Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Its their own money and they can do what they want. They are a profitable business without taxpayer help and its none of our business what they do - unless you are a shareholder - if you are just an account holder I'm not sure they will not be particularly worried if you close your account but thats your choice.

Plus the gov't will receive 50% of ?1,400,000,000 in tax from Barclays + 50% of ?1,40,000,000 in tax from individuals + 28% corporation tax on Barclay's profits of ?6,000,000,000 so Barclay's success and the success of the individual's within Barclays will enrich gov't coffers to the tune of just over ?3,000,000,000 - surely something to applaud.


Whether this gov't or any gov't will spend it wisely is another matter - but it's a sum of tax that will offset that raised from more ordinary individuals on less stratospheric salaries.

I think they have done very well in difficult times, but it must be said the majority of the profits have come from Barclay's Capital on Wall Street which bought up, on the cheap, the rump of Lehman's.


Good luck to them they deserve all their bonus as they took a huge risk and its paid off.

Something like that and equity but look at their performance compared to the banks that took the government money = RBS and Lloyds/HBOS. If I was a Lloyds shareholder I'd be spitting Gordon persuading the board to take the toxic mess that was HBOS. Those shorters were right after all.
This bonus thing really bugs me. The articles in the papers go on an on about the same thing. Ultimately if no bonuses were paid and the C-Suite were paid ?50k like everyone would seems to want our banks would implode on a much grander scale than has already happened.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
    • I perceive the problem.simply as spending too much without first shoring up the economy.  If the government had reduced borrowing,  and as much as most hate the idea, reduced government deiartment spending (so called austerity) and not bowed to union pressures for pay rises, then encouraged businesses to grow, extra cash would have entered the coffers and at a later stage when the economy was in a stronger position rises in NI or taxes would have a lesser impact, but instead Reeves turned that on its head by increasing ni which has killed growth, increased prices and shimmied the economy.  What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???     
    • That petition is bananas.   If you want a youth centre there pay the landlord the same rent a Londis would and build it yourself or shut the f**k up to be honest. Wasting our MPs time with this trivial nonsense is appalling. If your kids are still out at 1am on a school night you've got bigger problems than vapes and booze and hot sausage rolls. 
    • There used to be a better baker than Gail's on the same site immediately before Gail's pulled their financial muscle.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...