Skip to main content

Blame the shepherd, not the wolf

I can't believe the BBC are scapegoating the bankers. Looks like the UK Government is trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes by making it seem like the fault of the greedy bankers and their excessive profiteering and bonus-awards, taking advantage of the public outrage at the bankers being awarded such large bonuses using tax-payer bail-out money.

Okay, so the bankers are not going to be popular folk heroes, but the Government shouldn't be allowed to make it look like it's not actually the Government's fault. It is the Government's fault.

Face it, bankers are employed by corporations to make as much profit as possible in the next reporting period (a year, a quarter, whatever). They are not incentivised to look after the long term interests of the bank that employs them, or the nation as a whole. So of course they behaved in the way that they did. Unless they did something illegal then there is nothing for them to apologise for!

It's like blaming the wolf for eating the sheep that have been left out there in the field. It's in their nature; you can't blame them for that. The finger of blame should be pointed, in this analogy, to the shepherd, whose responsibility it was to look after the sheep.

And so it is the financial regulators (i.e. the Treasury, as the FSA doesn't actually have the teeth) that we must blame for the financial problems the UK is currently undergoing. And the financial regulators are appointed by the Government.

We cannot even blame the bank bosses for going to the Treasury asking for a bail-out. They presented a simple choice to the Treasury, telling them that their companies would collapse if they didn't get an injection of money, and would the Treasury like to take the opportunity to do so in the interests of the UK economy? Seems fair enough. And again the Treasury, and ultimately the Government, failed the UK population by just handing over a huge wad of cash without placing on it certain conditions, or even going as far as nationalising them.

So, we shouldn't accept the bankers as scapegoats, thereby absolving any culpability of the Government or the BBC's beloved over-borrowed consumer who was stupid enough to buy or remortgage an overpriced house, or take out any other forms of credit that they simply cannot afford to pay back.

Don't be fooled.


Popular posts from this blog

Selecting Full on this computer may result in degraded video playback

When I attempt to import Full 1920x1080 video into iMovie '08 on my MacBook, it tells me "Selecting Full on this computer may result in degraded video playback". It doesn't tell me, however, what I can do about it. Is it the CPU? The graphics card? RAM? The slower Firewire 400? Is there a list of Mac models that can support full 1080 resolution? Do I need to switch to Final Cut? There is a discussion on the Apple Support forums, but no answer yet...

Berkhamsted Multi-storey Car Park

Petition The premise seems to be that Berko needs more parking spaces, and that the traffic infrastructure is able to accommodate extra traffic. However, according to the council's own report , our largest car park only gets 73% full, and the Lower Kings Road already gets 93% congested at the weekday evening peak - so the traffic congestion problem is already worse than the car park utilisation, and they predict the traffic queues on Lower Kings Road will increase by about 30%. If you want to know the detail... Let's start with that first part: that Berko needs more parking spaces. Looking at the council's own Transport Assessment that they have submitted to support this planning application, it says that the railway car park gets only 73% full at its busiest hour in the week. So there are already a significant number of free spaces in Berko just a few minutes walk from the centre. And as for the Lower Kings Road car park, the report tells us this can get up to 97%