1 Pixel = 1 million Dollars

Really2

StevieJ wrote: »

You can't call people greedy for looking for the best rates,

But yet the bank toppled? (don't forget this was just a savings they never did loans to people. So the risk the banks took to get the best savings rates were what brought the bank down.)
TBH if it was not greed for higher returns what was it? It all played a part of where we are now IMHO.

And I say that as an ex-icesave saver.

fedupfreda

Really2 wrote: »

Could not agree more
Greed was abundant from ever higher saving rates to 125% mortgages the greed was there in all quarters in the boom.
What gets me is that even now people are still looking around believing they were not part to the excesses.

We all were anyone who saved, invested, borrowed or spent went along with it.

Have to agree with you there Really2, but it's hard to go against the flow when you see everyone else jumping on the bandwagon, and (apparently) making a mint when you are slogging your guts out just to make ends meet. It was hardly surprising that so many people accepted the bounty on offer, even when it flew in the face of logic. Its human nature not to want to miss out.

The great shame is that if the banks had been a bit more careful about what they had been offering in the first place, and checked a bit more to see if people weren't getting in too deep and that they could actually afford to pay it back, we might not be quite as deep in the proverbial as we are now.

I certainly wouldn't have offered myself a credit card - being on minimum wage at the time - but I was offered one, and took it.:o Got myself £2K in debt just using it to make ends meet - I am only just finishing paying this off now.:o:o I dread to think how much I would have made had I been able to afford to stick that money in a savings account instead :eek: If only I had been forced to live within my means a bit more at the time:( But hey, I learnt money respect the hard way. Which, ultimately, is the only way. And each generation has to do this for themselves. You only have to look at history to see that.

Really2

fedupfreda wrote: »

Which, ultimately, is the only way. And each generation has to do this for themselves. You only have to look at history to see that.

Great post.:T I did my bit of "learning" in my early 20's just before the boom.

lemonjelly

I kind of like how this thread has looked at how we, as individuals have to take responsibility. In my view, people don't take enough personal responsibility nowadays, frequently are only to quick to point the finger of blame at others.

However, surely institutions should bear equal responsibilities too?

Really2

lemonjelly wrote: »

However, surely institutions should bear equal responsibilities too?

I suppose their punishment will be there balance sheets and share values for years to come.

lostinrates

lemonjelly wrote: »

I kind of like how this thread has looked at how we, as individuals have to take responsibility. In my view, people don't take enough personal responsibility nowadays, frequently are only to quick to point the finger of blame at others.

However, surely institutions should bear equal responsibilities too?

To take responsibility people need choice and a lot of people don't see the choices we still have, feel they made no choices i things they don't like....so they feel....absolved.

IMO they are incorrect..

....but a lot of us have always said we are all to blame. Here we nod sagely and thank...try saying it t a cocktail party or coffee social...I can assure you the response is different Very different. (I need a little devil smilie.) Hasn't stopped me though.

fedupfreda

Really2 wrote: »

I suppose their punishment will be there balance sheets and share values for years to come.

Probably not - businesses can write these things off/sell the debt on/take it as a loss against tax. Whilst debtors can get chased forever and a day and get ever increasing amounts of interest loaded on to the debt and see 'the light at the end of the tunnel' getting further and further away :mad:

Not that people should evade their personal responsibilities - but it is all too easy for big business, in particular, to find loopholes - and for their chief executives to walk away, pockets loaded, whistling into the sunset! Whilst the poor saps that work for them take the hit in reduced wages/lost jobs in order to make up the slack. Yeah, I know - that's capitalism for you - but it still doesn't make it morally right.

JP45

StevieJ wrote: »

You can't call people greedy for looking for the best rates, classic example was Icesave, there were guarantees up to 20k and 35k ( it wasn't obvious at the time that the UK govt wouldn't cover the first 20k). I personally would not have reinbursed anyone over the guarantee limits.

Nor would I. I actually avoided Icesave for the very reason that the rates looked too good to be true. More fool me, given that the government subsequently decided in its vote-seeking wisdom to fully reimburse everyone, regardless of the FSCS limits.

To my mind, the widespread failure to apply moral hazard is one of the most serious, if not the most serious, aspects of this whole crisis. If people and institutions that chose to take a greater risk in order to earn a higher return are subsequently bailed out by the taxpayer, then we cannot be surprised if they decide to do so again in the future. Indeed, it would be a perfectly rational decision on their part.
.

StevieJ

lostinrates wrote: »

....but a lot of us have always said we are all to blame. Here we nod sagely and thank...try saying it t a cocktail party or coffee social...I can assure you the response is different Very different. (I need a little devil smilie.) Hasn't stopped me though.

Remind me again, why are we all to blame?

lemonjelly

Really2 wrote: »

I suppose their punishment will be there balance sheets and share values for years to come.

Hmmm. Not really the same though is it.
Personally I feel that corporations (& particularly their heads) should be a lot more accountable than they are. I just feel that the range of options which can be brought against an individual who has done wrong is quite large. However, the same cannot be said for organisations who have acted illegally/unethically etc.

I'm also one of those who believes corporate manslaughter legislation should be brought in.