Good luck Mr.ALexander in your next job :D Thanks for making S2 business management fun and for your support through Dragons Den :L I think the representatives from your class are just jinxed for second place :P Gutted i didn't have you for third year , business wasn't the same without you telling us about the thousands of jobs you've had :P
good luck in your new school :D !!
chloe :)
Saturday, 31 July 2010
Monday, 21 June 2010
Dragon's Den - Anita Kaur
Recently, all of the Second Year Business classes have completed a project - Dragon's Den. Modelled on the successful television series, the pupils had to create a suitable, yet unique, product with no outs help. It gave pupils a chance to use their imagination and express themselves whilst freely deciding what they thought of the business world. The groups of two or three had to create a business plan that included their idea, finance strategy, market research, profit and loss projections and manufacturing costs. Some groups even included advertisements such as radio jingles, which showed that they understood the reality of the project.
The groups then had to present their presentation to three Sixth Year "Dragons". These "Dragons" were all studying Higher Business Management, so the groups knew their presentations had to be perfect and professional. This experience gave the young entrepreneurs both confidence and experience. The winner of each class then had to present their business plan to real business men and women from East Renfrewshire Council. All three presentations were great, and the business people were extremely impressed by the amount of hard work from all the pupils.
The groups then had to present their presentation to three Sixth Year "Dragons". These "Dragons" were all studying Higher Business Management, so the groups knew their presentations had to be perfect and professional. This experience gave the young entrepreneurs both confidence and experience. The winner of each class then had to present their business plan to real business men and women from East Renfrewshire Council. All three presentations were great, and the business people were extremely impressed by the amount of hard work from all the pupils.
Prospective Power - Labour (1/3)
The most recent general election resulted in mass confusion and mixed-up policies. In part one of a three part series, Eve McLynn looks at what would have happened had the election had a different, more final outcome.
A Labour majority, and the parliament is staying as it has been since 1997. But Gordon Brown has promised ‘A Future Fair for All’, so how can he make Britain a better place?
2010: Let's pretend Bigot-gate, Iraq and the credit crunch and - let's face it - Gordon's smile hadn't happened, and Labour have gained another four years.
How convenient for Gordon Brown. The speeches are made, promises renewed, and our beloved Prime Minister doesn’t even have to pack up his furniture. He sits down with his government, and the plans are made for the next year. One by one the politicians leave the room, and Gordon Brown gazes out of the window, at his country.
2011: Labour has done their best over the last year to change Britain, changing the voting age to sixteen, and working to make the UK "go green" by increasing woodland areas and introducing new energy plans. A higher minimum wage is implemented and the government sets about improving the NHS with routine checks for those over forty, expansion of diagnostic testing and giving the public the right to choose a GP who is available at hours that suit them, in their area.
2012: Gordon is now trying to shed the "New Labour" image and return to being man on the people. Labour introduces Toddler Tax Credits of £4 a week, and begins to help the arts by providing more lottery funding for galleries, museums and culture. Keen to win the spokespeople over, celebrations for a Golden Decade of Sport start with the 2012 Olympics. Labour provide fifteen free hours of flexible nursery education for under fours a week, and help ten million people create savings with Personal Pension plans, and social workers and the police are given more power, as the Government decide that prevention is better than cure, intervening earlier in dysfunctional families.
2013: By Labour’s third year in Parliament, all children between sixteen and nineteen years old begin to receive free education, and first time buyers are given a helping hand, Gordon Brown style. First time buyers are free from stamp duty for two years. Brown is convinced that this will entice first time buyers to give the economy a boost. The public is now given more free will concerning community service workers, voting upon the work that is carried out.
2014: Brown has now held the seat for four years, and election looms again. But Labour ploughs on, convinced that they can still make Britain a better place. Time is running out, and he has deadlines to meet. 400,000 green jobs to be conjured from thin air within one year, and pressure is building for Brown. Within working family life, Labour puts in to action plans to save post offices and local pubs, and restoring Britain to its former glory, in this digital age, implementing a highly technical broadband infrastructure, and halving the deficit, all in one year. Better hurry, Prime Minister.
2015: The last four years? What did they do, how did they restore Britain to ‘glory’? Did Gordon Brown live up to expectations? Only the voters can say.
A Labour majority, and the parliament is staying as it has been since 1997. But Gordon Brown has promised ‘A Future Fair for All’, so how can he make Britain a better place?
2010: Let's pretend Bigot-gate, Iraq and the credit crunch and - let's face it - Gordon's smile hadn't happened, and Labour have gained another four years.
How convenient for Gordon Brown. The speeches are made, promises renewed, and our beloved Prime Minister doesn’t even have to pack up his furniture. He sits down with his government, and the plans are made for the next year. One by one the politicians leave the room, and Gordon Brown gazes out of the window, at his country.
2011: Labour has done their best over the last year to change Britain, changing the voting age to sixteen, and working to make the UK "go green" by increasing woodland areas and introducing new energy plans. A higher minimum wage is implemented and the government sets about improving the NHS with routine checks for those over forty, expansion of diagnostic testing and giving the public the right to choose a GP who is available at hours that suit them, in their area.
2012: Gordon is now trying to shed the "New Labour" image and return to being man on the people. Labour introduces Toddler Tax Credits of £4 a week, and begins to help the arts by providing more lottery funding for galleries, museums and culture. Keen to win the spokespeople over, celebrations for a Golden Decade of Sport start with the 2012 Olympics. Labour provide fifteen free hours of flexible nursery education for under fours a week, and help ten million people create savings with Personal Pension plans, and social workers and the police are given more power, as the Government decide that prevention is better than cure, intervening earlier in dysfunctional families.
2013: By Labour’s third year in Parliament, all children between sixteen and nineteen years old begin to receive free education, and first time buyers are given a helping hand, Gordon Brown style. First time buyers are free from stamp duty for two years. Brown is convinced that this will entice first time buyers to give the economy a boost. The public is now given more free will concerning community service workers, voting upon the work that is carried out.
2014: Brown has now held the seat for four years, and election looms again. But Labour ploughs on, convinced that they can still make Britain a better place. Time is running out, and he has deadlines to meet. 400,000 green jobs to be conjured from thin air within one year, and pressure is building for Brown. Within working family life, Labour puts in to action plans to save post offices and local pubs, and restoring Britain to its former glory, in this digital age, implementing a highly technical broadband infrastructure, and halving the deficit, all in one year. Better hurry, Prime Minister.
2015: The last four years? What did they do, how did they restore Britain to ‘glory’? Did Gordon Brown live up to expectations? Only the voters can say.
Sunday, 18 April 2010
Ask the Chancellor
The General Election will takes place on 6th May 2010. Already, interviews and debate among the three would-be Prime Ministers are flooding on to our screens, but in these post-recession times of economic unsettlement, the real question is - who will be our new Chancellor? In hopes of answering this, Channel 4 sparked of election season with "Ask the Chancellors", a live televised debate between the three hopefuls.
Alastair Darling, Labour.
As the current occupant of Number 11, there was a lot of pressure to prove that the last three years he has been in this position hadn't been wasted. And it showed. Darling came down altogether aggressively on the Conservatives, accusing George Osborne of attempting to "tip us back into the recession". His approach to economy seemed genuine (which is more than can be said of George Osborne) and he remained firm in Labour's key economic policies, promising taxes would not be raised. His stand out moment, however, was defending Labour's infamous social care proposals despite the unjust criticism from Osborne. Ultimately, though, in the back of everybody's minds, there was the question "Why has it taken so long?".
