As I'm sure most of you know, it has been front page news that former chief executive of the Royal Bank Of Scotland Sir Fred Goodwin has resigned with over £17 million in his pension pot.
The government wishes to try and retrieve some of this sum through legal action, as "the ethics of such a pension in this financial climate are unnacceptable."
Basically, there are many people out in Britain struggling to make ends meet and are living for tomorrow, unsure whether the next letter that comes through the door could be disaster or otherwise.
Yet, Sir Goodwin has worked hard to get to the position he was in. The pension pot he accumulated would not be any different in a normal financial climate. As far as government irony goes, there is probably a good number of MPs with an annual pension sitting much higher than the income of many average families. Contradiction possibly?
Do you agree with Sir Goodwin's right to live in peace? Or should his money be put back into the economy to try and benefit others? Discuss below.
I couldn't help myself. It tells you exactly how I feel.
I believe this is one of the reasons why the BIG banks are having a financial crisis, and a very GOOD reason why they should be allowed to fail, instead of the Government bailing them out. Possibly those voting for the bail-out package are as responsible as Brown is for propping up Banks to the extent that they can still pay their top executives big money.
^The bank needs to be allowed to fail, then it will come time for the courts to order them to pay what debts they can, according to the importance of that debt.
In such a case (and assuming a fair judge), the pension for management would be considered a very low priority debt, and would only pay, say, 2%, while more important debts (like giving money back to investors who invested in that bank) would be paid back in a higher percentage.