|
BANKS --- DEFUNCT SYSTEMS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH. Disposable liabilities or essential default mechanisms? In other words can banks be written off or are they plugging a valuable hole ? The cry is out against politicians and banks among other institutions. Extortionate professional advisors and money lenders making mice meat of small businesses are not quite out of the picture either They all represent the final straw to a long suffering public out for blood and freedom from the eternal tax assaults that lead nowhere even as they wipe the floor clean with the entrepreneurial spirit. Government bale outs of banks have been seen in this light by the young and impressionable who view the massive write offs and last minute smash and grabs by the board members who have never even met a single shareholder. The mystified young about to take over key positions in an essentially corrupt society demand changes (and with good reason) as they view these insensitive bankers as a threat to all economic growth. The jobless young and marginalised (and especially a combination of both)), has had it with respect to these outdated systems of social control. They cannot identify with the political trends or destructive represseive measures let alone open a bank account. Banking functions are questioned with respect to the provision of a service that uses other people´s monies for no other reason other than to hold it “safely” or spend it on their behalf until they have to be baled out by the tax payers of all people ! That is not all however when it comes to underlying political subversion in the form of subsidies and loans to what the classify as the underpinning of the giant multinationals which end up by paying taxes elsewhere, if they have to. Bank of Santander for example classified as a major National achievement and patted eternally by the Ministries, is no longer even Spanish when it comes to the international body and which shares of all global, government supported, purchases, now sport foreign heads and contribute to foreign fiscal masters including offshore ones. The only remnant, the original and isolated "Spanish" retail network produces less than 12% of the global income and has recently been the beneficiary of local tax devolution rather than contributor. The same picture can be seen in other European countries some of which have even been indicted, like Barclays for fraudulent twists in their base rates among other things. Tail wagging politicians are easy to come by as the massive collapse of Bankia the main Spanish Bank (now nationaliszed) drew an equally colossal plus of more than 30 thousand million euros as a second refloat.It was hoped that the sale of its shares at an appropriate time would enable the payment but of course, as always, pipe dreams fall very far short of objectives. Although apparently repayable to Europe by the bank itself over a period at low interest rates,years after that it is obvious that the very citizens themselves effectively signed the responsibility. The debt was kept out of the national debt statistics for obvious reasons. The State in most democracies devoid of serious public control of finances, can invest in whatever the state machine thinks “suitable”. Often they are disasters as happened with South American follies and which funds always seem disappear into the horizon for better or for worse. But it´s the banks that we are really concerned about in this instance. Are they worthy of the trust the public places in it ? Or are those illusion now too tarnished to be taken for granted ? Since the term safety is now relative, the overall purpose of these gigantic runaway money machines (and some would say one armed bandits) appears questionable. The problem is that it is too late for either banks or politicians to do anything likely to control this angry rising tide of discontent. Despite the very public apathy that brought about the licentious abuses by both banking and political systems, the hitherto seemingly disinterested crowds took to the streets with a vengeance in relatively pacific, European countries. There is also very little chance of rising totalitarian law enforcement tactics created by instability being able to prevent violent behaviour in the case of the inability of any one bank shutting its doors on its clients. Extreme right wing groupings dangerously face thinner division lines with equally venomous left wing elements. Political situations that put Prime Ministers in front of these representatives, cannot produce effective results. Perhaps the party system is no longer functional with leaders regularly taking egg on their faces as a matter of course, but the extremist groups are her to stay for a while. As far as Europe is concerned, taking it all in its stride appears to be a natural stance. What else can it do ? What few people understand is that the disintegration of sovereign structures within its members States was not just allowed for, but seen as the easing of the path to overall control and ultimate, unfettered, European identity. Brexit rests its case. It explains why the present Lord of the Manor, Jean Claude Juncker is always at the very borders of the schism with a smugness that does not seem to add up to dissent. None of this is visible to the general members of the public who are not brought up on the finer details of the machinery of ambitious, large scale, community expansion. An overhaul of the banking system is considerably overdue, and perhaps the time is ripe for clear cut changes, in this respect. Whether Europe is ready or willing to touch these sacred cows of political support, is yet to be seen, but whereas it thinks that bigger is better, the real source of growth lies in the smaller, mercantile banking elements with real entrepreneurs on board. The erosion of the middle classes and the creation of a society relatively free of the expensive and bungling bureaucracies is not a dream but the banks as we know them have to go. What is causing the system to collapse ? But can blame really