George Osborne, Conservative
Everybody was expecting the Tory lapdog to be slightly less in touch with the common man (despite being considered an "oik" in his own party for being educated at St. Paul's rather than Eton). However, what they were not quite prepared for was such outright hypocrisy. One minute, he was telling young students he wanted to "hold their hand during the job-seeking process", and the next he was pledging to cut 10% public sector jobs. The Conservative Party have got undoubtedly complacent in the last few months, and here was the proof. In attempts to deflect from his own party's egoism, he resorted to empty, overly-emotive insults to his opponents, such as describing Labour's Social Care proposals as "Death Taxes". In his final attempt to make the Tories seem in any way philanthropic, he promised they wouldn't raise taxes. Oh, yes? Well, the last Tory to promise that was Thatcher, and everyone knows how that turned out.
Vince Cable, Liberal Democrats
Without a doubt, the night's success story. A relative newcomer to TV appearances, and positively geriatric compared with the alternatives, Vince Cable spoke with honestly, enthusiasm and - above all - sense. Unlike his opponents, he did not trot out the usual promises such a tax freezes. Also unlike his opponents, he saw the danger of high-debt consumerism in advance. He hinted at a move toward the previous Lib Dem status as a "high-tax, high-spend" party, which is definitely the most sensible approach to economic recovery. Already with notable support in the media (famously, Ian Hislop championed a "Vince Cable for Treasurer" campaign), he is the best hope this country has of economic stability in the dear future.The audience laughter and cheers proved that experience shall prevail over flash smiles and false promises, and as long as everybody gets out and votes, we could be seeing a lot more of Cable in the near future.
Alastair Darling, Labour.
As the current occupant of Number 11, there was a lot of pressure to prove that the last three years he has been in this position hadn't been wasted. And it showed. Darling came down altogether aggressively on the Conservatives, accusing George Osborne of attempting to "tip us back into the recession". His approach to economy seemed genuine (which is more than can be said of George Osborne) and he remained firm in Labour's key economic policies, promising taxes would not be raised. His stand out moment, however, was defending Labour's infamous social care proposals despite the unjust criticism from Osborne. Ultimately, though, in the back of everybody's minds, there was the question "Why has it taken so long?".
George Osborne, Conservative
Everybody was expecting the Tory lapdog to be slightly less in touch with the common man (despite being considered an "oik" in his own party for being educated at St. Paul's rather than Eton). However, what they were not quite prepared for was such outright hypocrisy. One minute, he was telling young students he wanted to "hold their hand during the job-seeking process", and the next he was pledging to cut 10% public sector jobs. The Conservative Party have got undoubtedly complacent in the last few months, and here was the proof. In attempts to deflect from his own party's egoism, he resorted to empty, overly-emotive insults to his opponents, such as describing Labour's Social Care proposals as "Death Taxes". In his final attempt to make the Tories seem in any way philanthropic, he promised they wouldn't raise taxes. Oh, yes? Well, the last Tory to promise that was Thatcher, and everyone knows how that turned out.
Vince Cable, Liberal Democrats
Without a doubt, the night's success story. A relative newcomer to TV appearances, and positively geriatric compared with the alternatives, Vince Cable spoke with honestly, enthusiasm and - above all - sense. Unlike his opponents, he did not trot out the usual promises such a tax freezes. Also unlike his opponents, he saw the danger of high-debt consumerism in advance. He hinted at a move toward the previous Lib Dem status as a "high-tax, high-spend" party, which is definitely the most sensible approach to economic recovery. Already with notable support in the media (famously, Ian Hislop championed a "Vince Cable for Treasurer" campaign), he is the best hope this country has of economic stability in the dear future.The audience laughter and cheers proved that experience shall prevail over flash smiles and false promises, and as long as everybody gets out and votes, we could be seeing a lot more of Cable in the near future.
Sunday, 14 February 2010
Celebrity Endorsement - Anita Kaur
It's a highly competitive world out there, so what is the best and most cost-effective way to get your product, service or brand noticed by the consumer? For many businesses, it seems asking a celebrity to advertise their products is the way forward.
