Better banking or what?

Most people want to live in a secure and settled country. Indecision and a financial threat to livelihoods is not welcomed. So it must be, in a democratic society, that those who control the purse strings don't get to toy with the people as if they are only there to slave away for the benefit of watching those purse strings tighten or slacken at whim.

Goldman Sachs have decided to limit bonuses of top executives to £1M this year. Very gracious of them. However, such magnanimity is dwarfed by the taxpayers' compulsory attendance at bailout time. It seems there is still no proper incentive by government to tackle this ongoing problem.

I would dread to think that we exist only to act as financial sponges for what would appear to be a support system for financial spongers. Can Goldman Sachs tell us exactly what good they currently are doing for society? I know that they are doing excellent work for themselves. But do they provide a worthwhile service to us all?

I don't think they do. How can it possibly be a good deal if banks can carry on as they please, only to grab us all by the nuts when they get it a bit wrong? We are the suckers, surely? It's rather like having a bad apple in the family, a type of Terry-Thomas character, who turns up on regular occasions with such lines as "I say, old boy, spot of bother on the finance front. Met this woman, you know. Terribly into...." and you feel obliged and the rest.

Well, I hope, come the general election (May 5th apparently) we voice our opinions by voting in strong representation that can confront all the "old boy" routines and put a stop to this Las Vegas culture in the banking industry.