be levied at the Banking system or even at the generally, ill equipped, moderately cultured, politician dependent on advise from up top at every turn of he game ? Is there a need for a genuine modern interpretation of both these functions and their attachment to values which guarantee social protection and stability ? These are difficult if not prickly questions to answer in the absence of an immediate alternative. From the sound of things, both banks and politicians could disappear overnight without anything untoward happening to anybody in the event. Money can be handled in a great number of ways by independent agencies as and when required to be transferred, spent or loaned. The lack of security they reflect today is as much an European nightmare as it is in other less sophisticated countries. At worst, they can suddenly prevent all withdrawals like they did in countries like Argentina and Cyprus and at best they might just cut back so badly that banking would have to enable intermediate multifaceted retail outlets (like supermarkets) to prevent clients having to walk or drive miles to the nearest branches. In fact where banks are concerned, provided they paid back every penny, most people today would welcome their disappearance from their everyday lives. Switzerland did the job for high income ear and security was never an issue. In fact the whole of the national banking systems can be replaced with imaginative and commercially supportive tools to promote growth and research for more qualified structures to emerge. Despite the apparent attempt on the part of both banks and politicians to impress their public with statements to the effect that national economic needs are being addressed, it is patently obvious that they are no more than empty words. The funding of ailing businesses by the banks and the cutbacks in public expenditure by the politicians, which are the present day crucial issues, are the tasks least likely to get the attention they deserve. Why ? Because banks appear to have more unaccountable holes than money to give out too suddenly. Rather than suffer exposure and social unrest, politicians know that cutbacks affect popularity and that does not go well with any ideologically based party that assumes the right to rule and change people´s way of looking at things. As a result public dialogue is heavily laced with propaganda which as we all know is no more than an unadulterated means of trying to make people feel at ease. How society ever got caught in this mesh, requires a very long trek down to roots through the last century.But why ? Are they all Communists or bound to other taskmasters who point the way with their threatening hands on the purse strings ? Is armament and exponential international strife based on it a coincidence or a consequence ? A very close analysis of the function of both bankers and politicians can tell us a bit more about that, but it will not alter the credibility with respect to both bankers and politicians which is now thin and extremely fragile. What is difficult to accept is that,incredibly, most banks all functioned badly ( or so they said, during good times and when mortgagors faced new downturns. One should have compensated the other, but they did not, so where did those profits which should have supported those loans throughout these periods go to ? Where did those gains which should and could have added healthy noughts to investor deposits go to ? And yet these sinister bankers circling round the world economies had even manipulated set interest rates to their own advantage! Curiously, not one single endowment policy managed by available investment expertise functioned to the benefit of the aspiring mortgage holders. These as we are seeing now ( and for many, too late in life), have faced the shortfalls leaving them crestfallen and very unsympathetically let down. The issue of these illegal interest fixings is now being address judicially, but as always at half mast and too late for many who lost their homes and reason for living. If these unexplained misfortunes had happened outside these institutional sacred cows, there would have been investigations bordering on the criminal from the very beginning as scrutiny institutions caught their first whiffs. They did not and anyone can imagine the worst with respect to the political forces,supposedly nonexistent, which virtually dictate the levels of quality of life allowed during any given period. The hidden good performance. The overall and apparent bad performance of the banking industry compares unfavourably with that of the results of most independent private investors who did very well out of the fifteen years leading up to the so called “crisis” of the late eighties and in many cases made killings after killings on property and commodity dealinGS. Were the banks therefore being badly advised or manipulated by Governments of the day and their party calls ? Such interdependence would have been unheard of decades before, but we saw the results at the end of the periods and the massive losses based on short sighted investments even when they should have simply creamed it in or did they ? What this shows is that the banking industry must have “robotised” these fund placements to the detriment of their clients and with a cynicism tantamount to disregard for results. What it means, is that they have worked together with other banks (with political suggestion perhaps) to enter markets not within the normal trend of good investment policy and taking on risks of a nature that individual investors just beyond “blue chip” risk factors, would have hardly countenanced and perhaps considered irresponsible. One example being investment in foreign, emerging markets where political feelers were already at work trying to get in through the back door. Could it also have something to do with an investment policy which had little to do with the performance of their own products and more with a corporate bid for leadership (and incestuous upper executive share dealings) on the exchanges ? In other words, did