Studies have proved that celebrities endorsing a brand can really increase consumers’ awareness of their products. It can also make the advert more memorable. Furthermore, celebrity endorsement makes the business seem more upmarket to customers and makes them think that the products shall be of high quality.Celebrity endorsement can also attract people who have aspiration to be famous themselves, as well as the famous person's existing fan base.
In order for product endorsement to be successful, the brand must select a celebrity that is appropriate for their product. For example, David Beckham is very famous, rich and respected, so Calvin Klein were right to ask him to advertise their products.
However, sometimes these products are how celebrities portray them - the owner of the product exaggerates what it can do. For example, Pantene face criticism when it was revealed that Cheryl Cole wore hair extensions when advertising their shampoo.
Ultimately, celebrity endorsement can be very effective when uses correctly. However, it is also allows big businesses to take advantage of some naive individuals.
Studies have proved that celebrities endorsing a brand can really increase consumers’ awareness of their products. It can also make the advert more memorable. Furthermore, celebrity endorsement makes the business seem more upmarket to customers and makes them think that the products shall be of high quality.Celebrity endorsement can also attract people who have aspiration to be famous themselves, as well as the famous person's existing fan base.
In order for product endorsement to be successful, the brand must select a celebrity that is appropriate for their product. For example, David Beckham is very famous, rich and respected, so Calvin Klein were right to ask him to advertise their products.
However, sometimes these products are how celebrities portray them - the owner of the product exaggerates what it can do. For example, Pantene face criticism when it was revealed that Cheryl Cole wore hair extensions when advertising their shampoo.
Ultimately, celebrity endorsement can be very effective when uses correctly. However, it is also allows big businesses to take advantage of some naive individuals.
Thursday, 4 February 2010
We Can't Go On Like This - Eve McGlynn
The Conservatives claim that they have all the answers, many feel that they are the key to Britain’s bright new future. The Tory’s’ bright plans mean a total change in the way the country will run - a change in the NHS, pensions, and most importantly, the government. But is there a darker side to this new future?
The media is often too quick to judge politicians on every aspect of their public and private lives, especially when their actions affect taxpayers, with issues such as the economy or the health service. But would the public really prefer to make the choices themselves? David Cameron proposes that through his leadership, the NHS will be given back to the people. New information will be available, such as doctor performance, for patients to view at any time. Other information, such as cancer survival rates, and statistics will be ready for the general public. They can also find out about options to secure their future should they fall ill, about their changes for independence after recovering from a severe illness.
In these modern times, the world is constantly changing around us, and as life expectancy increases and medicine becomes more and more sophisticated, our population is becoming older. So the government’s pension plans are of upmost importance to the ageing population. The Conservatives will introduce a pension delay of one year – making the retirement age 66, an increase of one year for men, and six years for women. If employers refuse their workers pension, this will mean the average person will have to save around £55 a week. The employers have every right to refuse to hand out pensions, and the Tory’s will have to do their best to rectify, or face those of retirement age claiming benefits for a year of missed pensions. In trying to pull Britain’s economy out of the gutter; they may be pushing it deeper.
Within the British government itself, the very heart of the country, changes are being made. But the new changes will not benefit all Public Sector workers. Pay will be frozen for all public sector workers earning of £18,000 per annum if the Conservatives come to power, as David Cameron claims this will save the Government around £3.2 billion a year. Other pay cuts include abolishing tax credits for families that earn over £50,000 per annum. However, the Conservatives do have a heart, it seems. On top of abolishing Bankers Bonuses, they plan to introduce Global Warming policies that will encourage the public to ‘do their bit’. These include a fixed price for all ‘green’ electricity, and allow schools, hospitals and even homes to improve their eco-friendly efforts.
The Prison systems, too, will receive a shake up. The Tory’s new policy – ‘Prisons for a Purpose’, will change the way the judicial system works. A minimum and maximum sentence will be introduced, and a Victims fund will be set up, the criminals working to earn money for the fund. Every inmate that requires it shall receive drug and alcohol rehabilitation care, and the Tory’s have another miracle cure – they claim that they can end overcrowding by 2016, conjuring 5000 more prison cells than Labour ever planned to build.
