www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18612279
Barclays bank will pay penalties of £290m ($450m) for trying to rig the key interest rates at which banks lend money to each other.
The penalty from UK and US authorities followed "serious and widespread" misconduct, the Financial Services Authority said.
|
|
They are find for fiddling surprise surprise.I wonder how this affected the man in the street.Has anybody any answers?
|
|
Hints at criminal investigation now. Confirms what we knew already bunch of thieving low life scroats, no better than a Tesco shop-lifter. Heads will roll hopefully.
|
Peston was on the Beeb earlier suggesting Barclays is simply the first in a line of banks.
|
|
prison time not fines is in order, fines get passed on to the customer
|
Francis Maude conservative minister was asked about the banking scandal.His answer was he didn't know enough about it.He was employed in the banking sector as a Managing Director.
He gave answers on lots of subjects but this one he didn't know.Do these politicians think we all came up in the last buckett?
|
>> Francis Maude conservative minister was asked about the banking scandal.His answer was he didn't know
>> enough about it.He was employed in the banking sector as a Managing Director.
>>
>> He gave answers on lots of subjects but this one he didn't know.Do these politicians
>> think we all came up in the last buckett?
It's so complicated. It's somewhat unclear how high in the management this was known about. I have sympathy with anybody is required to try to get to grips with what actually happened.
Doesn't alter the fact that some people should go to gaol pour encourager les autres in the usual British way...
|
|
I'll be quite surprised to see Bob Diamond remain in his job as revelations come out.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Thu 28 Jun 12 at 11:23
|
|
Bob Diamond is a very resilient and very slippery character. I wouldn't wager against him surviving. He is possibly the most bullish of all banking heads - Globally.
|
|
Whoever has to resign you can gurantee one thing - they'll leave with a huge payout or end up in the House of Lords. The only losers are the likes of us who have to use banks.
|
If you were in charge of a car manufacturer which failed safety checks and lied about it, you would be forced to resign.
If you were in charge of a food manufacturer which lied about the level of additives, you would be prosecuted.
If you were a Financial Adviser and lied to your customers and put them into dodgy investments you would lose your reputation and client base. And probably go to jail
But if you are a Banker and sell useless PPI insurance - basically fraud - and rig Libor figures so you make more money and your customers pay a lot more- you keep your job and say you have done nothing wrong.
Turning a blind eye to widescale financial abuse of your customers - as the banks have done - and the Directors condoned - is basically Fraud.
.
In any normal society fraudsters go to jail...
Looks like banking is a Ponzi scheme with the customers holding the baby when the music stops.
|
The BBC's Peston now saying: "An influential shareholder tells me investors may demand the resignation of Marcus Agius as chairman of Barclays.”
That's more like it, say what you like about Diamond, but he is brilliant - and the best - at what he does.
Barcelona might sack the manager, but they would never sack Lionel Messi.
|
>> That's more like it, say what you like about Diamond, but he is brilliant - and the best - at what he does.
That's the same pedestal Fred the Shred inhabited before the demise of RBS.
|
...That's the same pedestal Fred the Shred inhabited before the demise of RBS...
The difference being Fred bankrupted RBS at the same time as Diamond managed to keep Barclays afloat in the same choppy waters.
Barclays has never had a penny in government bailouts, although they did take some private Arab money.
|
>> Barclays has never had a penny in government bailouts, although they did take some private
>> Arab money.
A shame they didn't issue some shares to the Government. Then we'd be sitting on a big fat profit - instead of the Arabs.
|
...A shame they didn't issue some shares to the Government...
At the time of the Arab transaction, the government might not have been too keen to buy Barclays shares, given it had all the other failing banks to deal with.
|
Iam sick and tired hearing about these scumbags.They are laughing at us and getting away with blue murder.Has any politician got the guts to take them on for real,instead of all the hollow words we hear from them.Leave these banks take every penny out if you have any.
Rant over.>;)
|
>> ...That's the same pedestal Fred the Shred inhabited before the demise of RBS...
>>
>> The difference being Fred bankrupted RBS at the same time as Diamond managed to keep
>> Barclays afloat in the same choppy waters.
>>
>> Barclays has never had a penny in government bailouts, although they did take some private
>> Arab money.