they play for press attention and cosmetic accounting to push share values up blindly ignoring the dangers ? Whatever, the average client, as can be seen, has been badly let down with results that even a short course in market dealing would have produced better. A look behind the curtain. If reality in this secretive and irresponsible world can actually be pinned down, it is likely that we would find that interbank share dealings have bordered on share pushing and share dumping which modern means of communication and behind-the-scene fraternity handshakes, have encouraged. Both these practices, long considered illegal, are beyond modern judicial redress, requiring a very determined exponent and massive fortunes to back the charges. It goes without saying that simply visualizing the day to day activities in many an international stock exchange is enough to see that daily corporate and institutional share dealing are the ones that cause the systematic, frantic, ups and downs. It shows the nature of the hidden hands which create the waves and troughs that can often go very very wrong. These are the signs of the bankers. Recently, some European Countries on the brink of collapse, have blamed ( and are attempting to outlaw) the small speculative market dabbler for the sharp curves, but either they are concerned that the hidden hands should be seen too closely or else they have worked it it out wrongly. The critical ups and down are too heavy for average unattached punters. They are without doubt, the bankers and allied, institutional, large fund managers playing the robot game – in on low and out on high, once or twice a day. It works until the market turns sour and fails to respond with the massive losses that ensue. All at the expense of the hapless bank client with the average endowment policy or the glorified, medium risk fund contributor. Behind the Black Holes. The impressive holes that the banks throughout the world have created could also have something to do with top level executive drawings when funds did not allow for splendid self indulgence, added to weak investment policies. What is irritating is the fact that most highly paid executives are no more capable of playing the markets than the average supermarket till taker. Most boards depend on in-house and external so called whiz kids who, it would appear, are just as likely to win or lose it all despite their so called skills. Their poor performance,in the main it would seem, could betray lack of genuine talent (common sense, serious performance research and attention to detail) and occasional hits brought about by happy go lucky adventurous streaks. In fact, some work on hunches rather than detailed studies of past performance of sectors and individual companies. “ This (the traditional slow way) is not the modern way of doing – it is too costly and takes up far too much time with little guarantee of results” as a bank chairman once told me at a top level champagne and caviar spread at their club premises. In fact, the little control exercised by the board of directors in many instances is clearly reflected in their individual c.v´s which glossed over the sort of specific economic skills that could supervise “play station” attempts at instant fortunes, by their blue-eyed whiz kids. “You are bound to hit some bad spots, but in the main they seem to balance out”. This came out clearly in the Lloyd's, Baring and other banking disasters. It is not difficult therefore to see where in these cases, endowment policy premiums actually went to. Pointed questions on the subject, levied at upper level banking management figures produce the same bland, lame excuses of market downturns and unpredictability of results. In fact what is distinctly lacking, is the ability of the executive to carry out functions for which they were not recruited. Buying canned advise is as common a practice as doling out commission “bonus” fortunes to fund managers, even, it would seem, when individual performances did not justify them. “We would not want them (the whiz kids) to go anywhere else” said another of those prime examples of banking misfits. Nothing in fact stops them from working with others - on the telephone at least and often just as misinformed between them. The truth of the matter is, that the situation could be much much worse, unless a great deal has not yet been told. Despite governments pumping in massive amounts to supposedly cover (mask) the critical shortfalls (cash funds versus liability balance), some banks were not even prepared to disclose the end results of the state infusions. In the event, the man in the street, would ultimately have to pay for all this not only in tax increases, but in added banking charges. All a shameful, political trayful of banking piracy that could hardly be called facing the real issues with a conscience. Conversely, letting the banks fall down would have probably put many a life and private fortune in serious jeopardy. If this is not a question of the devil and the deep blue sea, then very few things are. However, what matters is that common sense and genuine political talent should have made sure that the interests of the electorate were always paramount and effective regulatory forces should have been in place. The betrayal of the bank licence. Banking licences were initially set up to encourage people to part with their monies for their subsequent sound social investment, whilst providing the day to day service which made financial commitments simple. Bank charges, would (and rightly so) be absorbed by the placement of the accumulated funds in banking instruments like mortgages, guarantees etc. It seemed to go well with care and attention to details and client, until modern publicity preaching its usual false pretensions urged the clients of one to move to another and better service. Serious competition slid in with positive intentions, but as with most modern instruments of market competition, it went past its “best by” date as soon as the unscrupulous sales tactics moved in. With quality of service