The Tory’s bright new policies and shiny campaigns may blind the general public into believing that Conservative is the best vote for them, but have they considered the financial consequence to the taxpayer? David Cameron’s statement only rings too true “We can’t go on like this” – but could his own slogan be his own death wish?
The media is often too quick to judge politicians on every aspect of their public and private lives, especially when their actions affect taxpayers, with issues such as the economy or the health service. But would the public really prefer to make the choices themselves? David Cameron proposes that through his leadership, the NHS will be given back to the people. New information will be available, such as doctor performance, for patients to view at any time. Other information, such as cancer survival rates, and statistics will be ready for the general public. They can also find out about options to secure their future should they fall ill, about their changes for independence after recovering from a severe illness.
In these modern times, the world is constantly changing around us, and as life expectancy increases and medicine becomes more and more sophisticated, our population is becoming older. So the government’s pension plans are of upmost importance to the ageing population. The Conservatives will introduce a pension delay of one year – making the retirement age 66, an increase of one year for men, and six years for women. If employers refuse their workers pension, this will mean the average person will have to save around £55 a week. The employers have every right to refuse to hand out pensions, and the Tory’s will have to do their best to rectify, or face those of retirement age claiming benefits for a year of missed pensions. In trying to pull Britain’s economy out of the gutter; they may be pushing it deeper.
Within the British government itself, the very heart of the country, changes are being made. But the new changes will not benefit all Public Sector workers. Pay will be frozen for all public sector workers earning of £18,000 per annum if the Conservatives come to power, as David Cameron claims this will save the Government around £3.2 billion a year. Other pay cuts include abolishing tax credits for families that earn over £50,000 per annum. However, the Conservatives do have a heart, it seems. On top of abolishing Bankers Bonuses, they plan to introduce Global Warming policies that will encourage the public to ‘do their bit’. These include a fixed price for all ‘green’ electricity, and allow schools, hospitals and even homes to improve their eco-friendly efforts.
The Prison systems, too, will receive a shake up. The Tory’s new policy – ‘Prisons for a Purpose’, will change the way the judicial system works. A minimum and maximum sentence will be introduced, and a Victims fund will be set up, the criminals working to earn money for the fund. Every inmate that requires it shall receive drug and alcohol rehabilitation care, and the Tory’s have another miracle cure – they claim that they can end overcrowding by 2016, conjuring 5000 more prison cells than Labour ever planned to build.
The Tory’s bright new policies and shiny campaigns may blind the general public into believing that Conservative is the best vote for them, but have they considered the financial consequence to the taxpayer? David Cameron’s statement only rings too true “We can’t go on like this” – but could his own slogan be his own death wish?
Monday, 1 February 2010
Advertising - Ellis Macaulay
In today’s world, advertising is the way businesses communicate with their customers to intrigue them into buying their product.
Many adverts have special techniques to help persuade people to take interest in the product. They may use celebrity endorsement, which is when the business uses a celebrity to advertise their product in order to persuade more people to purchase it. Recently, the Nintendo Wii has been advertised using Ant and Dec. This choice of celebrity shows that the product is suitable for family enjoyment and is fun and exciting. This is because that is the image Ant and Dec have. They also use families and the people are all very enthusiastic about the product in the advert, which manipulate the viewer into thinking that it will be the right product for them and their family. Adverts typically also include a catchy song or just be very unique and colourful.
On of the most notorious examples of advertising recently is the Cadburys advert. It is especially very unique as it is exciting for the viewer and catches their eye, as it is not immediately obvious what it is for.
If the advert also has a peculiar motto or special deals then this could really help a business. Mottos that are catchy are really the best. Special deals and peculiar mottos are mostly used for radio adverts. As the listener cannot see the advert, the motto or song has to be especially unique to intrigue the listener.
Ultimately, many techniques are involved in helping businesses get people interested in their products, particularly those who wouldn't otherwise. So, next time you're watching TV or listening to the radio, try to spot some!
