One thing we’re not short of at the moment is distractions. City bonuses for instance: a symptom not a cause. As Nick points out, our troubles stem from the conversion of investment and universal banks into homes for large proprietary trading outfits, in-house hedge funds.
Reimposition of Glass-Steagall would be one way to put these operations out of harm’s way. Another way to do it would be to adjust capital adequacy ratios so that prop trading becomes radically less profitable – and on the way, less risky and less prone to pay out large bonuses.
Relative to reimposing Glass-Steagall this would be straightforward. The Basel international capital adequacy framework already provides a way to do it, a mechanism that banks across the world are well-used to complying with.
What’s stopping politicians from both main parties from cracking on with this? Capture by the financial interest is one factor. Another more immediate reason is tax. Receipts from prop trading profits are enormous – Goldman, a hedge fund in all but name, will pay £2bn in tax this year alone. Short term gain, long term repetition of catastrophic disaster.
Reviews
"Cohen’s forcefully argued and powerfully memorable book...the psychology of the left wing is hauntingly displayed." Spectator
"Cohen’s book is an admirable example of self- criticism and self-examination, using intellectual honesty as a means of illuminating a much wider canvas. Do not feel that you have to be a leftist or liberal to read it, because it engages with an argument that is crucial for all of us, and for our time. Sunday Times
"Nick Cohen's roaring polemic of outrage against the moral and political crisis of the liberal tradition. It is already one of the most discussed current affairs books of the new year. At the very least it forces, or ought to force, anyone on the left to think carefully about where their movement has ended up in the modern world."
Guardian
"Nick Cohen, whose book What’s Left?: How Liberals Lost Their Way appears next month. If it does not have a profound effect on the political debate, I will be surprised and disappointed. It is an essay of wide reference and great brilliance." Financial Times
"This book is much more than a mere denunciation of old left-wing friends and colleagues. It is also a moving account of a long personal journey, carried off with wit, verve, considerable literary skill and human compassion."
Observer
1 Comment
November 8, 2009 at 11:10 am
One thing we’re not short of at the moment is distractions. City bonuses for instance: a symptom not a cause. As Nick points out, our troubles stem from the conversion of investment and universal banks into homes for large proprietary trading outfits, in-house hedge funds.
Reimposition of Glass-Steagall would be one way to put these operations out of harm’s way. Another way to do it would be to adjust capital adequacy ratios so that prop trading becomes radically less profitable – and on the way, less risky and less prone to pay out large bonuses.
Relative to reimposing Glass-Steagall this would be straightforward. The Basel international capital adequacy framework already provides a way to do it, a mechanism that banks across the world are well-used to complying with.
What’s stopping politicians from both main parties from cracking on with this? Capture by the financial interest is one factor. Another more immediate reason is tax. Receipts from prop trading profits are enormous – Goldman, a hedge fund in all but name, will pay £2bn in tax this year alone. Short term gain, long term repetition of catastrophic disaster.
But screw tomorrow, eh?