>>
>>
>>
That's just spin for the ignorant.
Barclays took $ billions from both UK and US Governments in cheap loans (effectively free) and in exchange for non performing assets. If it had not (along with most other major banks including Goldman Sucks) it would have had such severe liquidity problems it would have gone pop - along with the rest of the banking system.
Surprisingly Barclays never mention it.
|
|
Apparently the FSA knew about Barclays fixing Libor as Barclays told them.. but just did nothing....
|
|
The old "light touch" where big money is involved......
|
>> Apparently the FSA knew about Barclays fixing Libor as Barclays told them.. but just did
>> nothing....
>>
Apparently the Queen knew about it too, but just did nothing.
Zero's dog Fido know about it too, really, but did nothing except maybe cock a leg at conspiracy theorists.
|
|
Zeros dog is a bitch, so does not cock a leg, and is not called Fido but Fifi. Thats destroyed that conspiracy
|
>> Zeros dog is a bitch, so does not cock a leg, and is not called
>> Fido but Fifi. Thats destroyed that conspiracy
>>
Spoilsport. Should have let them fall for it. ;-)
|
...Barclays took $ billions from both UK and US Governments in cheap loans (effectively free) and in exchange for non performing assets...
You couldn't have given Diamond a better write-up - are you his press officer?
|
>> ...That's the same pedestal Fred the Shred inhabited before the demise of RBS...
>>
>> The difference being Fred bankrupted RBS at the same time as Diamond managed to keep
>> Barclays afloat in the same choppy waters.
>>
>> Barclays has never had a penny in government bailouts, although they did take some private
>> Arab money.
>>
IIRC they were at the door of number 10 doing a deal, and then the Arab money came in at the 11th hour so they took it.
Lets also not forget that this took place in Barclays capital............the business that was headed up by bobby dazler
|
>> IIRC they were at the door of number 10 doing a deal, and then the
>> Arab money came in at the 11th hour so they took it.
Different sort of money. Without the added liquidity in the banking system *every* bank would have gone under. Ergo all banks have relied on Government money.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Fri 29 Jun 12 at 15:28
|
Apparently, manipulating LIBOR is legal as long as you do it within your own Bank. As soon as you collude with other Banks, it becomes a cartel - and that could be open to criminal charges.
>> end up in the House of Lords. >>
Diamond geezer is from across the pond - does that not disqualify him from the Lords?
www.rtbot.net/Bob_Diamond_(banker)
"Bob Diamond was born in Concord, Massachusetts, on July 27, 1951.. One of nine children, Diamond grew up in an American family of Irish-Catholic values. His parents - Anne and Robert Edward Senior, were both teachers and second-generation Scottish and Irish immigrants."
>> banking is a Ponzi scheme with the customers holding the baby when the music stops. >>
The world's economics is run as a Ponzi pyramid scheme, with the rich nations at the top of the pyramid. The UK's private sector is run on the basic principle of maximising earning/saving money for the benefit the owners/employees, and they will get their money even if it means effectively robbing the poorest of the world. The public sector is run on the basic principle of spending/borrowing to justify the existence of the public sector. To con the private sector and the voting public in to believing that the spending is good for the country, the public sector will borrow money that they don't have, so that they can continue to "do all the wonderful things that the public sector does for the people of the country and for good measure also give aid to the poor of the world". Both sectors rely on the poor of the world ultimately paying for it all as the cost must always trickle down to the base of the Ponzi pyramid.
|
|
Diamond grew up in an American family of Irish-Catholic values and from Concord Mass. Hardly the type of person who would want anything to do with being a "Lord"
|
>> Diamond grew up in an American family of Irish-Catholic values and from Concord Mass. Hardly
>> the type of person who would want anything to do with being a "Lord"
>>
I've lost count of the number of times I have written back to the Queen refusing her gracious offer of a knighthood, an MBE, an OBE, a Lordship etc. After all one can hardly want to be a member of the same club as Geoffrey Archer, a convicted criminal...or David Beckham, a common footballer.
|
|
Yeah - no hypocrisy endemic to Irish Catholicism, is there?
|
|
Haha indeed not ! Mind you someone born in the epicentre of the American War of Independence whose ancestors had every reason to hate the British Monarchy was too tempting a target !
|
Hester earlier after refusing a bonus for this year:
"[Bankers] thought they were masters of the universe, when they should have been servants of the customer."
