A solution to the greedy banks

I came across this paragraph on an Adam Smith Institute blog:

However, given the threats by both HSBC and Barclays to relocate to Hong Kong and New York respectively, it is probable that the risk of losing their valuable tax revenues will prevail over any ideological reasons for compulsory separation.

It has always been my nature to want to counteract any threats, heavily, and immediately, and this enabled me to come up with an idea which could immediately counteract the threat.

Could not the government counter with a ruling that no bank, operating in the UK, may have more than ten branches if their head office is not based here? This would not concern Investment Banks but would be a major blow for High Street banks.

If the two major banks blackmailing the Government still carried out their threats, they would have to sell all their branches before relocating and this would probably mean a double loss. First of all the loss of business, and secondly, the loss of sales of real estate at a time when the economy is certainly not booming.


  1. #1 by Ampers on Monday, 25 October 2010 - 11:52 am

    I have to admit, if anyone threatens me I tend to take immediate retaliatory steps against them! So we are similar on that issue! 🙂

    And yes, if RBS had gone to the wall how long do you think it would be before Branson or Tesco bought all the branches up? Weeks rather than months.

    The MP I know is new in Parliament and is already on committees so is probably ambitious and doesn’t want to deviate from the party line. But your analogy with reference to goose shit is a good one. I do know one or two others (also a couple of MEPs) and will approach them with this blog entry with comments and see what they say.


  2. #2 by cunobelin on Monday, 25 October 2010 - 11:08 am

    First class idea Ampers. Because I am a simple soul, my gut reaction to anyone making threats is, “Do your worst Old Son”. The banks are bullies pure and simple – they need to be reminded that they need us a damned sight more than we need them.

    So much of the anguish that has been allowed to drag on for so long – and the further crap that the banks will be laying on us in the not too distant future (“we need more money; taxpayer’s money. Lots and lots of money”) – could have been avoided if just one or two banks had been allowed to go to the wall when the solids entered the air-conditioning a couple of years ago. It’s a measure of the strangle-hold the buggers have on governments worldwide that they managed to avoid the most logical progression of a free market.

    Having a golden goose is all very well, but if owning one means that everything is covered in goose shit all the time then it is time to reassess matters.

  3. #3 by Ampers on Saturday, 23 October 2010 - 11:52 am

    I have received an email from an acquaintance who is also an MP, as he hasn’t given me permission to include his name, and I don’t want to bother him unnecessarily, I have omitted said name..


    I wouldn’t support such a move. If the UK government creates an environment that is hostile then they should have the right to relocate. The UK banking industry provides nearly 10% of GDP, employs a million people and generates billions in tax revenues. Government should be careful not to kill a golden goose.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxx MP
    sent via blackberry

    Personally I think Cameron should mention these figures more often when people talk about the wicked bankers.


%d bloggers like this: