Should individuals who cause an economic crisis be sent to jail?

adrock1976 · 17 Aug 2019

In replying to the following post:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-first-trenitalia.188497/page-16#post-4158862

When the global economic crisis happened back in 2008, instead of the government bailing out the bankers, should they have bailed out the people and sent the bankers who caused the crisis to jail?

Also, would the UK's finances be in a better position today had the people been bailed out rather than the banks and bankers been sent to jail?

After all, that is what the Icelandic government did, and they have recovered far better than what the UK has done.

RailUK Forums

eMeS · 17 Aug 2019

Probably, and would you include Gordon Brown in those imprisoned?

edwin_m · 17 Aug 2019

eMeS said:
Probably, and would you include Gordon Brown in those imprisoned?

Gordon Brown arguably did quite a bit to resolve the problems. George Osborne probably caused more hardship, and Boris Johnson will be a disaster if he stays in office long enough. Where do you draw the line?

61653 HTAFC · 18 Aug 2019

No.

They should be made to work in food banks, or perhaps in Poundland for free.

mikeg · 18 Aug 2019

One could argue this should be the case, however it should only be within the rule of law, so would have to be a thing going forward. We should not however go as far as the DPRK, which famously executed Park Nam-Gi for 'Damaging the Peoples' Economy' following a badly implemented currency reform.

Incidentally wasn't this the initial pretext for the arrest of Egon Krenz prior to his manslaughter charges?

JamesT · 18 Aug 2019

adrock1976 said:
In replying to the following post:

When the global economic crisis happened back in 2008, instead of the government bailing out the bankers, should they have bailed out the people and sent the bankers who caused the crisis to jail?

Also, would the UK's finances be in a better position today had the people been bailed out rather than the banks and bankers been sent to jail?

After all, that is what the Icelandic government did, and they have recovered far better than what the UK has done.

In principle to bail out the people but not the banks you can allow the bank to go to the wall and recompense savers out of the FSCS fund. Not sure that really helps people more than the methods the government did use and would lead to the collateral damage of the normal staff losing their jobs (I assume by ‘bankers’ you mean the top management).

The bailout allowed for a much smoother transition from the risky position the banks were in to the current state. It also doesn’t really have much bearing on the public finances, much of the bailout was in the form of guarantees so no money actually changed hands. The banks that were nationalised had to pay fees to the government and at least of the money was recouped when they were sold back into private hands.

Iceland did bail out its banks, it nationalised several of them. You may recall the dispute over whether Iceland would repay UK depositors, which I would argue is the opposite of bailing out the people.

The people who should be behind bars for causing this are mostly politicians who set up these conditions that encourage banks to look to riskier investments. If the US government hadn’t been pushing their mortgage companies to loan to people who couldn’t afford it then this bubble wouldn’t have built. Though there are also some people in finance guilty of fraud by repackaging the loans which were sold on.

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

adrock1976 said:
When the global economic crisis happened back in 2008, instead of the government bailing out the bankers, should they have bailed out the people and sent the bankers who caused the crisis to jail?

In theory, it's a noble idea, but who exactly caused the financial crisis? The individual banking advisors who pushed through dodgy mortgages? Their managers for setting high targets? The finance people for repackaging the high risk debt? The bank leadership for turning a blind eye to the developing risk because returns were high? The political class for neutering the regulators?

Or, perhaps, consumers for taking on debt they had no way to service?

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

Looking at the number of shops that are now closed in the city and town centre areas, people who openly admit to shopping on line seem to have a "Nelson's blind eye" when the growth figure statistics on a year-by-year basis are examined and say their purchasing online is solely for their benefit. The demise of town centres is the removal of eons-old settlement core from areas which has a most detrimental effect on these areas and seems to have no current answer to this problem.

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

najaB said:
In theory, it's a noble idea, but who exactly caused the financial crisis? The individual banking advisors who pushed through dodgy mortgages? Their managers for setting high targets? The finance people for repackaging the high risk debt? The bank leadership for turning a blind eye to the developing risk because returns were high? The political class for neutering the regulators?

Or, perhaps, consumers for taking on debt they had no way to service?

Glad you mention consumer responsibility in your final sentence, as they had the choice whether or not to accept such debt.

DerekC · 18 Aug 2019

najaB said:
In theory, it's a noble idea, but who exactly caused the financial crisis? The individual banking advisors who pushed through dodgy mortgages? Their managers for setting high targets? The finance people for repackaging the high risk debt? The bank leadership for turning a blind eye to the developing risk because returns were high? The political class for neutering the regulators?

Or, perhaps, consumers for taking on debt they had no way to service?

A friend of mine is (or rather was) a county court judge who had to sit at many, many cases where mortgage companies were applying for repossession of a house. In a lot of them the owner was unable to meet the mortgage repayments after an initial "low cost" period had expired. My friend has told me several times that he wished he was in the criminal court sentencing the people who had sold the mortgage in the first place. Financially naïve people were deliberately misled into taking out loans they couldn't afford because of the very large commissions paid. That's basically a confidence trick and although it's easy to criticise the person taken in by it, the blame lies with the trickster.

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

DerekC said:
Financially naïve people were deliberately misled into taking out loans they couldn't afford because of the very large commissions paid. That's basically a confidence trick and although it's easy to criticise the person taken in by it, the blame lies with the trickster.

I don't doubt that there was some level of coercion, but at the end of the day the phrase caveat emptor still is still as relevant as it was 2000 years ago.

Some people were tricked, sure, but many more were just greedy and wanted more than they could afford.

radamfi · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
Looking at the number of shops that are now closed in the city and town centre areas, people who openly admit to shopping on line seem to have a "Nelson's blind eye" when the growth figure statistics on a year-by-year basis are examined and say their purchasing online is solely for their benefit. The demise of town centres is the removal of eons-old settlement core from areas which has a most detrimental effect on these areas and seems to have no current answer to this problem.

Your ire would be better focused against town planners and the Thatcher government who allowed the huge growth in out of town shopping, which predates the boom in internet shopping. Other countries have restricted such development to a greater extent meaning less competition for town centres. There has obviously been a reduction in physical retail over the last 10 years or so, but retail grew massively in the decades prior to that. I wouldn't be surprised, therefore, if the amount of retail space in use today (town centre plus out of town) is still greater than that what existed in the 1980s.

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

radamfi said:
Your ire would be better focused against town planners who allowed the huge growth in out of town shopping, which predates the boom in internet shopping.

Indeed, I vaguely remember hearing of the death of the high street back in the mid to late 90s, well before Amazon, et al existed.

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

radamfi said:
Your ire would be better focused against town planners and the Thatcher government who allowed the huge growth in out of town shopping, which predates the boom in internet shopping.

That sounds a very lame excuse for those people who have flocked en masse to internet shopping who had taken the personal decision to conduct their retail affairs in such a manner. Town planners and the Thatcher government are not the ones who have actively participated in the actual spending. Town planners are those who now face the situation in town centres caused by internet shopping.

radamfi · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
That sounds a very lame excuse for those people who have flocked en masse to internet shopping who had taken the personal decision to conduct their retail affairs in such a manner. Town planners and the Thatcher government are not the ones who have actively participated in the actual spending. Town planners are those who now face the situation in town centres caused by internet shopping.

So you don't think out of town shopping has had any effect on town centres?

DerekC · 18 Aug 2019

najaB said:
I don't doubt that there was some level of coercion, but at the end of the day the phrase caveat emptor still is still as relevant as it was 2000 years ago.

Some people were tricked, sure, but many more were just greedy and wanted more than they could afford.

Many (I hesitate to say the majority because I don't have evidence) were people who couldn't afford to own their own home and were offered what they were told was a once in a lifetime opportunity to get aboard the owner-occupier escalator, rather than paying rent in an increasingly landlord-friendly world for the rest of their lives. If that's greed then most of us are guilty, I suspect.