Would love to believe this could filter through but funnily enough banks are best at fleecing their current customers rather than winning new ones by competetive rates/levels of service.
|
|
Dare say that like other all other businesses, results are examined very, very carefully. Profit centres would be monitored and judged on their year on year performances. Woe betide those trader teams, for example, who play by the rules and fall back in the rankings. They'd be examined even closer....Don't think service to the punter comes into it unless they lose wodges. Thinking aloud, I don't know what proportion of profit is derived from running a "bank" as distinct from the glorified betting shop that the "investment" side seems to be. I'll ask a couple of chaps I know when next in the great wen:)
|
|
£290 million is 10 day's profits, apparently. That's really going to hurt - not!
|
>> £290 million is 10 day's profits, apparently. That's really going to hurt - not!
>>
The fine only helps reduce costs at Banks (including Barclays), in that the levy they pay to meet the FSA running costs gets reduced. From the Guardian article linked in my other earlier post :
Where does that money from the £290m in fines go?
If you are a customer of Barclays, don't expect a cheque. The money from the fine is paid to the Financial Services Authority, which contrary to most people's understanding, is financed not by the taxpayer but by a levy on banks and financial firms. Oddly enough, these firms are likely now to pay a lower levy next year because of the Barclays fine – and that includes the levy on Barclays itself.
Last edited by: John H on Sat 30 Jun 12 at 13:10
|
Those in charge and that knew should be thrown in prison for this.
There was obviously something weird with interest rates. BOE is rock bottom and yet even after bail out after bail out LIBOR didn't fall.
I wonder if all of us having to pay more on our mortgages due to these thieving scum are going to be refunded the difference? My mortgage was essentially a tracker until about 2008 when all of a sudden RBS decided it wasn't really and it was going to respond to BOE, LIBOR and 'other factors'. Now I know the banks have been fiddling with LIBOR then I think they should be made to pay back all the extra customers have paid. BOE is the only rate that can't be manipulated so I personally think that is the only factor banks should reference against for borrowing rates.
|
|
Why did the Bank of England didn't get any wind of this?It's strange they where manipulating the rates whilst the Bank of England rate stayed the same.
|
>> Why did the Bank of England didn't get any wind of this?It's strange they where
>> manipulating the rates whilst the Bank of England rate stayed the same.
>>
Barclays told the FSA: who said "carry on".
Allegedly.
If so, it's typical of the FSA at the time: we used to call it the F.... Stupid Agency as it was...
|
...BOE is the only rate that can't be manipulated so I personally think that is the only factor banks should reference against for borrowing rates...
If the bank borrows the money it lends you at LIBOR rates, then common sense suggests the LIBOR rate must be taken into account.
I think at the bottom of your query is banks lending money they don't have.
A traditionally-run building society, of which there may only be one or two left, only lends that money which has been deposited by savers.
|
|
Should we go back to building society's or old fashion banking?My question is how has this affected people with morgages and small bussiness.
|
...My question is how has this affected people with morgages and small bussiness...
I approached building societies when I was after my first mortgage in the early 80s.
One told me something like: "We are not doing a lot of mortgage lending at the moment, Mr Iffy, because fewer deposits have been made.
"We suggest you try us again in a few months."
|
>> Should we go back to building society's ............. ?
Yes.
|
>> A traditionally-run building society, of which there may only be one or two left, only
>> lends that money which has been deposited by savers.
As do traditionally run banks. Shame that tradition died out.
|
There are still over 50 building societies
www.bsa.org.uk/aboutus/buildsocmember.htm
|
Instead the invidious "fractional reserve" banking was introduced where banks lent more money than they had as deposits or "reserves" was implemented.
Funny money, indeed!
|
>> Instead the invidious "fractional reserve" banking was introduced where banks lent more money than they
>> had as deposits or "reserves" was implemented.
>> Funny money, indeed!
>>
I'm not sure you really understand the term "fractional reserve".
Fractional reserve banking has been practised for centuries and banks throughout the world operate on this basis as do all building societies.