Many adverts have special techniques to help persuade people to take interest in the product. They may use celebrity endorsement, which is when the business uses a celebrity to advertise their product in order to persuade more people to purchase it. Recently, the Nintendo Wii has been advertised using Ant and Dec. This choice of celebrity shows that the product is suitable for family enjoyment and is fun and exciting. This is because that is the image Ant and Dec have. They also use families and the people are all very enthusiastic about the product in the advert, which manipulate the viewer into thinking that it will be the right product for them and their family. Adverts typically also include a catchy song or just be very unique and colourful.
On of the most notorious examples of advertising recently is the Cadburys advert. It is especially very unique as it is exciting for the viewer and catches their eye, as it is not immediately obvious what it is for.
If the advert also has a peculiar motto or special deals then this could really help a business. Mottos that are catchy are really the best. Special deals and peculiar mottos are mostly used for radio adverts. As the listener cannot see the advert, the motto or song has to be especially unique to intrigue the listener.
Ultimately, many techniques are involved in helping businesses get people interested in their products, particularly those who wouldn't otherwise. So, next time you're watching TV or listening to the radio, try to spot some!
Anita Kaur's Interview with Mr Alexander
Something very intriguing about business management is that it is such an applicable and employable skill, that it is something of a mystery why someone possessing an MBM would go into teaching. Is there a particular reason Mr Alexander chose this career rather than actually start his own business? "Well, basically, I never had an idea. I'd say if you have an idea, a good idea, and it's something you're passionate about, you should definitely just go for it,". But is an idea really enough for a young entrepreneur? "Well, you must also be focused, do pleantly of research and remember your goals. If you work hard, there will be many rewards,". However, this doesn't answer why he came into teaching. He says that he has always been interested in teaching and in business, so chose a career where he use the two together.
A recurring feature of Mr Alexander's lessons are his anecdotes about his previous jobs and his life in Italy. When I bring up Italy, and the country's very different economy, he says that it is much harder to get loans (especially government grants and bank loans}. Mainly due to this, the businesses are very simple and are mainly based on agriculture. He said the majority of the businesses are run by a family and are passed down. However, he warns me that the business climate there is getting worse.
Mr Alexander always talks about his previous aspirations and achievements - the police force, sports journalism, finance, Italy…would it be accurate to suggest he merely came into teaching as a last resort? "No, no, not at all," he appears uncomfortable with the more personal questions, but genuinely refutes the claim, "teaching's always been there - in fact, that's what Italy was. A chance to try teaching, to see if it was what I really wanted to do,". He talks about how teaching finally gives him job satisfaction and a sense of achievement. When he worked in London, it was all about the money, but he's not financially orientated "I can live off my wage, that's all that matters to me when it comes to cash". Yes, lots of people claim to believe this, but if it's not money he wants, why turn up every day? "I like to see how far my teaching ability can go. Head of Department? Deputy?".
Mr Alexander is clearly passionate about his job, and is highly motivated in his career. His varied and extensive experience allows him to bring even the most abstract material in his subject to life, and provides his class with much more than the basic grounding needed.
A recurring feature of Mr Alexander's lessons are his anecdotes about his previous jobs and his life in Italy. When I bring up Italy, and the country's very different economy, he says that it is much harder to get loans (especially government grants and bank loans}. Mainly due to this, the businesses are very simple and are mainly based on agriculture. He said the majority of the businesses are run by a family and are passed down. However, he warns me that the business climate there is getting worse.
Mr Alexander always talks about his previous aspirations and achievements - the police force, sports journalism, finance, Italy…would it be accurate to suggest he merely came into teaching as a last resort? "No, no, not at all," he appears uncomfortable with the more personal questions, but genuinely refutes the claim, "teaching's always been there - in fact, that's what Italy was. A chance to try teaching, to see if it was what I really wanted to do,". He talks about how teaching finally gives him job satisfaction and a sense of achievement. When he worked in London, it was all about the money, but he's not financially orientated "I can live off my wage, that's all that matters to me when it comes to cash". Yes, lots of people claim to believe this, but if it's not money he wants, why turn up every day? "I like to see how far my teaching ability can go. Head of Department? Deputy?".
