FAO Telboy.....
06 February 2013, 02:25 PM
#1
FAO Telboy.....
So RBS are expected to receive a huge fine for the LIBOR affair. £half a billion is being touted.
And one man to lose his job.
But what of the others? Others MUST have been involved. Many others, surely? Is this not fraud? If not, why not, and if so, why is no-one going to prison?
How many others will be punished, or will it all be swept under the carpet again, one man goes and that's it?
Comments?
And one man to lose his job.
But what of the others? Others MUST have been involved. Many others, surely? Is this not fraud? If not, why not, and if so, why is no-one going to prison?
How many others will be punished, or will it all be swept under the carpet again, one man goes and that's it?
Comments?
06 February 2013, 02:52 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's gone 
RBS have been fined £390m, partly in the UK and partly in the US. 21 individuals (not 40,000 employees) were found culpable.
Is it fraud. This is where you and i will always disagree. Libor "fixing" has been defined as people submitting rates different to what they would have done without coertion. All well and good. But what gets lost in the headlines is that Libor fixings are usually estimations, there is very little to back them up (and since 2008 there has been pretty much nothing to back them up).
What the authorities object to is that the rate setters altered their estimations, they didn't actually make a factual event into a fictitious event. Did any of the rate setters benefit from submitting doctored Libors? That i don't know, it's possible, if it's been proved then i've missed those stories.
So regarding the point of people going to jail as you waste so much energy on, you'd have to prove that they were changing Libors explicitly to disadvantage the people whose money was affected by those Libor fixings. And that's something that cannot be proved. The bank was there to make money, and human nature made people act unethically, that's what the fuss is all about. And i get that. But given all i know about Libor fixing, and i know one of the guys who does it, no action was taken to deliberately affect one set of people or another, at least in the wider public.
Were "many" others involved? No, i doubt it, these fixings are so aggregated that a few tenths of a percent from one rate setter in the scheme of things that few people really care, it's the fact that the rate setters were influenced to *any* extent that's causing the furore. Regulation allowed human nature to surface, in a bad way. Bankers are as likely to succumb as anyone, including all the self employed people who under-pay tax every year. You might know some. Are they going to jail? Are they under-stating their tax to rip off the country? It's smaller scale, but it's the same thought processes.
Banking rules have been tightened to the point of the pips squeaking you'll be pleased to know, Libor settings are scrutinised like you wouldn't believe. If bankers were the only section of society on the make at some point in their lives, i'd concur with your desperation to see somebody led away in handcuffs. But you know as well as i do that this isn't the case. Bankers got their wrists slapped, and rightly so. But don't bay for blood when there is criminal activity being committed every day by those very people calling for their heads.
That's a bit of a ramble as i try and concentrate on other things, but it might give you an inkling as to how i see the situation.
RBS have been fined £390m, partly in the UK and partly in the US. 21 individuals (not 40,000 employees) were found culpable.
Is it fraud. This is where you and i will always disagree. Libor "fixing" has been defined as people submitting rates different to what they would have done without coertion. All well and good. But what gets lost in the headlines is that Libor fixings are usually estimations, there is very little to back them up (and since 2008 there has been pretty much nothing to back them up).
What the authorities object to is that the rate setters altered their estimations, they didn't actually make a factual event into a fictitious event. Did any of the rate setters benefit from submitting doctored Libors? That i don't know, it's possible, if it's been proved then i've missed those stories.
So regarding the point of people going to jail as you waste so much energy on, you'd have to prove that they were changing Libors explicitly to disadvantage the people whose money was affected by those Libor fixings. And that's something that cannot be proved. The bank was there to make money, and human nature made people act unethically, that's what the fuss is all about. And i get that. But given all i know about Libor fixing, and i know one of the guys who does it, no action was taken to deliberately affect one set of people or another, at least in the wider public.
Were "many" others involved? No, i doubt it, these fixings are so aggregated that a few tenths of a percent from one rate setter in the scheme of things that few people really care, it's the fact that the rate setters were influenced to *any* extent that's causing the furore. Regulation allowed human nature to surface, in a bad way. Bankers are as likely to succumb as anyone, including all the self employed people who under-pay tax every year. You might know some. Are they going to jail? Are they under-stating their tax to rip off the country? It's smaller scale, but it's the same thought processes.
Banking rules have been tightened to the point of the pips squeaking you'll be pleased to know, Libor settings are scrutinised like you wouldn't believe. If bankers were the only section of society on the make at some point in their lives, i'd concur with your desperation to see somebody led away in handcuffs. But you know as well as i do that this isn't the case. Bankers got their wrists slapped, and rightly so. But don't bay for blood when there is criminal activity being committed every day by those very people calling for their heads.
That's a bit of a ramble as i try and concentrate on other things, but it might give you an inkling as to how i see the situation.