What it means is that banks only retain a fraction of the money they receive as deposits, lending out the balance to make a profit. Problems only arise should all the depositors want their money back at once which causes a run on the bank. That is why the reserve amount is strictly regulated.
The modern world would not exist without fractional reserve banking.
|
>> Those in charge and that knew should be thrown in prison for this.
>>
>> There was obviously something weird with interest rates. BOE is rock bottom and yet even
>> after bail out after bail out LIBOR didn't fall.
>>
LIBOR was manipulated both up and down.
>> I wonder if all of us having to pay more on our mortgages due to
>> these thieving scum are going to be refunded the difference? My mortgage was essentially a
>> tracker until about 2008 when all of a sudden RBS decided it wasn't really and
>> it was going to respond to BOE, LIBOR and 'other factors'. Now I know the
>> banks have been fiddling with LIBOR then I think they should be made to pay
>> back all the extra customers have paid.
>>
You may have gained. Are you willing to pay back your ill-gotten gains in that case? :
www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/28/barclays-libor-scandal-question-answer
"So have I been overcharged interest on my mortgage?
Maybe – and maybe not. Barclays traders were pushing the Libor rate up at one stage (to enhance their profits), which could have pushed mortgage rates higher than they should have been. But the indications are that during the financial crisis, Libor was manipulated downwards. So all those landlords with Libor-linked buy-to-let loans enjoyed interest rates lower than they might otherwise have had to pay. "There won't be much business for the ambulance-chasing lawyers in this," said Boulger.
If Libor was pushed downwards, does that mean rates for savers were also artificially depressed?
Most savings rates set by the building societies and banks have little connection with Libor, so small savers are unaffected. But if you are a big institution – such as the treasurer of a local authority or large charity – you tend to deposit your balances into short-term accounts where the interest paid is linked in some way or another to Libor. These deposits would have received a lower rate of interest than they would otherwise have earned. So they are out of pocket – and may now want the banks to repay them."
|
|
They aren't customers' ill gotten gains as they weren't the ones manipulating the rates.
|
>> They aren't customers' ill gotten gains as they weren't the ones manipulating the rates.
>>
Human nature, eh! How the tune changes when there is the prospect of paying something back, rather than gaining compensation. ;-)
|
|
Doesn't affect me as I don't have anything LIBOR related. I don't like your accusation or tone frankly.
|
|
I see the Beeb is reporting the chairman (Agius?) will be on his way out tomorrow.
|
He is the first sacrificial lamb to be dangled as a sop, he was due to be replaced anyway.
Bob Diamond will be clinging on by his claws. You won't prise him out.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 1 Jul 12 at 23:02
|
And the FSA might might now want a new chair and chief exec replaced at the same time. I would!
Some discussion about the BoE knowing something too?
|
Until a fuller picture emerges we won't known what the effects of Barclays' attempts to manipulate LIBOR are, if anything.
For reporting sterling LIBORs, the BBA gets daily submissions from 16 banks (currently, the panel is reviewed annually) of a rate that they can borrow at on the interbank market, for various maturities. It discards the lowest and highest quartiles and averages the others. So it's quite difficult for any one bank to influence the published rate by much at all - likely not enough to have a material effect on an individual's mortgage payment. If it turns out that several other banks were not only trying to influence the rate dishonestly but acting together more or less, then that could be a different matter.
Even if and when more information comes out about the other banks, it might well be impossible to say what LIBOR should have been, had they not done it, so nobody will be able to work out the "losses" to counterparties.
What the banks will be disciplined for will be *trying* to rig the rates, the phrase actually used by Zero in the OP, and if they have been acting together they'll presumably be double or treble-bashed.
|
|
Banks double or treble bashed? I doubt it, these people act above the law and they will get away with any wrongdoing.Remember when Greenspan collapsed the market about thirteen years ago.The excuse was that inflation could rise.I might be naive but these people laugh at us.
|
>> Banks double or treble bashed? I doubt it, these people act above the law and
>> they will get away with any wrongdoing.Remember when Greenspan collapsed the market about thirteen years
>> ago.The excuse was that inflation could rise.I might be naive but these people laugh at
>> us.
>>
An estimate of the US lawsuits Barclays face suggest $29B is the worst case cost.. That's all Bob Diamonds's bonuses and salary - ever..
I suggest if Barclays do end up losing and paying out $billions they take back every bonus paid since 2007 when the fixing started - or was it 2006?
That might teach a few people some lessons - but of course they will not.
Last edited by: madf on Mon 2 Jul 12 at 17:53
|
>> I suggest if Barclays do end up losing and paying out $billions they take back
>> every bonus paid since 2007 when the fixing started - or was it 2006?
I think I agree. If you preside over a company where dubious business practice is this widespread then you should take responsibility. Where you have benefited financially from such dubious practice then clearly you have been obtaining money under false pretences and the bank should be looking to send you to prison.
Problem is, of course, if all these bankers leave then we're REALLY in a mess.
|
|
The bankers, the legislators, the regulators, the senior police and the judiciary all belong to the same clubs, and with (probably) the exception of the police, went to the same schools. Closed shop, no fresh blood, limited talent. Begone! There would be a net gain if the usual crew of inbreds were thrown off the ship. As with the forces. However, this is all a 9 days wonder, then it will be business as usual. Except for one thing: the Americans were blackballed:) The only hope is if the FBI extradite there will be incarceration.
Last edited by: NIL on Mon 2 Jul 12 at 20:21
|
>> The bankers, the legislators, the regulators, the senior police and the judiciary all belong to
>> the same clubs, and with (probably) the exception of the police, went to the same
>> schools.
>> There would be a net gain
>> if the usual crew of inbreds were thrown off the ship.
What rubbish. Offensive rubbish too. It might have been true fifty - or maybe thirty - years ago. Not today.
Adair Turner (chairman FSA): Hutchesons' Grammar School in Glasgow, Glenalmond College and Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge
James Crosby (recently ex-vice chairman FSA) Lancaster Royal Grammar School, Brasenose College, Oxford
Hector Sants (Chief executive FSA) Clifton College and Corpus Christi College, Oxford
Bob Diamond (ex chief executive Barclays) Concord-Carlisle High School Colby College, Maine.
John Varley (Diamond's predecessor) Downside School, Oriel College, Oxford
Marcus Agius (chairman Barclays) St George's College, Weybridge, Trinity Hall, Cambridge
Eric Daniels (ex chief exec Lloyds) Cornell University
Win Bischoff (Chairman Lloyds) early education in Cologne and Düsseldorf, Johannesburg University
Horta Osario (chief exec Lloyds) Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisbon
Lord Chancellor (secretary of state for justice) Kenneth Clarke Nottingham High School, Gonville and Caius College
Lord Chief Justice (Lord Judge, head of judiciary) The Oratory School in Woodcote in Oxfordshire, Magdalene College, Cambridge
So, the English-educated ones all ended up at Oxford or Cambridge, but do you really want somebody with 1 C at O-level running the country?
|
>> >> do you really
>> want somebody with 1 C at O-level running the country?
>>
I think that's overstating Her Majesty's educational qualifications a little. :)
|
Even the Tories see public school domination as a problem. tinyurl.com/7o6mdq4
|
>> Even the Tories see public school domination as a problem. tinyurl.com/7o6mdq4
>>
>>
Nort - That is one way of spinning it.
There are two elephants in the room whenever state vs private education is debated -
1. working class White, Black, Bangladeshi, and Pakistani parents do not encourage/foster/value educational attainment in their children (whereas the same economic group in Indian and Chinese communities does the opposite)
2. the failure of socialist leaning teachers in state sector education to motivate and encourage their brightest children to aspire to enter the top Universities. Indeed, some actively encourage pupils NOT to apply Oxbridge.
I know there are exception among working class parents who do want the best education for their children, to the extent that they do the utmost they can in raising and saving money to send their children to private schools (if a bursary available to bright children from poor families is insufficient to pay the fees in full).
And then you have reverse snobbery
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-16604050
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work
|
|
I thought the second reference was interesting and encouraging. The other elephant, not unrelated to the "dominance" aspect, is the gender divide in high office. As Mrs T would have said (approx.) it's solutions that are needed. The problem is easy to illustrate.....
|
>> The other elephant, not unrelated to the "dominance" aspect, is the gender divide in high office.
Whilst women will continue to insist on being the member of the partnership who bears the children this will be difficult to change.
|
>> Whilst women will continue to insist on being the member of the partnership who bears
>> the children this will be difficult to change.
So very selfish of them.
|
>> There are two elephants in the room whenever state vs private education is debated -
>>
>> 1. working class White, Black, Bangladeshi, and Pakistani parents do not encourage/foster/value educational attainment in
>> their children (whereas the same economic group in Indian and Chinese communities does the opposite)
>> 2. the failure of socialist leaning teachers in state sector education to motivate and encourage
>> their brightest children to aspire to enter the top Universities. Indeed, some actively encourage pupils
>> NOT to apply Oxbridge.
>>
John H,
1. While not wholly without support is a very broad brush. I also suspect calss is mich more in p;ay than ethnicity.
2. Is in my experience almost unknown outside Daily Mail la la land. It's certainly in no way typical or likely to ahve a signicant drag on numbers applying. My two and all their contemporaries are educated at state schools. All have been encouraged to apply to top Unis with particular emphasis on Russell Group. One of daughter's friends has an offfer to go to Cambs this year. Another rejected an offer from Oxford in favour of Southampton. The latter has a brain the size of a planet but is utterly scatty.
If however one were to posit that the presence of large numbers of public school pupils of the Cameron/Osborne etc social millieu deters middle class kids I'd agree!!
|
>>If however one were to posit that the presence of large numbers of public school pupils of
>>the Cameron/Osborne etc social millieu deters middle class kids I'd agree!!
Even for you, Brompton, that's an extreme statement. There are more state-educated pupils than private at Oxbridge. Public-school educated children are therefore a yet-smaller minority. These days, the presence of large numbers of state-educated pupils, together with the perceived/published anti-private school bias of Oxbridge makes many such school children favour Durham/St Andrews.
>>Another rejected an offer from Oxford in favour of Southampton.
Complete failing of something, somewhere. Quite possibly school support for Oxbridge.
John H>>Indeed, some actively encourage pupils NOT to apply Oxbridge.
Brompton>> Is in my experience almost unknown outside Daily Mail la la land.
Not so, Brompton. But it won't stop you making it up, I'm sure. I am aware of pupils at a top London state comp being dissuaded from Oxbridge by teachers.
More elephants:
1. Bright working-class children on private school scholarships are discriminated against by Oxbridge as they're not from the state sector.
2. Bright children of wealthier working class families who have saved to send their children to private schools are similarly discriminated against.
Blanket favouring of state-educated children is not the way to social mobility.
>>the Cameron/Osborne etc social millieu deters middle class kids I'd agree!!
Another thought. Any school child with any sense, realising that these are the people with power in the world, would want to become friends with them. Surely?
|
Mapmaker
I'm not making anything up. Why on earth would you suggest that?
My response was to the whole of John H's comment about socialist leaning teachers dissuading 6th formers from applying to top Unis. I didn't say it never happens but I don't believe, based on my own locality and experiences of family/friends that it's of anything like the statistical significance of an elephant in the room. If it was going to happen it would of course be in London!!
The daughter's friend had all possible encouragement. She's a modern languages 'whizz' and had an unconditional offer from soton. She attended an interview at Oxford and thought 'this is not for me'.
She may regret in later like. Who knows??
|
>> had an unconditional offer from soton. She attended an interview at Oxford and thought 'this is not for me'.
Not fair to second guess somebody else's choice, but I wonder how much guidance she had around this.
I remember my daughter's interview at Cambridge. Or rather I don't, because there was no provision for parents at all and I sat in the car. She went in, sat in a waiting room for a while, had an interview, came out and we went home. I don't think she got so much as a cup of tea. I also took her to Southampton. In contrast that was basically buttering up of parents and candidate, all very warm and friendly, a full day of looking around and being told how wonderful it was.
Fortunately she wasn't fazed by the Cambridge experience because her then boyfriend's mother was a tutor at Oxford and had talked her through what to expect. In particular the way they run interviews, which always includes asking questions that the candidate won't know the answers to - unprepared sixth formers who have only ever been spoon fed knowledge and told they are really clever can be very intimidated by this if they aren't guided.
My daughter's school was supportive but I doubt if she would have had quite the same understanding of what was coming had it depended solely on them.
|
Bromptonaut,
you should open your mind to accepting facts that don't quite fit in with a socialist agenda. The links below are from a non-Daily-Mail paper; in fact, they are from the Guardian - I trust that is Left-wing enough for you to accept the reports.
fact 1: Indian and Chinese children do well at school, regardless of their social status -
just one of many reports here
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/mar/29/homework-linked-better-school-results
".... The study controlled for social class ....
Children who did well from disadvantaged backgrounds were backed by parents who valued learning and encouraged extra-curricular activities. "Parents' own resilience in the face of hardship provided a role model for their children's efforts," the research says. .... "
fact 2: Teachers do not encourage Oxbridge applications:
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/apr/27/state-school-students-oxbridge
".... Just 44% of secondary school teachers say they encourage gifted students to consider Oxford or Cambridge ...
..
The survey also reveals that many state school teachers underestimate the proportion of pupils from state schools that study at Oxford or Cambridge.
..
"It is deeply concerning that the majority of state school teachers are not encouraging their brightest children to apply to Oxford and Cambridge.
"It is also worrying that almost all state school teachers, even the most senior school leaders, think that Oxbridge is dominated by public schools."
He added: "The sad consequence of these findings is that Oxford and Cambridge are missing out on talented students in state schools, who are already under-represented at these institutions based on their academic achievements. We need to do much more to dispel the myths in schools about Oxbridge and other leading universities." .... "
>> If however one were to posit that the presence of large numbers of public school pupils of the Cameron/Osborne etc social millieu deters middle class kids I'd agree!! >>
Your "us and them" attitude sums up pretty well why the "social mobility" ideal is doomed. It is also coincidentally the reason why Unions are so destructive in their dealings with employers - whether state or private sector.
Last edited by: John H on Wed 4 Jul 12 at 09:06
|
I should imagine that Brompton's daughter's friend was given some discouragement (quite possibly indirectly) by Brompton himself.
Another victory for class warfare. Stuff the elitist universities by denying them a bright student. Instead let them go to Southampton (errr, where? AFAIK you go there if you're a bit posh and not that bright and like sailing. But not if you want an education that people have heard of.)
Hurrah!
Here's another excellent Guardian article which points out that the fourth-most successful school in Britain, when it comes to Oxbridge successes, is a state school.
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jul/08/university-admissions-study-oxbridge-divide
This is teachers failing their pupils in the interests of class warfare:
Of a comprehensive and a private school in Cornwall, with near identical results, the former sent 17% to selective universities and the latter 66%. There are striking differences even between schools of the same type. At two comprehensives with similar results, almost 70% of 18-year-olds applied to go to university at one, but only 33% at the other.
As an aside, my Telegraph tells me that it costs £200,000 a year to keep a child in care. Eton will look after your children for 30-odd weeks a year for a tad over £30,000 - with no need to provide a state school place as well.
Don't you just love state-funded activity.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Wed 4 Jul 12 at 10:47
|
>> Here's another excellent Guardian article >>
a few others for Bromp to read:
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/oct/10/britains-divided-school-system-report
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/feb/07/chinese-children-school-do-well
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/03/social-class-achievement-school
www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/feb/10/gcse-results-ethnicity-school-meals
>> Don't you just love state-funded activity.
>>
If I had my way, all school children would get vouchers to the value that the State pays to their school. These vouchers would be exchangeable for face-value for admission to any school that the pupil goes to, whether private or state.
|
|
No chance. They'd sell them on, for drugs:)
|
|
Nanny state continues to run their lives then. That's not a great way to think of our youth, is it.
|
>> No chance. They'd sell them on, for drugs:)
>>
"They" would be the excellent state school teachers then, as the vouchers can only be encashed by the school.
|
>> I should imagine that Brompton's daughter's friend was given some discouragement (quite possibly indirectly) by
>> Brompton himself.
I 've been indisposed for most of the last week and only have opportunity to comment now. The Oxbridge etc stuff has died and I'm not going to resucitate it. Mapmakers comment above however, given he's no personal knowledge of me, downright rude.
The lass concerned is one of my daughter's circle, a fixture at birthday parties and occasional sleepovers since year 7. I'd no more presume to influence her educational development then her personal life.
|
>> Bob Diamond will be clinging on by his claws. You won't prise him out.