Essan · 18 Aug 2019

Gordon Brown, George Osborne, Boris Johnson .....

None of them would have been in a position to do anything unless the electorate had voted for them as the best, most honorable, suitable, competent, reliable, capable persons to represent them in parliament

I humbly suggest the electorate are not fit for purpose.

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

radamfi said:
So you don't think out of town shopping has had any effect on town centres?

No, it is the current volume of retail business that is conducted via the internet that in 2019 is the chief offender.

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

DerekC said:
If that's greed then most of us are guilty, I suspect.

Yes, most of us are (and this is coming from someone who had serious financial problems which basically came down to spending more than I earned).

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
No, it is the current volume of retail business that is conducted via the internet that in 2019 is the chief offender.

Internet shopping is the final nail in the coffin, but I don't see many people "popping to the internet" to get a cup of coffee, a haircut or meet up for lunch. All of which, increasingly are done away from town centres.

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

najaB said:
Internet shopping is the final nail in the coffin, but I don't see many people "popping to the internet" to get a cup of coffee, a haircut or meet up for lunch. All of which, increasingly are done away from town centres.

Perhaps you live in a different type of town location than I do, where rather nice cafes and restaurants and both male and female hairdressing salons are easily to be found.

najaB · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
Perhaps you live in a different type of town location than I do, where rather nice cafes and restaurants and both male and female hairdressing salons are easily to be found.

I do. There is a world outside East Cheshire.

Adsy125 · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
No, it is the current volume of retail business that is conducted via the internet that in 2019 is the chief offender.

How dare people use a cheaper and more modern form of retail, they should just pay more to get less on their high street. Struggling families, should just skip meals instead

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

najaB said:
I do. There is a world outside East Cheshire.

Thankfully, there are even more select parts in the "Golden Triangle" of our part of Cheshire East than in other parts of the said county.

DerekC · 18 Aug 2019

Essan said:
Gordon Brown, George Osborne, Boris Johnson .....

None of them would have been in a position to do anything unless the electorate had voted for them as the best, most honorable, suitable, competent, reliable, capable persons to represent them in parliament

I humbly suggest the electorate are not fit for purpose.

Hmm - that's kind of saying that democracy is not fit for purpose. The problem is, of course, that we don't get to interview potential PMs (and Chancellors) and pick the best candidate. In the end you just have to go back to Churchill's view in 1947 - "it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time". You are really stuck with either democracy or autocracy. Or maybe we are heading for the rule of the machine?

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

Adsy125 said:
How dare people use a cheaper and more modern form of retail, they should just pay more to get less on their high street. Struggling families, should just skip meals instead

So this is your excuse for internet shopping destroying whole numbers of retail jobs in the cities and towns. How do those former retail staff who are made redundant to facilitate your way of thinking actually cope with life then?

radamfi · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
No, it is the current volume of retail business that is conducted via the internet that in 2019 is the chief offender.

So nobody goes to Handforth Dean?

Xenophon PCDGS · 18 Aug 2019

radamfi said:
So nobody goes to Handforth Dean?

We never do venture there, but I suppose there is a large enough population resident in Handforth who will go there. We always source rather good quality food both from our two neighbouring farms who both have farm shops and the village shops who cater for a wide variety of culinary tastes.

I do not know how well you know Wilmslow, the largest town nearest to where we live, but I can well recommend Hoopers department store in particular and the Waitrose store seems to always have plenty of customers.

DarloRich · 18 Aug 2019

if they have committed and are then convicted of a criminal offence then yes. Being a rich, arrogant, twonk isn't a crime.

Essan · 18 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
No, it is the current volume of retail business that is conducted via the internet that in 2019 is the chief offender.

Out of town shopping also has a very big impact. It's a combination of factors

As does the fact that many shoppers expect to park next to the shop. I have problems with people complaining that they had to park less 50 yards away because there wasn't a space literally in front of my door.

Should individuals who cause an economic crisis be sent to jail?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member