AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Ever wonder how left wing Germany is?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
The current debate to answer this question can be seen with the discussions surrounding Josef Ackerman CEO of Deutsche Bank. He said that he would be ashamed to accept tax payer money from the government. As a result he is being skewered by everyone in the media and especially by the politicians (one even going so far as to say he should be arrested), because his position discriminates against those banks that need the help. And we should not discriminate in our society.

So here is the scorecard if you are keeping track:
when the bankers pay themselves huge bonuses they are scum.
When they lose a lot of money on risky investments they are scum.
When they irresponsibly hold out their hand for government help they are being socially responsible.
But when they say no i don't need help, they are again scum.

The funny thing is the people I know all applaud him for having some decency.

I'd post some links but they are all in German. Maybe I'll see if I can find an English article.
He is hypocritical, this is what is causing the condemnation.

Josef Ackermann was the first to suggest that Germany put together a bail -out plan (similar to the one in the US) much to the condemnation of the Social Democrats (earlier this month) who said his comments were inappropriate. They might well have a point, he is one of the leading voices calling for the state to 'get out of the markets'. When times turn tough he called for a rescue plan.

"If the United States has a rescue plan, Europe should be ready to offer similar solutions," he said, as quoted by Dow Jones Newswires.

Deutsche Welle article

Now he has stating in an interview that he would be ashamed about accepting taxpayers money! :o
In reference to the title of this thread. Germany is more left-leaning compared to the US... but then there are few developed countries which are not.
It is just so obviously fascist/socialist.

The only good bank is a nationalized bank. What a step backwards the bank with the most private individual customers is the postbank. Used to be government run.

Now they are basically trying to head somewhere they have already been that didn't work all that well the first time.
TheMan,
one big private bank's still standing in the midst of the rubble. So what? Evidence that the system of systematic fraud and fantasy value called free market has been successful, after all? Not some socialist left wing system has failed here as you hypocrite suggest.
I watch Deutsche Welle every day and they reported a lot about Deutsche Bank recently, not what you stated, and you offered no link. They praised Ackermann for setting an example by reducing his and his board members incomes by half for this year, and to forgo bonuses as well. They don't need assistance (yet), but their business is weaker too. The critics mentioned that is a drop in the ocean, a PR gag, and don't they have a point?

And yes, all banks should be nationalized. Postbank doesn't have the most private customers, by far not as many as Sparkassen and Volksbanken. That they have many, though more of half of their accounts are inactive nominal members is the heritage of being government run, since they could not refuse to open accounts (say for people with a rich history of loan defaults), they could not cancel accounts, and they offered them free of charge. One can't do in Germany without bank account, pensions, wages, insurance payments, whatever, everything is transfered to accounts. There is no system of cheques you can make to cash somewhere, or cash payments. Therefore, one needs at least one bank open for everybody.
Yeah except Germans don't watch Deutsche Welle. they watch ARD, ZDF, RTL, NTV, N24, etc. etc.

For reference try any of the above plus the Tagesspiegel, Spiegel or pretty much any daily newspaper published in Germany. Quotes from Merkel saying he is irresponsible and this could cause banks who need the help to not take it are everywhere. Plus the Linke Candidate for Bundespresident said he should be arrested. For that you can reference the story I linked about he size of the EU bailout both quotes are also listed in there as well. The list goes on and on. The only positive press I have seen is an op ed in the Handelsblatt, which I'm sure you don't read.
Well, here's a Spiegel report in English. It says

Quote:No Bonus for Deutsche Bank Boss Ackermann

Josef Ackermann, head of Germany's biggest bank, said he would not accept bonuses this year, forgoing the potential for millions in personal income.

Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann says he'll skip his bonus this year.
The German Social Democrats have never been shy of a little populism. In 2002, it was then-Chancellor Gerhard Schröder who made his opposition to the impending US invasion of Iraq a major plank in his re-election campaign. SPD head Franz Müntefering followed in 2005 with his oft-repeated labelling of private-equity investors as "locusts" on German businesses.

Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück's insertion of a clause in Germany's €500 billion bank bailout bill calling for managers from those banks in need of public help to accept a reduced salary of just €500,000 per year fits right in.

But now, it seems that Steinbrück has been one-upped in the populism department -- by none other than Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann. On Thursday Ackermann told the German tabloid Bild that he would forgo his annual bonus this year out of solidarity with Deutsche Bank employees lower down on the ladder.

"I have told the supervisory board that in this difficult year I will waive my bonus -- for the good of deserving workers who need the money more than I do," Ackermann told the paper. In 2007, Ackermann head earned over €12 million worth of bonuses. It is unclear how high Ackermann's bonus would have been this year, but he said it was "a few million."

Deutsche Bank says it has lost in the neighborhood of $10 billion as a result of the credit crisis since the beginning of 2007.

At a Thursday management meeting in Frankfurt, Ackermann also said Deutsche Bank would not take advantage of help offered by the €500 billion German bailout package that passed through both houses of German parliament on Friday.

The SPD on Friday seemed unhappy with Ackermann's attempt to portray himself as a man of the people. SPD parliamentary floor leader Peter Struck called Ackermann's offer "pure showmanship." Struck made his comments just before Germany's lower house of parliament, the Bundestag, voted to approve the gigantic bailout package. He went on to say "the arrogance of the bankers has to come to an end once and for all. These gentlemen acted as if they were playing a giant game of Monopoly."

