It is a very particular situation which could not only be reflected in the banking system, a few years ago I received or we (employees) got a bonus for over-productivity that one of the branches had had in another country, if I remember correctly it was the main branch located in United States.
I worked for this transnational in my country and this never happened again during the time I was there it, but there was the benefit that when any company in the consortium obtained an over in productivity, these profits were shared among all the employees globally, regardless of whether your branch was part of this achievement.
So, these policies exist but they are not applied correctly. Well, maybe they are applied but they are distributed among a few.
Topic: Not all banks are going bust. - page 3. (Read 328 times)
If the government restricts banks from giving loans to some institutions it might hurt the economy because it is not all businesses that fail to service their loans. The problem with most banks is that they go against government regulations and engage in countless financial malpractices. Recently a bank manager gave out an uncollateralized loan to his brother-in-law making which made the bank collapse. Because most of these top bankers are politically connected they are not persecuted. In my country most of these big companies and wealthy people that made banks collapse due to toxic loans are not openly mentioned. I think this secrecy portrays the fact that there is a collaboration between the government and these powerful debtors.
This is the first time I am learning about a bank like Nationwide that operates as if its customers are shareholders. It is also interesting to know that they abide fully by the banking laws. If all banks operate this way, there will be fewer bank failures.
This is the first time I am learning about a bank like Nationwide that operates as if its customers are shareholders. It is also interesting to know that they abide fully by the banking laws. If all banks operate this way, there will be fewer bank failures.
I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.
I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.
It's not about being able to work as a complete commercial bank, it's about your vision and mission, these two things could help in realizing so much wealth even than some commercial banks. It's also good to point out that in some economic uncertainties of a country, banking and banking-related sectors are not always poor, especially this time when the interest rate is dangerously high in many countries.I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.
Also, the bank issue in the US has caused a lot of misconception globally, it's not like that. Any country could have an issue in their sector, while other countries are booming in that sector. Taking my country as an example, banks are recording huger annual gains compared to the time without inflation issues. So, we should not use the US banking woes to judge globally, this is as the economy of the UK is even improving.
By the way, congratulations to you on the £100.
I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.
I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.
I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.
Jump to: