2024 Election thread
Comments
-
Fair enough, although I think there's a fortune v ability debate there. If exploiting the short windows is a reliable ability, then higher base pay should presumably be OK. The 10m year will be back at 100m once the star performer has returned to their mean level of performance.rick_chasey said:
Many of the business lines of investment banks are in are very choppy by nature. Lot of lines of business are *extremely* profitable in a very narrow time window.Jezyboy said:
If performance is so variable that you need to adjust take home salaries with bonuses of over 200%, it doesn't sound like a stable business.rick_chasey said:Yes, incentivising gigantic base salaries does not a more stable bank make.
If you bring in £100m of revenue 3 years running, but the next 4 years it's £10m because the window has closed and the cycle has turned (or your rivals worked out your secret sauce and copied) how do you reward that appropriately?
If you're competing for the few people who can do the above, because you want those 3 years of £100m revenues, you are often competing on pay. If you're limited to 200% of your base, the base salaries can get stupidly high very quickly.
Also, banks are just part of the wider FS ecosystem and it makes it harder to shift talent between FS industries as the base salaries are so out of whack; it's not efficient.
Of course if different companies are recruiting from the same pool, but have different rules, I can see that being awkward.
I don't necessarily disagree with the bonus rule being a bad bit of legislation. It's clearly designed to appeal as a bit of legislation that would reduce "bankers" take home pay, but it probably doesn't, and as you say, banks are but a part of the ecosystem.
However, getting rid of it now screams of a government who don't really have a direction who just have random priorities.
0 -
The reality of the situation is people still get paid a fortune, but rather than that fortune being wildly dependent on how much money they make for the bank, it instead lumbers the banks with very high fixed costs.Jezyboy said:
Fair enough, although I think there's a fortune v ability debate there. If exploiting the short windows is a reliable ability, then higher base pay should presumably be OK. The 10m year will be back at 100m once the star performer has returned to their mean level of performance.rick_chasey said:
Many of the business lines of investment banks are in are very choppy by nature. Lot of lines of business are *extremely* profitable in a very narrow time window.Jezyboy said:
If performance is so variable that you need to adjust take home salaries with bonuses of over 200%, it doesn't sound like a stable business.rick_chasey said:Yes, incentivising gigantic base salaries does not a more stable bank make.
If you bring in £100m of revenue 3 years running, but the next 4 years it's £10m because the window has closed and the cycle has turned (or your rivals worked out your secret sauce and copied) how do you reward that appropriately?
If you're competing for the few people who can do the above, because you want those 3 years of £100m revenues, you are often competing on pay. If you're limited to 200% of your base, the base salaries can get stupidly high very quickly.
Also, banks are just part of the wider FS ecosystem and it makes it harder to shift talent between FS industries as the base salaries are so out of whack; it's not efficient.
Of course if different companies are recruiting from the same pool, but have different rules, I can see that being awkward.
I don't necessarily disagree with the bonus rule being a bad bit of legislation. It's clearly designed to appeal as a bit of legislation that would reduce "bankers" take home pay, but it probably doesn't, and as you say, banks are but a part of the ecosystem.
However, getting rid of it now screams of a government who don't really have a direction who just have random priorities.
Banks would rather be able to pay £1m bonus to someone if they've earned the bank a lot and £200k the next year if they haven't, rather than just paying them £800k the first year and £600k the second year.
That should be obvious.0 -
I wonder what manifesto ideas Rishi will campaign on at the election? He and the party don't seem to have any medium or long term strategies at all currently!0
-
‘Long-Term Decisions for a Brighter Future’?
Like cancelling long term plans?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
Exactlypblakeney said:‘Long-Term Decisions for a Brighter Future’?
Like cancelling long term plans?0 -
Does "brighter future" refer to the IQ of the next incumbent of no. 10?1
-
I think it refers to the future of Tory Leadership's wealth managers0
-
Meh, I'm not sure it's a particular lack of IQ. Rishi doesn't strike me as someone who is particularly stupid, I suspect Truss would also score above average on most tests.First.Aspect said:Does "brighter future" refer to the IQ of the next incumbent of no. 10?
0 -
It's only a nopinion poll, but even so... Tories + Reform = just 30%. I'd hope that LD & Green voters would vote tactically in the Red Wall seats, and Labour voters ditto in vaguely marginal seats otherwise, as I still suspect that Reform will pull out in many constituencies to favour Tory candidates, but are using the parlous state of the Tories' support to leverage their power to influence Tory policy in the meantime
0 -
I wonder how many reform voters will just stay at home if they don't have a candidate to vote for.0
-
Jezyboy said:
I wonder how many reform voters will just stay at home if they don't have a candidate to vote for.
Depends how much further to the right the Tories go. To be fair, they haven't got that much further to go to be in the National Front league.
0 -
It's all very well having the Tories having anti immigrant rhetoric, but they've been in power for over a decade and have seen record immigration numbers.briantrumpet said:Jezyboy said:I wonder how many reform voters will just stay at home if they don't have a candidate to vote for.
Depends how much further to the right the Tories go. To be fair, they haven't got that much further to go to be in the National Front league.0 -
Jezyboy said:
It's all very well having the Tories having anti immigrant rhetoric, but they've been in power for over a decade and have seen record immigration numbers.briantrumpet said:Jezyboy said:I wonder how many reform voters will just stay at home if they don't have a candidate to vote for.
Depends how much further to the right the Tories go. To be fair, they haven't got that much further to go to be in the National Front league.
Quite something when they can't even National Front properly, despite the aspiration to.1 -
May election looking likelier0 -
-
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls.0 -
See my post in the other thread. The drop in inflation has nothing to do with the government and food inflation is still at 10%.rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Having nothing to do with something has never stopped a government from taking the credit.0
-
True, but it should highlighted.joeyhalloran said:Having nothing to do with something has never stopped a government from taking the credit.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Annualised inflation from the last five months by category. Maybe it needs to be taught in schools.
Food and non- alcoholic beverages 2.00%
Alcoholic beverages and tobacco 6.61%
Clothing and footwear 7.99%
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels -12.33%
Furniture, household equipment & routine maintenance -2.24%
Health 3 6.03%
Transport 1.25%
Communic- ation -1.83%
Recreation and culture 5.08%
Education 3 11.10%
Restaurants and hotels 5.14%
Miscell- aneous goods and services 3 3.12%
CPI (overall index) 1.28%
1 -
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Feel free to furnish me with all the things the government has actually been doing.Stevo_666 said:
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls.0 -
Surprised they didn't find a way to fuck it up, but at the time it was announced it felt a bit like having an August policy announcement for the temperature to be lower in December.0
-
So are you giving them credit on reducing inflation or not?rick_chasey said:
Feel free to furnish me with all the things the government has actually been doing.Stevo_666 said:
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
So are you giving them credit on reducing inflation or not?rick_chasey said:
Feel free to furnish me with all the things the government has actually been doing.Stevo_666 said:
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls.rick_chasey said:Sure, though just as Sunak can't have it both ways, neither can we.
If we want to pin inflation on the government, and I think we have, we also need to pin the reduction on the gov't.
In reality, we ought to be looking at comparable countries and how the UK inflation rates compare so we get a better idea of what the government inflation premium or discount is.0 -
rick_chasey said:Stevo_666 said:
So are you giving them credit on reducing inflation or not?rick_chasey said:
Feel free to furnish me with all the things the government has actually been doing.Stevo_666 said:
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls.rick_chasey said:Sure, though just as Sunak can't have it both ways, neither can we.
If we want to pin inflation on the government, and I think we have, we also need to pin the reduction on the gov't.
In reality, we ought to be looking at comparable countries and how the UK inflation rates compare so we get a better idea of what the government inflation premium or discount is.
Although as I mentioned above, some major drivers of the increases in inflation were out of the governemnts hands."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Sure. In theory you could devise a sort of inflation benchmark driven by external factors and then you could evaluate the government's performance against that - so you could see whether the govt is above or below benchmark.Stevo_666 said:
Although as I mentioned above, some major drivers of the increases in inflation were out of the governemnts hands.
I suspect measuring inflation is not remotely accurate at the best of times (cake stop's favourite topic!), so the likelihood of having good enough data to do that is probably pretty low.0 -
Oh cr@p, that's where I keep my bikes.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage"Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
================================
Cake is just weakness entering the body1 -
They did nothing to fuel inflation such as cutting income tax or raising VATrick_chasey said:
Feel free to furnish me with all the things the government has actually been doing.Stevo_666 said:
Thought so. You couldn't be seen to be giving credit where credit is due, even though some main drivers of inflation (such as Putin) are outside of government control.rick_chasey said:
Pretty much. "The whole house is no longer on fire, only the garage" is not something I would be crowing about too much.Stevo_666 said:
Was that just in case anyone thought you might be giving the Tories a compliment?rick_chasey said:(should add, prices are 16 per cent up over the last 2 years).
The rapidness of the tweet is aligned with the reported theory that waiting for inflation to calm down is a key factor in deciding when to go to the polls.0