Mr Alexander is clearly passionate about his job, and is highly motivated in his career. His varied and extensive experience allows him to bring even the most abstract material in his subject to life, and provides his class with much more than the basic grounding needed.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
"Banker's Bonuses" - Eve McGlynn
The subject of Banker’s Bonuses has been highly debated within the press recently, as Britain’s economy continues not to improve, as promised by politicians, but to worsen, as time passes. Although the infamous ‘green shoots’ have begun to appear in the economy, with businesses announcing growth in profits, and rises in house prices have appeared, although by a small amount , the economy is nowhere near a full recovery.
Although the economy is in ruins, the employees of huge Wall Street bank Golden Sachs - who many hold to blame - continue to receive bonuses of around eight times the British annual salary, on average £323, 000 being paid to each individual, Golden Sachs forking out approximately £10 billion in total. The bank also seems to show disregard for the recession, as this becomes their largest payout ever in bonuses. The business itself has announced profits of £1.96 billion for this quarter, and instead of retaining profits, which could help to safeguard the business in the volatile economy, they continue to pay out five times their quarterly profit, at £10 billion, compared to a profit of £1.96 billion.
Some claim that although the Banker’s Bonuses are widely frowned upon, they are a better alternative to giving the Government more money, as to waste it on ‘pointless schemes’. The bankers will use the money to support the economy by spending, as politicians so frequently urge us to do. The banks also try to keep their employees happy, because without employees the huge banks could not function. Some bankers would consider finding another job, at another bank that would be willing to give them bonuses. This may result in losing more jobs, as vacancies, even at such high levels, are few and far between. Banks would rarely be willing to take back such volatile employees, and there would be many other possible candidates for the post, and so the banker in question would be without an occupation.
Alistair Darling plans to propose a 50% tax on Bankers Bonuses, which would be paid straight to HM Revenue & Customs, although it would not be the employees themselves that would be paying taxes, but the banks. For example, for a bank to pay out £1 million in bonuses, it would cost the bank £2.25 million, which would go straight into the government, to use on for example regeneration projects, or the NHS. This would benefit communities, all the while being fair to the employee, as their bonus would not be deducted, simply deferring the banks from handing out large bonuses. Alistair Darling insists that he is giving banks a choice, “They can use their profits to build up their capital base.” states Darling “But if they insist on paying substantial rewards, then I am determined to claw money back for the taxpayer.” Darling expected a smaller bonus payout due to the £80 billion losses suffered by British banks, although, they seem intent on handing out huge bonuses. Darling also believes that banks will find other ways to pay out bonuses, and is prepared to put the legislation through parliament, to stop them undermining his new plans.
Banks plan to hit back toward this legislation, though. MP John Whiting states that “It does sound like more of a controlling measure than a tax raising one: we need to see the detail but the obvious thought people will have is that it will be possible to sidestep the measure by waiting a year.” His statement only rings too true and the banks will not just defer the bonuses by a year, but take other measures too. Some bankers would be prepared to move to different places, where tax can be as low as 13%. This would only be one method of getting around Darling’s new plans. Some banks would take the simple measure of increasing salaries, instead of handing out bonuses, which would escape the tax, through this very simple loophole. Another, more elaborate loophole that has been found is to create artificially low value shares, that’s value would rise rapidly. If the defer bonuses by a year (or until the windfall tax ends), which would leave bankers without their £300, 000 pay out, would be remedied by a bonus twice the size the next year, which in the long run could support the economy, as the bankers would inject a large sum of money into the economy, an approximate (and sizeable) £20 billion.
