Ladies and gents - please calm down and stop adding to the hysteria

Jonbvn

gax23 wrote: »

:rotfl:And he bites! Didn't spot the earlier personal attacks from your cronies, then? Funny that

Cronies? !!!!!! are you talking about?

Please stick to the facts and stop trolling......

GeorgeHowell

mikeymo wrote: »

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

The media tend to overplay everything these days. If we had taken all their panic-mongering on board, we would have expected by now to be dead from AIDS, CJD, SARS, bird flu, or nuclear terrorism, to be frozen by southerly diversion of the Gulf Stream, to be blown to pieces by hurricanes or tornadoes, to be flooded by tsunamis, to see the planet thrown into the equivalent of a nuclear winter caused by the explosion of the Yellowstone National Park -- the list goes on and on, becoming ever more bizarre.]

Well, in case it's escaped your attention, millions of people HAVE died from AIDS, thousands did die in the Asian Tsunami, 6 million did die in the Holocaust, 10 million in the Stalin's USSR, 4000 in the 9/11 attacks etc. etc. Really bad things actually do happen. They might not happen here, with the Icelandic banking system, but you can hardly blame people for taking notice of what's going on and trying to protect themselves. Seems prudent to me. Still, if you're not worried then stay not worried.

These things have not escaped my attention, though I don't recall mentioning the Holocaust or Stalin's USSR in my post, both of which events are long enough ago to be irrelevant in the context of a discussion about today's media. What I referred to was the way that the UK media scare-mongers in terms of the effect of the other disasters mentioned on the UK population. None has proved to be a major risk to the vast majority of the population -- tragic though it is for those affected. The media does not habitually remind us that these are risks with high and devastating impact but with relatively low incidence, so that we can tailor our degree of concern accordingly.

In the current situation, for example, media comments to the effect that despite the £50,000 FSCS guarantee, ordinary savers might feel compelled to move their money to Germany, whose government were alleged to have made a 100% guarantee -- which they hadn't -- are unhelpful. Given the gullibility, and political and economic ignorance, of large swathes of the UK population, such suggestions run the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies to an extent, and certainly do nothing to allay unreasonable fears and to restore the atmosphere of ordered calm that we so desperately need.

bazster

mikeymo wrote: »

OK thanks for that. So what was the mechanism? Has the FSCS, using money loaned to it by HMG, actually sent real money to anybody (Santander? B&B? the depositors?)? Or is it still a promise? I genuinely don't understand what, if any, money changed hands.

Your point is taken, I agree, that it appears that HMG and the FSCS between them seem determined to ensure that depositors don't lose out. But if bank after bank fails, or more precisely, is allowed to fail, what then? I suppose at that point money is worthless and those with a roof over their head and some land to grow food to eat are in the best position.

OK, I understand your confusion. The *real* money was paid by HMG to Santander: it's the money that was in our B+B accounts and was about to disappear if B+B went bankrupt. If you like, the FSCS, using a loan from HMG, paid the compensation money to Santander so that it could continue to operate our accounts, instead of paying the money back to each one of us individually.

Unlike the Icelandic government, HMG is stinking rich in comparison to the banks, it will not run out of money (famous last words...)

maypole

itsnever2lateisit? wrote: »

I have 'enjoyed' reading this thread, and here is my tuppence worth.

The rational of 'normal' times is out the window at the moment. I don't think any of us know what will happen next, if the compensation schemes will actually work, if it came to it (Will be run by civil servants after all)

What should be clear is that no bank operates on money alone, as there is no bank anywhere that has the cash at hand to satisfy a full drawdown by all of its customers, banks operate therefore on TRUST and FAITH.

For retail banks like NR us individuals CAN cause a catastophic run, but for most banks (eg RBS) it is the wholesale markets that are currently causing problems, and the monies being withdrawn their make our savings look like a 2p piece in the crease of the sofa.

IMHO Robert Pestons sensationalist journalism is the wrong style in the current climate, Evan Davies would be a safer bet in reporting FACTS rather than speculation and Pestons gloating of 'breaking news'

Until European governments act together and quickly to draw a line in the sand that gives a clear message to speculators that they will get burnt the current situation will continue

I agree, we much preferred Evan Davies and he was more articulate.

Zebra

Many people have very genuine fears about the security of their savings.
Pointing out that these fears are not without foundation is not in my opinion scaremongering, and those who shout down these posters need to stop whistling in the dark and accept the seriousness of the situation.

gax23

Zebra wrote: »

Many people have very genuine fears about the security of their savings.
Pointing out that these fears are not without foundation is not in my opinion scaremongering, and those who shout down these posters need to stop whistling in the dark and accept the seriousness of the situation.

:T Well said

isofa

Zebra wrote: »

Many people have very genuine fears about the security of their savings.
Pointing out that these fears are not without foundation is not in my opinion scaremongering, and those who shout down these posters need to stop whistling in the dark and accept the seriousness of the situation.

I totally agree, but I hope you'd agree that pointing out the facts and discussing these, rather than posting alarmist misinformation is the way to go?

I don't see anyone shouting down anyone you posts factual, sensible worries or otherwise.

maypole

Zebra wrote: »

Many people have very genuine fears about the security of their savings.
Pointing out that these fears are not without foundation is not in my opinion scaremongering, and those who shout down these posters need to stop whistling in the dark and accept the seriousness of the situation.

I think people just want facts and not rude ignorant comments from certain posters.

susanjfp

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

mikeymo wrote: »

These things have not escaped my attention, though I don't recall mentioning the Holocaust or Stalin's USSR in my post, both of which events are long enough ago to be irrelevant in the context of a discussion about today's media. What I referred to was the way that the UK media scare-mongers in terms of the effect of the other disasters mentioned on the UK population. None has proved to be a major risk to the vast majority of the population -- tragic though it is for those affected. The media does not habitually remind us that these are risks with high and devastating impact but with relatively low incidence, so that we can tailor our degree of concern accordingly.

In the current situation, for example, media comments to the effect that despite the £50,000 FSCS guarantee, ordinary savers might feel compelled to move their money to Germany, whose government were alleged to have made a 100% guarantee -- which they hadn't -- are unhelpful. Given the gullibility, and political and economic ignorance, of large swathes of the UK population, such suggestions run the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophesies to an extent, and certainly do nothing to allay unreasonable fears and to restore the atmosphere of ordered calm that we so desperately need.

Agree with you and think it is fast starting to become self-fulfilling phrophecy and too many people are panicking due to the media but guess it sells newspapers and hence advertising. Best if people read the terms of the various compensation schemes in UK, isle of man, chanel islands for themselves. Synopsis of them is here

GeorgeHowell

Zebra wrote: »

Many people have very genuine fears about the security of their savings.
Pointing out that these fears are not without foundation is not in my opinion scaremongering, and those who shout down these posters need to stop whistling in the dark and accept the seriousness of the situation.

I think we must draw the distinction between those criticising the media for stirring it, and anyone trying to 'silence' those expressing concern on this forum. I unashamedly have been doing the former, but certainly would not do the latter. It is however futile for individuals to ask for reassurance about the security of their savings, to be told of all the guarantee schemes in place, and then still to wail about how worried they are -- it savours of Private Fraser's "We're all doomed !" from Dad's Army. If it ever came about that the £50,000 guarantee were reneged on in the event of a bank failure then we would be in the midst of such an unprecedented economic crash and collapse that we would indeed all be doomed.