Misc: One News Page Alert: Views on the News: Dubai, bankers' bonuses and t..

Dear Haytham,

We have been monitoring the world's news headlines on your behalf,
and found the following news report which matches your search term
*Make Money Earne*:

------------------------------------------------------------
Views on the News: Dubai, bankers' bonuses and the value of web
content
------------------------------------------------------------
Bloggers have spent much time this week trying to unravel what
represents true value for money and, perhaps unsurprisingly, their
views do not always chime in with those in power.The debate began on
Monday, when the Dubai government said it would not guarantee the
debts of Dubai World and hinschelwood asked: Is this proof that
getting slaves to tip sand into the sea isn't a good investment?Full
many a towerIs built to be unfilledAnd a waste of capitalIn the desert
air.Wrote GreatGreatGrandDad.Jonathan Freedland's CiF that the debt,
excess and exploitation is not just down to Dubai, we've all had a
slice of this pie, got clemsworld thinking: The $64,000 question is
precisely who exactly is the mythical loan shark that we (as a global
community who have 'all been at it') owe all this money too exactly?
When is he going to knock on the door and what will his henchmen look
like?Well, there might be a few bankers looking for some gainful
employment, if RBS is correct. On Wednesday, the bank revealed that it
had reluctantly surrendered the right to decide how many bonuses
should be paid for the current financial year. However, it was the
caveat that this may adversely affect staff retention and recruitment
that forced many to question whether the bankers really deserved the
payouts.Seriously, which planet are these people living on? asked
jacquai. If you don't like the terms of the dealÃ¢Â€Â¦ we, the people,
we will have our money back thanks, because I for one, would rather
spend it on hospitals, doctors, nurses, schools and
teachers.CrystalMethod added: As for 'talent' at the banks, I used to
write software for trading platforms until I got too bored of the bank
bureaucracy. As part of my job I came into contact with a large number
of traders and other trading floor 'talent'. They to a man (very few
women in that environment) were no more savvy about economics than the
bloke in the betting shop. They would only buy when it was obvious to
do so, and sell like lemmings at the lightest provocation.What bonus
pool? asked Voltaire21. Oh, they mean the reward for failure money.How
about some negative bonuses for the top earners to bring them down to
the average wage? suggested Cyphon1988.The whole matter is a farce,
this should have been agreed in advance, said Koolio. Sadly the
Treasury seems unable to see beyond its nose these days. It is very
rare for the largest shareholder and the board of a company to fall
out in public, especially when they are supposed to be working towards
the same goal. It makes things look very amateur.Davidlan agreed with
the argument in favour of a windfall tax on bonuses, presented by City
columnist Nils Pratley: It needs to be done. Government intervention
in this instance is the only realistic option for changing the current
bonus-driven investment banking culture. While the bonuses themselves
are, because of their visibility, a public annoyance, the real problem
with the current bonus culture is that it drives palpably bad
decisions prompted by a short-term focus on revenues. As long as bonus
mania is a part of mainstream banking then the whole financial system
remains exposed to the (strong) possibility of another meltdown.Then
Lord Mandelson waded into the argument with a plea that banks should
show some restraint on pay.Dear oh dear! tutted SAEZ. Let's ask Satan
be kind, the Nazis be tolerant and Blair do something about the Middle
East! Mandy is trying to pull our leg.Mandelson is part of the same
over paid, self-satisfied, patronising bunch of morons who think that
they are the only ones in the country who 'produce wealth', added
rubberneck. Every person in the country is a part of wealth production
every time any economic transaction is carried out.And the prime
minister? This week it emerged that Gordon Brown is the 324th highest
paid person in Britain's public sector.324th? asked waylandsmithy. You
get what you pay for. Although in Brown's case, I'm sure we're
definitely not getting value for money.The other big value debate this
week centred around whether or not we should be paying for internet
content. Tim Luckhurst's Cif praising Johnston Press' move to charge
for online content from six of its local titles brought some lively
debate on the value of journalism.Bring it on baby! wrote
TheGreatGigInTheSky. You stay on YOUR side of the paywall, and we will
stay on OUR side of the paywall.Dinosaur rages against approaching
asteroid, added Ragged. Blog at 11.Then there was the decision by
Google to allow publishers to limit free news access, following
complaints by Rupert Murdoch about 'theft' of content. The story
stirred plenty of comment, most of it pretty negative about News
Corp.I hope Google adds a button so that these newspapers can be
filtered out, wrote prayle.Xiol added that it is all a waste of time
anyhow: The news sites will quickly realise that all the users will
end up doing is clicking the Back button and finding another site with
the story they're looking for.What about pundits then? They've got to
add something of value, haven't they? Er, not so, says harmonyfuture
who wrote following commentary from Morgan Stanley's Graham Secker
which included the prediction that living standards are likely to
fall, reflecting factors such as a weak jobs market:Is the author of
these statements paid a lot of money to make these predictions or does
he have a degree in the 'fu**ing obvious', asked this blogger.The only
safe prediction is the value debate has a long way to go. Keep them
coming.