In conclusion, the banking world is one that although many people say that they could do a much better job than the ‘fat-cat’ bankers, they also do not actually know the full story. People may have miracle cures to the recession, and they can be hostile towards bankers, politicians and the likes all they want, but, behind closed doors, the economy is a world which none of us can fully understand. The public may have opinion on how the country is run, but let me assure you, put any one in the seat of a politician, and they would, most likely, perform in a similar manner, if they were able to cope under the pressure. This does not mean to say that all politicians and bankers are saints, as they have not performed their duties well, and should continue to strive for the better of our country.
Although the economy is in ruins, the employees of huge Wall Street bank Golden Sachs - who many hold to blame - continue to receive bonuses of around eight times the British annual salary, on average £323, 000 being paid to each individual, Golden Sachs forking out approximately £10 billion in total. The bank also seems to show disregard for the recession, as this becomes their largest payout ever in bonuses. The business itself has announced profits of £1.96 billion for this quarter, and instead of retaining profits, which could help to safeguard the business in the volatile economy, they continue to pay out five times their quarterly profit, at £10 billion, compared to a profit of £1.96 billion.
Some claim that although the Banker’s Bonuses are widely frowned upon, they are a better alternative to giving the Government more money, as to waste it on ‘pointless schemes’. The bankers will use the money to support the economy by spending, as politicians so frequently urge us to do. The banks also try to keep their employees happy, because without employees the huge banks could not function. Some bankers would consider finding another job, at another bank that would be willing to give them bonuses. This may result in losing more jobs, as vacancies, even at such high levels, are few and far between. Banks would rarely be willing to take back such volatile employees, and there would be many other possible candidates for the post, and so the banker in question would be without an occupation.
Alistair Darling plans to propose a 50% tax on Bankers Bonuses, which would be paid straight to HM Revenue & Customs, although it would not be the employees themselves that would be paying taxes, but the banks. For example, for a bank to pay out £1 million in bonuses, it would cost the bank £2.25 million, which would go straight into the government, to use on for example regeneration projects, or the NHS. This would benefit communities, all the while being fair to the employee, as their bonus would not be deducted, simply deferring the banks from handing out large bonuses. Alistair Darling insists that he is giving banks a choice, “They can use their profits to build up their capital base.” states Darling “But if they insist on paying substantial rewards, then I am determined to claw money back for the taxpayer.” Darling expected a smaller bonus payout due to the £80 billion losses suffered by British banks, although, they seem intent on handing out huge bonuses. Darling also believes that banks will find other ways to pay out bonuses, and is prepared to put the legislation through parliament, to stop them undermining his new plans.
Banks plan to hit back toward this legislation, though. MP John Whiting states that “It does sound like more of a controlling measure than a tax raising one: we need to see the detail but the obvious thought people will have is that it will be possible to sidestep the measure by waiting a year.” His statement only rings too true and the banks will not just defer the bonuses by a year, but take other measures too. Some bankers would be prepared to move to different places, where tax can be as low as 13%. This would only be one method of getting around Darling’s new plans. Some banks would take the simple measure of increasing salaries, instead of handing out bonuses, which would escape the tax, through this very simple loophole. Another, more elaborate loophole that has been found is to create artificially low value shares, that’s value would rise rapidly. If the defer bonuses by a year (or until the windfall tax ends), which would leave bankers without their £300, 000 pay out, would be remedied by a bonus twice the size the next year, which in the long run could support the economy, as the bankers would inject a large sum of money into the economy, an approximate (and sizeable) £20 billion.
In conclusion, the banking world is one that although many people say that they could do a much better job than the ‘fat-cat’ bankers, they also do not actually know the full story. People may have miracle cures to the recession, and they can be hostile towards bankers, politicians and the likes all they want, but, behind closed doors, the economy is a world which none of us can fully understand. The public may have opinion on how the country is run, but let me assure you, put any one in the seat of a politician, and they would, most likely, perform in a similar manner, if they were able to cope under the pressure. This does not mean to say that all politicians and bankers are saints, as they have not performed their duties well, and should continue to strive for the better of our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