displaced by a manic urge for growth at all cost on the stock exchanges as quoted companies formed the home base from which all was to depend. This secondary sources of income for a system with unfair advantage on information, was to be its downfall as high street banking became an unattractive issue. From then onwards what mattered was the profit margin – not the client. In fact both personnel and client costs were the paramount factors leading to automation and impersonal service. The main contributor to the bankings system, the average wage earner, played second fiddle and became prey to the mendacious glossy advertising that started to appear on every available interior surface. Every offer limply centred around household scenes and family. Joy, reminiscent of the Church preachings,was geared to extract,with impunity, every possible margin that could be obtained from the unwary client. For people now being dragged into the spiralling consumer market, getting those credit cards, mortgages and investment policies wich promised huge opportunities became the visions of alternative worship. There was very little room for comparison in what has always been a tight market, as one banking entity copied another within very narrow differences of approach, advertising expenditure became serious overheads with editorial interest a prime target. Nobody will ever know where politicians, editor and banking interests ever came together but without doubt the nature of the force was and still is awesome. Worse still, was the unhealthy banking interest in property sales promotion with the sleek capability of smoothing every ruffle in even the worst of the finance applications. Nobody bothered to find out which bank had the most interest in selling what apartment, by virtue of their involvement in the development market itself and which explains why unusually high prices were achieved in many instances and beyond market correction. The so called cheapest loan over the longest period may sound foolhardy on both sides of the negotiating table, but if the bank had a stake in the sales in the first instance as partner/investor of the developer, then from the banks point of view, making it easy to sell the units, is not such a bad policy after all. Clearly, property and banking are linked beyond mere loans as they are indissolubly interdependent and explosive bubbles resulting form such attachments may well have been taken into account, but by then, the real profits had already been made in the increased property margins. The only loser, of course, as always, was the hapless borrower in a market plunge, faced with a rapidly depreciating asset that even his neglected endowment investment shamefully and inexplicably, did not save him from. The sad truth is that market values had become prone to bank support and the power of the banks to alter social conditions so drastically should have never been allowed. Today Court rulings are doing what governments should have done much earlier to protects its citizens. A non service that preys on public gullibility ? Unfortunately, the practical benefit of having the average wage or pension marshaled into accounts from which to operate payments and savings, is now outweighed by the irrational cost of these. The expense, has now practically become a form of rental of the service. Taking into account that the majority of the funds belong to those very people who put them there, the idea of charging the depositors commissions without providing a deep and detailed analysis of where they are being invested, or to whom profits are paid, is tantamount to licentiousness. Banks were,supposedly, duty bound to perform every act of economic activity within social parameters for the benefit of local needs. Among these was the support of standard aspirations, like secure homes, a modicum of useful luxuries and local social amenities. Instead, today, those criteria have not only gone by the board, but appear alien to any of the millions of bank managers who like puppets merely make the noises that their boards of control ask them to propagate. Scurrilous promotional activities which have contributed to property value escalations demonstrate that banking has drifted far away from their social requirements and turned into sterile and risky investment companies under the guise of high street banking. A superfluous Retail exercise Even then, performance does not even appear to provide consolations and political lending have bordered on the scandalous and above public acceptance. Incredibly, they would gladly drop high street banking services overnight, if asked to provide them for free, despite the fact that they provide the very base on which they owe their very existence. This would be called profiteering in any language. Intelligent, proficient investors would never leave their funds to high street banks to manage and results speak for themselves with its application dependent on head office decisions on what to go into. It is the day to day dribble of the average purse that enable all bank functions to seek profits and technically, the bread and butter of the system, but is this about to change ? The shameful aspect of the bank betrayal is that they have basically clubbed together to manipulate the stock exchanges and drive their selected shares where they want them for purchasing and the reverse for buying, ultimately. The question of utilizing those skills for the benefit of the average small and medium sized businesses not quoted on the exchanges, is of no interest to them . In fact, they view the prospects of unsecured (and often secured) loans to promote employment and industrial activity as foolhardy. The reason behind this is, that their loyalties, like those of the politicians are to their own interests in pursuit of feathering their own nests. They lean towards the giant multinationals, where behind the scenes agreements, provide loyalties to their common causes. In an indiscreet conversation in public baths in London, a disenchanted banking agent complained bitterly about the