Despite the widespread disgust with the financial calamity brought on by dubious investments and high-risk trading, it seems doubtful that Finance Minister Steinbrück's plan to require bank managers receiving state help to accept a salary of no more than €500,000 per year will gain traction. Frankfurt law professor Theodor Baums told SPIEGEL ONLINE that "no one can require a manager with a valid contract to reduce his salary to €500,000 per year."

But then, when it comes to populism, real-world effects are perhaps secondary. Ackermann, for his part, certainly won't go hungry as a result of his offer. His base salary in 2007 was €1.2 million.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/busi...09,00.html

Steinbrueck's pissed. His life long ambition was to balance the state budget, and this he can forget now. :lol:
TheMan Wrote:It is just so obviously fascist/socialist.

The only good bank is a nationalized bank. What a step backwards the bank with the most private individual customers is the postbank. Used to be government run.

Now they are basically trying to head somewhere they have already been that didn't work all that well the first time.

This is not fascism. Do not get warped into thinking this is the case.

It is historically and semantically incorrect.
Some economy specialist in Germany made himself unpopular with the statement "the Jews were blamed for the great depression of 1932, and in today's depression, it's not the Jews, but the managers". Unpopular with the Central council of the German Jews, which claimed he's an anti-semit.
quadrat Wrote:Some economy specialist in Germany made himself unpopular with the statement "the Jews were blamed for the great depression of 1932, and in today's depression, it's not the Jews, but the managers". Unpopular with the Central council of the German Jews, which claimed he's an anti-semit.

I was thinking of this when I mentioned in another thread how both sides here do a lot to perpetuate the anti-semitism. His remarks were exagerated but not anti-semitic.
According to John L,fascism involves governments subsidizing,aggrandizing,chosen industrial concerns,but now owning them. If that's accurate,I;'d say the entire west is fascist in that sense.

For example,GM and Chrysler are begging our government for a big investment. I don't know if they get it or not,but if they did,it's a fact Toyota and Nissan won't get the subsidies and they produce big here as well.
Patrick, my definition of what Fascism is is not only True, but it is entirely Accurate. It is the rest of the crowd who are incorrect. Any State which controls the means of production through heavy regulation, is Fascist in nature.

As for this proposed merger, and the begging of subsidies, I am surprised, but not really shocked. Why should I be, when Uncle Sugar is already throwing money around to other businesses, and padding the bill with so much Pork, it squeals all the way to the bank. It is only natural that at least two of the auto companies would do this. But where is Ford, and can they be far behind? What about USS and the other major producers, who are not getting their "quota"?
Yes, you own the only truth. However, I feel there's more to fascism than your narrow point of view of a narrow facet of the economy. I still stick to the definition fascism = nationalism + militarism. Never mind, according to it, you're fascist too.
Here it is, the quote comparing Jews and managers. Dunno, as a German myself, I got no problem to say what I think about Jews.

Quote:BERLIN (Reuters) – One of Germany's most prominent economists apologised on Monday for comparing the criticism bankers are facing over the global financial crisis to anti-Semitism in 1930s Germany.

Hans-Werner Sinn, president of the Munich-based Ifo economic research institute, sparked outrage especially within the Jewish community with his comments which were published on Sunday.

"I apologise to the Jewish community and withdraw the comparison," Sinn wrote in a letter to the President of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Charlotte Knobloch.

More than 60 years after World War Two, comments seen as qualifying the horror of the Holocaust, in which the Nazis killed 6 million Jews, are still unacceptable in Germany.

"Even in the global economic crisis of 1929, no one wanted to believe in an anonymous system failure. Then it hit Jews in Germany, today it is managers," Sinn had told Tagesspiegel daily.

The Council of Jews had swiftly demanded an apology and described the comparison as "outrageous, absurd and misplaced."
quadrat Wrote:Yes, you own the only truth. However, I feel there's more to fascism than your narrow point of view of a narrow facet of the economy. I still stick to the definition fascism = nationalism + militarism. Never mind, according to it, you're fascist too.

Again, the difference between "Truth" and "Accuracy" Your equation is true, but it is not accurate.

Why, because "lilitarism + nationalism = Fascism" is not always true, when you reverse the equation. That also goes for the SSR, old DDR, PRC, N Korea. ALL of them are nationalistic, militaristic, and not Fascist. THEY ARE COMMUNIST YOU GENIUS!!

Ahem, I rest my case.
No Dear, you're wrong. There was the perfect opposite of nationalism in the former communist countries, the internationalism. The idea was that members of the same class are the same all over the world, class warfare, not warfare of nations. The surely was some militarism in the CCCP, and is in North Korea, it's an instrument to diszipline people, but there was none in DDR. Due to the fascist intermezzo.
quadrat Wrote:No Dear, you're wrong. There was the perfect opposite of nationalism in the former communist countries, the internationalism. The idea was that members of the same class are the same all over the world, class warfare, not warfare of nations. The surely was some militarism in the CCCP, and is in North Korea, it's an instrument to diszipline people, but there was none in DDR. Due to the fascist intermezzo.
What ever happened to "workers unite"? Or was it a figment of Soviet (nationalistic) expansionism?
It's "workers of all nations, unite". Does it not express what I said in my last post?