He's gone.
|
He's leaving a maelstrom of accusations, counter accusations and a generally messy row and taking a great deal of cash with him.
Sensible bloke!
|
Wouldn't it be lovely to preside over an organisation that appears to have committed an act of fraud, and then walk out with a pot of cash instead of going to jail?
Some of us are more equal than others. This whole sad state of affairs is enough to bring out the socialist in anyone.
|
>> that appears to have committed an act of fraud,
>>
Appearances may be deceptive, see:
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=11060&m=246473&v=e
|
>>
>> >> Bob Diamond will be clinging on by his claws. You won't prise him out.
>>
>>
>> He's gone.
He has. And I am surprised he went with such apparent ease. Which leads me to suspect there is a really nasty barrel of worms on the way from that institution.
|
>> He has. And I am surprised he went with such apparent ease. Which leads me
>> to suspect there is a really nasty barrel of worms on the way from that
>> institution.
Chief Operating Officer, Jerry del Missier, has also fallen on his sword severance package.
|
...has also fallen on his sword severance package...
You're right, some of these people are getting almost as much as those in public service, who live off taxpayers all their 'working' lives and into retirement.
|
>> Chief Operating Officer, Jerry del Missier, has also fallen on his sword severance package.
>>
can't get any Messier. Chinese whispers to blame, it would seem.
Telegraph reports:
"It is understood that Mr del Missier was the senior manager who misinterpreted the comments of chief executive Bob Diamond after he came off a call in October 2008 with Paul Tucker, Deputy Governor of the Bank of England.
Due to that misinterpretation, Me del Missier told staff that they had been instructed by the Bank to deliberately lie about their Libor submissions.
The Financial Services Authority revealed the communication after Barclays was fined a total of £290m for manipulating the inter-bank lending rate Libor.
The FSA said: “As the substance of the telephone conversation was relayed down the chain of command at Barclays, a misunderstanding or miscommunication occurred.
“This meant that Barclays’ submitters believed mistakenly that they were operating under an instruction from the Bank of England (as conveyed by senior management) to reduce Barclays’ Libor submissions.” "
Last edited by: John H on Tue 3 Jul 12 at 16:01
|
My little office overlooks two banks - Nat West and Barclays.
Nat West has 'Sorry' posters in the window.
I expect Barclays would like to do the same - if they had anyone senior enough left to authorise it.
|
|
Building Societies are reporting record deposits - one bank scandal too far ?
|
Most of the liquid part of the Iffy family fortune resides with Barclays.
I'm not worried, honest. :)
|
The telling thing is:
RBS fired 4 traders involved in LIBOR fiddling last year.
As far as we are aware, Barclays have fired no-one .. in line with bob Diamond's stated view that the banking crisis was over : leave us alone.. or words like that.
I am sure the BOE DID tell Barclays to fiddle LIBOR - but Bob Diamond threatened to tell Parliament and that was it..
see:
ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/07/03/1069611/and-with-an-inflexion-of-the-eyebrows-bob-was-gone/
and
ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/07/03/1070001/mr-tucker-stated-that-it-did-not-always-need-to-be-the-case-that-we-appeared-as-high-as-we-have-recently/
|
Interesting that Barclays are trying to shift blame onto the BoE. Didn't I read that there are up to 20 other banks under investigation? They can't all use that excuse can they? I guess Barclays were lucky to be fist, and have found a straw to clutch at.
btw one thing which surprised me was that the first I'd heard of this was when the fine was announced. Did they have a super injunction?
|
|
Barclays dont do "sorry" A nasty arrogant bank.
|
>> Barclays dont do "sorry" A nasty arrogant bank.
>>
Yep.
They'll bring down the Deputy Governor of the BOE and a few Labour politicians with them if they are full of revenge.
|
>>
>> They'll bring down the Deputy Governor of the BOE
>>
How shocking that someone should have implicated the BOE in any kind of financial wrong-doing.
They'll be alleging next that the Bank has been printing money by quantitative easing in an attempt to manipulate credit.
|
|
Good photo Dog.The Ridgeback looks in top condition nice shiny coat.
|
Barclay bank fined £290 million - Dutchie