lack of ethical standards in some foreign banks. It would appear that they had clubbed together and agreed to support the launch of a new company in which they were going to make a killing from the bloated starting price. When the launch came about, the precipitous drop of the share price (which had been artificially hyped) was not met with the buying up agreed by one member of the group (which was a household name foreign bank) causing the others to suffer a substantial loss as the initial price could not be sustained by demand nor could they buy up artificiality at high rates with a powerful member of the platform falling out. What ethics had to do with any of it, including the obviously common cartel member behaviour, is anybody´s guess. The average investor considers all this to be safely within the parameters of the regulatory bodies, who of course assumes that these operate effectively. It is pretty obvious that they have been obsolete for some time in view of the daily violations and the nature of the spikes in the stock exchange graphs which speak volumes. The short term push and dump appears to be finally addressed reluctantly by Europe, except that the responsibilities are, as usual, badly misconstrued with the blame being laid on the doorstep of the average investor and not the institutions who have found easy pickings in it. It will be interesting to see what the effects of these measures will be. Black market banking? In some socialist European countries, the very existence of the small businesses that support the economy (and above all the labour figures) is a red rag to their bull. As targets of the bureaucrats who tax and neglect them to the ground they attempt to survive, often resorting to black labour in which they have more confidence than the average unemployment benefit seekers who apply for “work”. To be able to obtain high street bank funding these beleaguered and completely neglected small employers, have to pay as much as 20% hidden costs required by skillful and corrupt intermediaries who can at least guarantee the support and keep them in business. Even then, unencumbered security is essential. As a result, an international and dangerous web of second line financiers charging as much as 70% per annum have set up their own lucrative camps, knowing that the security offered will be theirs at the end of the day. The degree of deviousness betrayed in some of these contracts, varies but in most cases the clauses allow for a swift extra judicial transfer of title to the lender. It is the emergence of this market (obvious to the politicians) that demonstrates just how ineffective the social system is, with respect to the protection of the “tender roots” of growth. Nothing therefore that we have seen so far in the world economic place, is surprising. Why growth remains a problem is no mystery and yet no gallant white knight comes to the rescue and politicians continue to put pressure on those more likely to lead a recovery. Under the circumstances and in view of the ostrich attitudes by the banking fraternity, it would seem, that either their cash availability (whatever errors they may put out to keep their shares in place) is not what it seems on paper, for whatever reason. Their disregard for the proper function of the free economic system may alternatively have implications of a more sinister order. The ideological concern for the multinationals and large corporations on whose inside knowledge, they so desperately depend for their in-house and ultimately egotistical and socially destructive wealth making, may well be a means towards an end. A totalitarian state at their beck and call (as so often comes to mind) may have more substance than the wildest conspiratorial theories, “Destruction” may be a heavy word to use, but if such juggling against market trends (and disregard for personal performance analysis) has become the banking survival mechanism, then wobbles of any nature within markets can go unperceived or ignored. This in itself can hold the destructive and predictable results that we are seeing today. What appears to emerge from all this by implication is that the banks seem incapable of operating under any other circumstances other than those market manipulative ones which they have fed themselves into and to which they have become accustomed. But is the banking system as the animal we now see with such disgust, replaceable ? Or even perhaps dismiss able ? The answer is a resounding Yes and in the present trend towards massive unemployment, entrepreneurial disintegration and loss of platforms for wealth generation, the sooner the better. How this can be done is simply a question of feeding into the market, a whole variety of revolutionary banking entities, bound by controllable and specific social criteria specializing in the understanding and control of business factors (including entrepreneurial skills) and unbiased market appraisals. Tall order indeed but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the opportunities which these banks can create within a given framework of apprenticeship, can bring about a genuine distribution of wealth and encouragement of business talent, without allowing economic instruments like public stock market quotation to blur the intrinsic need to stick to basics all the time. They would be barred from entering that game. The variety and quality of such banking armies, would perhaps offer personal choice and inter-bank competition that would favour the genuine talented entrepreneurs and discourage nepotism. Those fund recipients whose performances over a period of time could be seen not to favour growth or employment could be weeded out or encouraged to merge with other more profitable entities. These can also be placed under greater, reasonable commitment to straighten out the glitches as they make their appearance. Such supervision could also from part of an equity stake on the part of what could be could be called venture capital providers. But what about the average wage earner and the banking instruments, like