Moral predicament

So, almost a month in and not a single word from me about the economy, banking or finance.

If there is one thing the economic / financial crisis has managed to achieve it is ensuring that smug 25 year old nippers who just got a job in an investment bank can no longer pull girls by knowingly throwing about obscure names and acronyms of financial instruments. [sorry, but simply cannot resist adding, "and boy how they played those instruments!"]

"You know, I am a fixed assets spot trader in CDSs" says STYON (Smug Twentyfive Year Old Nipper). "So you are the bastard who got my nan to re-mortgage her house? She now lives out of a box in our garden!" says G-PEB (Gorgeous, Plastically Enhanced Blonde) as she throws the glass of champagne he sent her over the bar straight in STYON's face.

And yet, at least for me, banker compensation, or its complete elimination, is not that easy a subject from a moral perspective. Here goes. On the one hand I find people making money for taking risks with other people's money rather than for how successfully they did it (returns to investors and shareholders) morally unacceptable. And, by the way, when the tax payer needs to bankroll the banks when they fail that means they are risking everyone's money. On the other hand, I wouldn't really mind two or three years of 7-figure cash bonuses. I have to ask myself, were I in the position to get those bonuses, would I have refused them on account of them being morally unacceptable? I have to admit, to myself first and foremost, that the answer would be a resounding "No" [and probably also, on my knees, "please don't take my bonus away. Pleeeeese."] Would you?

And for those of you who were wondering how the Russian New Year party went, I can honestly say: not since the days of Marie Antoinette did so much champagne flow. Not since the days of Tsar Nikolay II did so much vodka ease the downing of so much caviar. I only hope for a better ending than those two enjoyed.

J