Today’s post looks at the story of the ‘fearless girl’ statue that was erected directly opposite the famous ‘charging bull’ on New York’s Wall Street, and the news today that the asset-management company behind its creation have agreed to pay a settlement fee of $5 million to settle ‘ federal allegations that it paid female executives less than their male counterparts ’. Whilst one may suggest that this chain of events is ironic, it is put forward here that what it actually represents is an accepted understanding on behalf of those in power that the public can be easily swayed, as long as the right people fight for the powerful (whether knowingly or not). In reality, the fearless girl statue, which stands as a symbol of defiance and the demonstration of equality, serves to mask systemic inequalities between men and women, and between different ethnicities; unfortunately, even ardent supporters of the public’s cause have fallen foul of this symbol-driven misdirection. Rather than

This post is concerned with the recent publication from the ‘Financial Exclusion Committee’, a committee that was set up by the House of Lords to ‘ consider financial exclusion and access to mainstream services ’. The report has created headlines that allude to the poorest in Britain being excluding from banking services, and ultimately being turned towards ‘ high-cost credit ’ and ‘ rent-to-own ’ products, However, there are a number of aspects, some of which are particularly vital for society, which emanate from this report and are worth considering. Ultimately, the report suggests a number of reforms and, although advisory in nature, strikes the right tone in terms of what is required to protect the vulnerable in society as we rocket towards a new phase. The report tackles a number of issues in terms of what is being labelled ‘financial exclusion’. The first aspects that we will look at revolve around the role of the banks within society. The first recommendation that may hav