu3]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

I should have commented with the link.

The New Economics Foundation may or may not do some interesting and worthy research but the founding members and many of their funding contributions come from strongly Leftist parties in the UK, like the Socialist Workers Party for example. The are very much anti-capitalist.

That may or may not be a "Good Thing" but I thought I would point out who were behind the NEF given the outcome of their research.

Having only read jtabeb's excerpt, I thought it smacked of a socialist agenda. Makes sense now that I see Chris's link and explanation of the NEF.

That aside, I would tend to agree that the banking and finance industry is way out of whack with regards to compensation for the functions it performs. Just as sanitation is there to support citizens and businesses, so is the banking industry supposed to play a support role to the productive economy. Instead they have become the economy. If the sanitation workers' union had somehow infiltrated the government and media, wielding tremendous influence over legislators, deregulating their own industry, giving themselves massive bonuses, salaries and "bailouts", they too would need fixing.

Jimmy

[jtabeb]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

Having only read jtabeb's excerpt, I thought it smacked of a socialist agenda. Makes sense now that I see Chris's link and explanation of the NEF.

That aside, I would tend to agree that the banking and finance industry is way out of whack with regards to compensation for the functions it performs. Just as sanitation is there to support citizens and businesses, so is the banking industry supposed to play a support role to the productive economy. Instead they have become the economy. If the sanitation workers' union had somehow infiltrated the government and media, wielding tremendous influence over legislators, deregulating their own industry, giving themselves massive bonuses, salaries and "bailouts", they too would need fixing.

Jimmy

Geesh! What's wrong with a social agenda!?!

I'd say the LACK of one has been killing us for 30 years!

[Rajiv]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

Jamal,

you have to realize that "socialism" is a dirty word in the minds of many in the US -- on par with the "seven dirty words"

BTW I think NEF produces some really good work

[jimmygu3]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

Jamal,

you have to realize that "socialism" is a dirty word in the minds of many in the US -- on par with the "seven dirty words"

BTW I think NEF produces some really good work

jtabeb & Rajiv,

Have you ever read my posts? I am normally one of the more liberal voices on iTulip, and I don't think socialism is a dirty word. I do think that it's worth noting whether a paper appears to have been authored to support one agenda or another. With this one it was very transparent and that bias detracts from its credibility. Whether an agenda is socialist, liberal, conservative, fascist, etc., I try to see it for what it is and view the results with an appropriate level of skepticism.

Jimmy

[Rajiv]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

Jimmy,

My post was not meant to be a reflection on you, but rather a more general observation. The result of that general observation has been that I tend to avoid posting links to sites like the NEF on itulip -- because they tend to draw unneeded flack, and things basically deteriorate to ideological diatribes on both sides. However, I have found many of the papers produced by the NEF to be insightful.

[jtabeb]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

jtabeb & Rajiv,

Whether an agenda is socialist, liberal, conservative, fascist, etc., I try to see it for what it is and view the results with an appropriate level of skepticism.

Jimmy

Woa! Did I just hear you correctly?

So I, as a BIASED advocate of social justice, and true free markets and objectivism have an agenda? YOU ARE KIDDING!


Of course everyone has an agenda, and you are correct in asserting that an agenda serves to benefit some objective or cause. The POINT IS, that the cause matters!

The anti-apartheid movement had an objective and an agenda.
The Nazi Party had an objective and an agenda.
Gandhi had an objective and an agenda.
Jesus had an objective and an agenda.


I do NOT think that they were all equal BECAUSE some were beneficial to society at large while others obviously were not.

Being OBJECTIVE is something that I advocate and is the way that I find my way around this crazy world.

Being truly OBJECTIVE drives you to seek the best way to MAXIMIZE the socioeconomic benefit to society as a whole WHILST simultaneously seeking to maximize JUSTICE within a society.

Anything else is IRRATIONAL or ILLOGICAL, from an objectivist perspective.

Some systems of socioeconomic organization are ANATHEMA to the objective perspective. Others fit like a glove, and it this case I WOULD ARGUE that a true FREE MARKET-SOCIAL CREDIT system is the best way to optimize social organization and social justice.

Can the ends justify the means? Well, it DEPENDS! It depends on if the ends are self-serving or altruistic. The economic system HAS TO BE altruistic in order for it to validly serve the interests of all mankind.

If you are on a train track and I push you out of the way of an oncoming train so that I prevent you from being killed, THAT's okay. (I don't gain materially, and you benefit)

Our present system is one where I surreptitiously take out a life insurance policy on you while your are walking on the train tracks and then PUSH you in front of the oncoming train in order to cause your death and which results in my being able to collect the insurance money!
(I gain materially and you suffer harm, as do your wife and children)


(Not addressed above is the win-win scenario, IMHO, the best form of economic transaction there is. I push you out of the way of the oncoming train and you give me a $50 gold piece to thank me for saving your life! You benefit, and I benefit FROM the BENEFIT I helped impart to you. THAT'S how you RUN a society!)

Our financial system now is WRONG, in the simplest sense. It is IMMORAL. To an ojectivist, our present system of private looting of the public purse is, well, sickening and I hope you don't classify me in the same terms that you would an oligarchical communist or a plutocratic fascist.

Agendas Matter and some are worth fighting for. Knowing an agenda as a basis to deconstruct motivation is also valuable. But attacking an agenda because there is an agenda is not sound rational.

I would ADD, that the only VALID profit potential in society (and objective we should seek to strive for, IMHO) is one in which parties MUTUALLY BENEFIT from economic activity and are not harmed by it. (My selling you a productive piece of equipment or a productive serves benefits us both. My selling you a defective Ford Pinto with an exploding rear gas tank benefits my to your detriment). We should not seek the LATTER as the basis for an socioeconomic system. Unfortunately, that is the system that we have now.

(remember I'm a little bit Huey Long meets Ayn Rand, or simply "A social credit inspired objectivist" read up on social credit here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit).

[jimmygu3]

Re: Bankers desroy $7 in capital for each $1 that they create!

jtabeb,

It was the NEF, the ones who published the study, that I said had an agenda, not you. I certainly agree that some agendas are good and others bad, depending on one's viewpoint. My point is that it's no surprise that a study published by a left-wing group came out with an a pro-worker, anti-banker result. Again, I largely agree with the gist of the article, but I smell confirmation bias.

Jimmy