cards and cheque facilities ? Can they be channeled into similar fraternities better suited for family needs ? There is a perfect base there for greater control. It is obvious that the old fashioned but ignored charters regulating licenses sought by would be bankers, can be tailored to demand . Such licences could be issued within necessary parameters, like relevant economic studies of their public advisors (which is not present today in the selection of the average robot of a bank manager) and a background of field play ( business history) and successful experience in diverse sectors. These better suited managers of the small business economy, whilst sympathetic and encouraging, could exercise skillful, graduated control of funding. Guaranteed loans wrapped in innovative second signature, security measures which take flexible employment and bad market patches into account would be an advancement. These measure exist today in venture capital providers looking for the right companies to back and these would in themselves prove a useful link through the very business banks themselves. Measures like the incorporation of suspension of payments for periods and the creation of tax allowable insurance policies for the avoidance of short term crashes caused by cash flow or market upheavals, would provide buffer zones where and when they were needed.. The creation of these smaller and more effective economic social institutions, would put banks back where they started - at the service of society and not itself. The present way that profits are distributed outside the dividend system is both immoral and unfair. The so called creative reward system which pays out fortunes in good and and bad times to the privileged few is also well discredited. A modern system would therefore have to take many factors into account and like everything else on the drawing board, discussed and put to the test. Business clients of these mercantile agencies would need to have the same facilities everywhere due to the increased competition of a fragmented system just like the clinics of family medical advisor. As a result, and faced with the loss of the millions of small and medium sized employers, the banks would perhaps not be so capable of wantonly squandering their client funds on artificially rigged stock exchange dealings which so often go wrong. Perhaps also, those inexplicable fortunes paid to their retiring executives and commission based dealers, would become unnecessary in their irrelevance as they concentrated away from these practices and settled on taking their client investments to safe harbours and even perhaps into small business financing. Only then, would the hard hit, downtrodden, hardworking wealth creators, have faith in the privileged bank manager relationship on which many a battleship was launched in the last century. Sadly, it is in the tarnished and inexplicable results of interior banking investment, that lies the headstone of what once was the pillar of the employment market. It started in the early eighties as controls seemed to seize up with the speed of developments, and the world has never been the same since. Since this article was written, European banking has lost all its meaningful social contribution and were it not for political support and EEC funding, would have collapsed. Blatant administrative stripping, shareholder confidence abuse, false accounting, insider dealings and ill advised dumpings, form part of what is now a dangerous investment minefield. Reinvention of the service along honest and socially stimulating lines, as originally intended, is perhaps now too long overdue. Michael Mifsud was a House of Commons Commonwealth correspondent at the age of 16. He published Britain´s first trade journal for Drivers and became the youngest full member of the Commonwealth Press Union sharing platforms with the press barons of the day. He traveled with the Royal family for over a decade as a member of a press team,becoming much sought after on matters of Monarchy by the media. He had his own TV programme on culture and art (as a keen art collector and investigator)in Marbella,Spain and has recently published a very successful book on the nature of the unique people of Andalusia,called, Al Andalus - a trail of Discovery. He has been the subject of TV interviews in Spain and the UK on Princess Diana (whom he knew before she married)the Templars of which he became a very senior executive and royal exiles whom he met regularly as a director of the Monarchist League of Great Britain. Reuters recently featured him in an exclusive interview on Templars on the eve of the da Vinci premiere which was seen worldwide and was a an important contributor to the controversial books, Holy Blood and Holy Grail and The Messianic Legacy in which he is also interviewed. He is mentioned in others like The Sword and the Grail as an interpreter of the real meaning behind the Templar battle cry. His research over 30 years on the Knights and the symbolism is disquieting and unpublished. He was included in the 500 most "inspirative" people in the world - according to the American Academic BWW society for the advancement of Peace and which has gone into official political agency and government libraries throughout the world. He delivered a paper on the failing role of the world press in Paris as an official delegate of the organisation and published two well received papers on Culture and Globalisation. He has been offered an editorial seat on the board which advises its academic members throughout the world. He is a proud Freeman of the City of London and holds Polish, Serbian and Afghanistani decorations gleaned during his early Templar life in London. Pre-retirment business interests included publishing,professional academies, airline operating, airport carparks and hotels. retirement will be spent on getting all outstanding books out on the market.
Related Articles -
banks, economic growth, economy, europe, unemployment, share pushing, share dumping, banking secrets, high street banks, political banking, ,
|
