Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Banker's bonuses
19 Answers
Has it occurred to anyone that huge bonuses may not be a bad thing?
If it keeps the high earners in this country then they continue to pay 40% of their large income in taxes for many years to come.
At least 40% of the bonus is taken in tax.
The proportion of the bonus that the employee actually gets almost certainly gets spent; thus from this comes: VAT on the purchase; turnover for the retailer and sales for the manufacturer which in turn generates corporation tax and keeps people in jobs; these in their turn pay income tax.
Even if the bonus is 'just' spent on shares it boosts the share prices which helps to get back some of the losses that ordinary people have taken on their pensions and savings; income from these is also subject to tax.
It seems to me that all of the above is much more valuable than preventing the bonus's from being paid in the first place.
And to forestall the obvious replies, no I'm not a high earner myself. My OH is retired and I am a housewife and our income is well below the national average.
If it keeps the high earners in this country then they continue to pay 40% of their large income in taxes for many years to come.
At least 40% of the bonus is taken in tax.
The proportion of the bonus that the employee actually gets almost certainly gets spent; thus from this comes: VAT on the purchase; turnover for the retailer and sales for the manufacturer which in turn generates corporation tax and keeps people in jobs; these in their turn pay income tax.
Even if the bonus is 'just' spent on shares it boosts the share prices which helps to get back some of the losses that ordinary people have taken on their pensions and savings; income from these is also subject to tax.
It seems to me that all of the above is much more valuable than preventing the bonus's from being paid in the first place.
And to forestall the obvious replies, no I'm not a high earner myself. My OH is retired and I am a housewife and our income is well below the national average.
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by madmaggot. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The banks should be divided into the type ordinary people use and the casino type that causes all the problems.
Tight regulations on the ordinary banks would mean there would be little chance of them going bust. The people who ran the casino side would be told it they go wrong that's their bad luck.
Tight regulations on the ordinary banks would mean there would be little chance of them going bust. The people who ran the casino side would be told it they go wrong that's their bad luck.
Well Sandy; it wouldn't have just been the banks that were rescued that would have gone under.
If just one bank had been allowed to totally fail (cast your mind back to Northern Rock) then every bank would have had the majority of customers wanting their money, none of them could have sustained this so they would have failed.
I for one do not fancy feeding myself on the barter system that would have been the only way left.
For a start people are so dishonest these days that no-one would have been able to keep crops in their garden until maturity, lol.
If just one bank had been allowed to totally fail (cast your mind back to Northern Rock) then every bank would have had the majority of customers wanting their money, none of them could have sustained this so they would have failed.
I for one do not fancy feeding myself on the barter system that would have been the only way left.
For a start people are so dishonest these days that no-one would have been able to keep crops in their garden until maturity, lol.
If huge bonuses are a good thing please accept my offer to pay me one. It'll keep me in the country paying taxes and spending. Hey maybe we could all have them ! Let's go for it, if they are so good; £500,000,000 bonuses for all, and we'll all be rich, the country will boom, and all will be right with the world. Or have we missed something somewhere ?
the ordinary man in the street has no idea of what so-called ordinary banks get up to. these banks all lend money to commercial businesses as well as private individuals like you and me. and the sums involved with commercial operations can be huge, thereby running the risk of huge losses. they mightn't get involved in dealing in commodities, trading, futures, foreign exchange transactions, etc., but can still lose as much money as an investment bank, as has been proved by hbos and northern rock.
the thing to remember is that whenever a bank lends money, there is an someone else who believes they can pay it back, whether that be a business or a private individual from his income. banks get blamed for the big losses they've sustained, and they're now getting blamed for not lending enough money. rock and a hard place....
the thing to remember is that whenever a bank lends money, there is an someone else who believes they can pay it back, whether that be a business or a private individual from his income. banks get blamed for the big losses they've sustained, and they're now getting blamed for not lending enough money. rock and a hard place....
the other thing to remember is that individuals will recieve bonuses because they/the bank have made large profits, which are taxed (as well as the bonuses) and go into the governments coffers.
when my other half recieved large bonuses when he worked, he managed to legitimately get them tax free. these loopholes have now been closed by the government.
when my other half recieved large bonuses when he worked, he managed to legitimately get them tax free. these loopholes have now been closed by the government.
How much blame goes to the people with such lack of foresight that they kept remortgaging to get money to buy cars, go on holiday, etc just because their house valuation had risen. They are now in trouble and screaming for help to keep their houses.
Those of us who scrimped and lived frugally in order to pay off extra to complete their mortgage, doing without holidays, sky tv, new cars, so that the house belongs to them; we are now considered to be LUCKY!
Yes, the harder we worked and the more we saved, the luckier we became!
Those of us who scrimped and lived frugally in order to pay off extra to complete their mortgage, doing without holidays, sky tv, new cars, so that the house belongs to them; we are now considered to be LUCKY!
Yes, the harder we worked and the more we saved, the luckier we became!
If I stood on the corner of the street offerring to lend 50 quid to anybody who walked by and lost a ton of money who'se fault would it be?
Mine or the people that borrowed from me?
Some of these lenders were willfully reckless and have avoided the consequences of that recklessness by blackmailing the country.
Do you like 20% VAT?
It's their fault you're paying it
Mine or the people that borrowed from me?
Some of these lenders were willfully reckless and have avoided the consequences of that recklessness by blackmailing the country.
Do you like 20% VAT?
It's their fault you're paying it
IMO the 20% VAT rate should have been introduced in 2004 or 2005 when it was clear that people were overspending with average personal debt, excluding mortgages, in excess of 20k.
I also think that the controls on lending should have been reintroduced at that point as people cannot be relied upon to manage their money responsibly.
But regardless of that, the point that I raised is that the ongoing tax generated by high earners is of too much value to listen to the current short sighted hoohar about bonus's.
I also think that the controls on lending should have been reintroduced at that point as people cannot be relied upon to manage their money responsibly.
But regardless of that, the point that I raised is that the ongoing tax generated by high earners is of too much value to listen to the current short sighted hoohar about bonus's.
I'm very impressed that you think controls on lending should have been introduced in 2004! - presumably you were saying that at the time were you?
Pretty much everybody now says that - I can just imagine what would have happened at the time - the screams of "communism" and "Nanny state" would have been deafening!
Pretty much everybody now says that - I can just imagine what would have happened at the time - the screams of "communism" and "Nanny state" would have been deafening!
I can't join this argument with all you rich people because I live on a council housing site where I can see lots of people struggling to keep their heads above water. Don't say get a job because there aren't any. Don't ask why these young men are hanging about doing nothing - they are only 16 and cannot even "sign on" to get a few pounds (not a million) Sorry - as I said I cannot join this argument.
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
Religion & Spirituality14 mins ago
I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
Politics28 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
