MSE Leaders' Debate: Savings (Losings) Accounts

Former_MSE_Wendy

This thread is specifically to discuss the Savings (Losings) Accounts question in the guide:

Savings (Losings) Accounts: MSE Leaders' Debate

To discuss or ask a question about the guide: click reply

Ergie

For those on low incomes savings need to be protected. However a recession is partly caused by people saving and not spending.

I think they should massively increase taxes on savings and dividends, above a certain threshold, say 10k. That might encourage people to spend and not save.

I also dont believe in people living exclusively off investment income - it doesnt generate wealth in itself (unless invested directly into growing businesses) and should be highly taxed, encouraging individuals to work. what we need is more people working and creating wealth for the country.

Lokolo

I don't agree with Clegg in raising personal allowance to £10k. Thats a lot of money he is losing. I calculated it to be £400 a person who is earning over £10k (which is a lot of people!). I suspect he's getting all the money back from trident.

Labour, disagree with saving scheme.

Torys, disgaree with earnings and state pension. If people want to save more for retirement it can be through stakeholder/private. I am happy for the state pension to be static throughout.

Guess its the lesser of evils I have to choose.

murphydavid

Did any one of them answer the question?


Banks boosting their income by maintaining a high differential between lending rates and savings rates? Savers who want security and liquidity for their savings? And have little option other than to put their money into bank savings accounts that now have very little competition between them. Banks getting a free ride to pay very little interest and use the money to speculate.
It was a British tradition that a middle man (Once independent Building Societies) was there to arbitrate between the older savers and the younger house purchasers to make life good for both. The Building societies main task I saw was to check that the housing stock on which the loans were made was of good value – safe as houses.
I think most people will regret the twisting of this arrangement to allow these funds to be used in more speculative deals and would vote for a party who pledged to restore ring-fenced accounts that served this purpose.
As the government now has money invested in the banks the situation is feeding money into government coffers, there is no one I can find to vote for who intends to do anything about it. Every time I hear the Inter bank Interest rate is being held at 0.5% while at the same time the Bank of England has to write a letter to the Prime Minister explaining why they missed the inflation target, I wonder. Does the Prime Minister read the letter and is he happy with it? If I set a target and it was missed I would do something more than file away another letter.

DavidP24

It works both ways, if more people save there is more money for Banks to lend to consumers and business and they in turn spend it.

Old_Slaphead

Ergie wrote: »

For those on low incomes savings need to be protected. However a recession is partly caused by people saving and not spending.

I think they should massively increase taxes on savings and dividends, above a certain threshold, say 10k. That might encourage people to spend and not save.

I also dont believe in people living exclusively off investment income - it doesnt generate wealth in itself (unless invested directly into growing businesses) and should be highly taxed, encouraging individuals to work. what we need is more people working and creating wealth for the country.

Where do you think money comes from for businesses to expand, mortgages, loans etc ????

You think people should consume simply for the sake of it rather than putting some aside to ensure they're not dependant on the state in their old age ?

One of the main reasons for the recession is the massive debts people and countries have accumulated that have driven asset prices up to unrealistic levels.

arjar

The nearest any of them get to giving a practical answer to the question is Nick Clegg, in his reference to broadening the product range of NS&I. But investing in Govt. bonds will still be too complex for most people, so |I have another idea!

It strikes me that Govt. could effectively put a floor on savings rates by (1) offering an instant access ISA account (via NS&I) that pays a variable rate that is constantly a small amount higher than RPI inflation, (2) requiring all providers to continue to pay interest on money being transferred between accounts so there's no loss to savers during transfer.

The 'super complaint' about ISAs by Consumerfocus to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) will provide an opportunity for the next administration (whoever wins) to deal with this issue - if they want to. So the real campaign for savers will start immediately after the election.....

arjar

I hope you're being ironic. The whole mess we're in was caused by profligate lending and spending. If we all consumed a little less and saved a little more the world would be a much better place. It would be very interesting to see what happened to any politician who espoused this simple alternative to 'consumer' led so-called recovery.

Old_Wrinkly

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

One of the main reasons for the recession is the massive debts people and countries have accumulated that have driven asset prices up to unrealistic levels.

Yep. In my view, the main reason for the recession is simply GREED - both corporate and personal. And the secondary reason is the governments/regulators/boards of directors that allowed that to happen.

evenasus

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Ergie wrote: »

For those on low incomes savings need to be protected. However a recession is partly caused by people saving and not spending.

I think they should massively increase taxes on savings and dividends, above a certain threshold, say 10k. That might encourage people to spend and not save.

I also dont believe in people living exclusively off investment income - it doesnt generate wealth in itself (unless invested directly into growing businesses) and should be highly taxed, encouraging individuals to work. what we need is more people working and creating wealth for the country.

Where do you think money comes from for businesses to expand, mortgages, loans etc ????

You think people should consume simply for the sake of it rather than putting some aside to ensure they're not dependant on the state in their old age ?

One of the main reasons for the recession is the massive debts people and countries have accumulated that have driven asset prices up to unrealistic levels.

I'm guessing Ergie doesn't have substantial savings and will be happy to rely on the state pension. If I'm right, heaven help him when he's retirement age,

Carnaby_lamb

Cameron at least bloody reference the question,
I'll give you a hint,

its about savings.

that's not pensions or inheritance.


That is definitely a dodge too far, even by politicians standards.