'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.' Yes... but don't forget the bankers!
There's a lovely moment in Henry IV (Part II) when Dick the Butcher, a supporter of the anarchist, Jack Cade, exclaims, 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.'
Today in the light of the monumental banking fiasco, I can understand his frustration and would apply his dastardly plan equally to bankers!
I'm sorry but it seems I'm the only person in this world who is horrified at the recent situation concerning the world of banking and the extent to which governments are going out of their ways to inject it with billions of pounds.
Only last Wednesday, for instance, our government put together £500b to save the incompetent banks within our country and thereby effectively nationalising them like Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.
And this is money, which incidentally, belongs to the taxpayer.
How the Treasury found such a colossal amount - to spend on buying failing organisations - is mind-boggling especially given the almost desperate state of affairs concerning our social services, pensions, NHS and education.
And even this morning (Friday) there was little guarantee from our prime minister that this money will be spent responsibly by the banks concerned. There's still very little evidence of checks and balances being put in place.
Now call me obtuse, but I really don't understand why my money should go to paying off some rich fat cats in the city who have been having a reckless party for so many years - borrowing and lending money - without as much as a morsel of care? And just why should it be that the honest tax payer's money should go in saving their backsides when they have been criminal with lending and investing funds belonging to banks? Surely there should have been safe guards - a series of effective regulatory mechanisms to ensure that investors like fund and hedge fund managers didn't overstep their marks? And although our Chancellor is telling us that measures are being put in place to safe guard the economy in the future, why weren't bonuses and dividends controlled previously? Alarmingly high street banks and building societies have been offering customers mortgages worth up to, a staggering, six times their salaries.
To me there's no doubt that the financial world has been behaving irresponsibly but it seems that our government is hell bent in saving their friends in the city who, at the least, should be told to fend for themselves if not taken to court for their professional negligence and unethical conduct. I'm sorry, the whole thing just reeks of the old school network - it's jobs for the boys in a climate of unprecedented arrogance!
With salaries for many people increasing by a mere fraction of the rate of inflation and the price of property, one doesn't have to be Adam Smith or Karl Marx to understand that it was only a matter of time before the bubble burst, before the fat cats had an epiphany - the Damascus experience - to reveal that the money they were dealing with was no more real than the digits on their computer screens.
In effect - and this is the horror of it all -they've been dealing almost solely with theory and hypothetical finance, projected forecasts and financial predictions of the value of shares/bonds. They've been working with estimations - pure guesswork - concerning profits and investments. Of course, their currency hasn't been cold hard cash - tangible valued product - but Mickey Mouse or simple tokens or IOUs in a game of Monopoly and thus ultimately worthless.
But sadly such estimated and vacuous figures produced by banks and building societies, have been the basis of our seemingly healthy economy which Gordon Brown has proudly presided over for eleven odd years.
In actual fact the state of the economy, which everyone has been talking so highly of, has been nothing more than an illusion. Well, it must have been because the growth of our economy is based largely on the growth of the property market which, we know, has been in the hands of the city investors and banks and building societies. As such they should be held accountable for bringing the banking system tumbling down to its knees - not rewarded for their greed.
But my indignation of them goes deeper. As I said, there is something deeply abhorrent about the idea that the private sector can be injected with billions of pounds from the public purse. I'm sorry but if we believe in laissez-faire that the state should leave commerce and industry well alone, I don't understand why governments are covering up for the very same organisations whose outlets and systems are integral to this mess. And it's a fact - mark my words - that the chief executives of the large banks concerned are still going to get their bonuses, hefty pensions, golden hand shakes and all the other customary paraphernalia that go with being 'successful' captains of industry.
All this will be going on right under our noses whilst our many pensions will be covering themselves with blankets because they won't be able to afford the fuel bills this winter.
Capitalism - don't make me laugh. It's nothing but layers of illusion coated with government arrogance and hypocrisy.
As Dick the Butcher says, what we should do is line them up against the wall - lawyers and bankers - and shoot 'em, one by one!
Older/Newer
« Icon Get Over You | Books not selling? Well, invite a fatwa »
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.' Yes... but don't forget the bankers! . TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.birminghampost.net/cgi-bin/mt421/mt-tb.cgi/36436















"I'm sorry but it seems I'm the only person in this world who is horrified at the recent situation concerning the world of banking and the extent to which governments are going out of their ways to inject it with billions of pounds."
You are right Roshan. I don't think anyone else is the least bit interested.
Clifford,
What would you suggest we do with a blogger who advocates 'lining up and shooting - one by one' swathes of the population on grounds of their occupation? Let him chew on a few lead pencils whilst stewing in his own verbosity? Tar and feather him and send him back to Dick the Butcher to be plucked, drawn and trussed?
U
I'm sure Roshan can speak for himself... But, as neither of you old fuddies - Clifford/Ursula - like him or his perspective, why do you carry on reading his posts? It really bugs me!...I have always enjoyed his rants - it's the only reason I log on to the Brummie Post blogs... But if you don't like him or his point of view or his politics; don't read. Why is that difficult for old timers like you to understand?
Linda, you poor misguided soul; if the best insult you can come up with is calling someone - who for all you know might be barely out of his/her nappies - a fuddy duddy why not join Clifford, Roshan and myself in the sandpit? We might as well bake some wet cakes instead of discussing our views of the world. You ask whether Roshan can speak for himself. Don't hold your breath, Linda - he is a bit busy today blowing out all those birthday candles.
Why do I keep reading and commenting on R's machinations? Someone has to; can't leave all the hard work to Clifford. Anyway, and it pains me: Roshan's blog is a source of tremendous amusement to me. For more reasons than one.
Mwah,
U
PS Happy Birthday, Roshan
Yes, Ursula, it was my birthday yesterday! Thank you for your kind wishes.
And I thank you all for taking time to comment on my posts... But I must say you guys are becoming rather familiar with me and my world! Reminds me of that 70s film 'Play Misty For Me'! Or Fatal Attraction. Scary... To be honest, Linda, I don't mind what readers say about me or my blog pieces - just as long as they don't go weird on me (Ok, Clifford??)!!
...Roshan, our chief anarchist, let's add politicians and civil servants to that list of people to be executed! And, of course, local councillors!
Roshan if you believe the state should take a laissez-faire attitude to commerce and industry where does this leave regulation?
Wasn't it a lack of regulation that got us into this mess in the first place?
Clifford's got a point, Roshan
Roshan, by saying that you "don't mind what readers say about me or my blog pieces" you are not only dismissive of your own writing you are also treating your loyal following with contempt. I believe that you are missing the point of what an opinion blog is about.
The comment box at the bottom invites readers of the BP's blogs to respond. If and when someone does the author should rejoice. Think of your blog as a dialogue, a discussion you might have with friends. If you don't want to be challenged (in an intelligent way), only confirmed in your opinions, why not keep shtum or stick to writing a newspaper column not inviting the reader "to interact"; if lucky, you might even get one (max) published response in the "Letters to the Editor" section.
Roshan, at the danger of repeating myself: You should welcome feedback, not stonewall by getting all defensive; and since you do blog it is your responsibility to address the questions asked of you. Lastly, as much as I do love a good devil's advocate, don't be controversial for the sake of it.
U
Yes, Clifford - and there's the paradox. But I don't believe that the state should leave everything well alone. well, not 100% anyway. I'm a kind of a socialist with a sneaky admiration for capitalists!... Ursula, when I said I don't mind what readers say, I meant that, to me, a criticism is just as important as a compliment or even a lukewarm endorsement of what I write and/or my style. I welcome all comments. Honest.
Thanks, Sam. You can be second in command...!