06 February 2013, 03:04 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that's the irony, the FSA get it, who then pay it back to the Government, who part-own RBS. It's all a bit incestuous, but £300m of the fine is coming out of the bonus pool as i understand it, although i doubt that will be enough to appease anyone. Whether or not there is a raft of civil litigations remains to be seen, it could be a bit like PPI where you have to prove you were adversely affected. The clarity of those cases will give better insight into whether the man on the street was as badly affected as the haters want to think they were. As i say, in my mind this was bad internal ethics, not a concerted attempt to defraud the public.
06 February 2013, 10:57 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: N Ireland
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's gone
RBS have been fined £390m, partly in the UK and partly in the US. 21 individuals (not 40,000 employees) were found culpable.
Is it fraud. This is where you and i will always disagree. Libor "fixing" has been defined as people submitting rates different to what they would have done without coertion. All well and good. But what gets lost in the headlines is that Libor fixings are usually estimations, there is very little to back them up (and since 2008 there has been pretty much nothing to back them up).
What the authorities object to is that the rate setters altered their estimations, they didn't actually make a factual event into a fictitious event. Did any of the rate setters benefit from submitting doctored Libors? That i don't know, it's possible, if it's been proved then i've missed those stories.
So regarding the point of people going to jail as you waste so much energy on, you'd have to prove that they were changing Libors explicitly to disadvantage the people whose money was affected by those Libor fixings. And that's something that cannot be proved. The bank was there to make money, and human nature made people act unethically, that's what the fuss is all about. And i get that. But given all i know about Libor fixing, and i know one of the guys who does it, no action was taken to deliberately affect one set of people or another, at least in the wider public.
Were "many" others involved? No, i doubt it, these fixings are so aggregated that a few tenths of a percent from one rate setter in the scheme of things that few people really care, it's the fact that the rate setters were influenced to *any* extent that's causing the furore. Regulation allowed human nature to surface, in a bad way. Bankers are as likely to succumb as anyone, including all the self employed people who under-pay tax every year. You might know some. Are they going to jail? Are they under-stating their tax to rip off the country? It's smaller scale, but it's the same thought processes.
Banking rules have been tightened to the point of the pips squeaking you'll be pleased to know, Libor settings are scrutinised like you wouldn't believe. If bankers were the only section of society on the make at some point in their lives, i'd concur with your desperation to see somebody led away in handcuffs. But you know as well as i do that this isn't the case. Bankers got their wrists slapped, and rightly so. But don't bay for blood when there is criminal activity being committed every day by those very people calling for their heads.
That's a bit of a ramble as i try and concentrate on other things, but it might give you an inkling as to how i see the situation.
RBS have been fined £390m, partly in the UK and partly in the US. 21 individuals (not 40,000 employees) were found culpable.
Is it fraud. This is where you and i will always disagree. Libor "fixing" has been defined as people submitting rates different to what they would have done without coertion. All well and good. But what gets lost in the headlines is that Libor fixings are usually estimations, there is very little to back them up (and since 2008 there has been pretty much nothing to back them up).
What the authorities object to is that the rate setters altered their estimations, they didn't actually make a factual event into a fictitious event. Did any of the rate setters benefit from submitting doctored Libors? That i don't know, it's possible, if it's been proved then i've missed those stories.
So regarding the point of people going to jail as you waste so much energy on, you'd have to prove that they were changing Libors explicitly to disadvantage the people whose money was affected by those Libor fixings. And that's something that cannot be proved. The bank was there to make money, and human nature made people act unethically, that's what the fuss is all about. And i get that. But given all i know about Libor fixing, and i know one of the guys who does it, no action was taken to deliberately affect one set of people or another, at least in the wider public.
Were "many" others involved? No, i doubt it, these fixings are so aggregated that a few tenths of a percent from one rate setter in the scheme of things that few people really care, it's the fact that the rate setters were influenced to *any* extent that's causing the furore. Regulation allowed human nature to surface, in a bad way. Bankers are as likely to succumb as anyone, including all the self employed people who under-pay tax every year. You might know some. Are they going to jail? Are they under-stating their tax to rip off the country? It's smaller scale, but it's the same thought processes.
Banking rules have been tightened to the point of the pips squeaking you'll be pleased to know, Libor settings are scrutinised like you wouldn't believe. If bankers were the only section of society on the make at some point in their lives, i'd concur with your desperation to see somebody led away in handcuffs. But you know as well as i do that this isn't the case. Bankers got their wrists slapped, and rightly so. But don't bay for blood when there is criminal activity being committed every day by those very people calling for their heads.
That's a bit of a ramble as i try and concentrate on other things, but it might give you an inkling as to how i see the situation.
I am prepared to make myself look like a non educated ****.... As I am. But Telboy you are a literary giant!! In your post shouldn't you refer to yourself as I rather than i
Grammatically I is always capitalised. Lowercase i is only acceptable in informal situations such as texting or due to laziness. Thus Telboy really should know better 
