Re: Banks taking advantage of us all. We should all do something about it!

JacksterD

Incyder wrote: »

if you hate banks then use a building society instead. i do.

This.

Or the Co-Operative Bank, which is similar to a building society. The bank itself isn't a mutual, but it's wholly owned by The Co-Operative, which is a mutual.

opinions4u

ILW wrote: »

But a serious threat to do it could in effect force the banks to pay higher rates to savers, they would have to increase rates to borrowers to do it, but it does appear that it is the savers who actually hold the true power without realising it.

Impossible to deliver as most mortgages and personal loans are on pre-determined prices.

Up the savings rate and your bank goes bust.

opinions4u

JacksterD wrote: »

Or the Co-Operative Bank, which is similar to a building society. The bank itself isn't a mutual, but it's wholly owned by The Co-Operative, which is a mutual.

Ah yes, the whiter than white Co-Op Bank.

Sponsors of the Labour Party and doublers of their chief executive's pay.

ses6jwg

Ah the Co-Op bank and the "holier than though" building societies.

Of course neither pay their executives a big fat salary do they, and of course no building society in history has ever offered a 110% mortgage.

ILW

opinions4u wrote: »

Impossible to deliver as most mortgages and personal loans are on pre-determined prices.

Up the savings rate and your bank goes bust.

I believe the majority of mortgages are now on SVRs, credit cards are variable etc. nearly all overdrafts are variable.
It is more a matter of interest that the millions of savers (who have been treated like crap, even Mervyn King used the word sacrificed) have the power to bring the whole system down.

I would suspect only about 20 or 30% of deposits would need to be withdrawn to cause mayhem.

ses6jwg

ILW wrote: »

I believe the majority of mortgages are now on SVRs, credit cards are variable etc. nearly all overdrafts are variable.
It is more a matter of interest that the millions of savers (who have been treated like crap, even Mervyn King used the word sacrificed) have the power to bring the whole system down.

I would suspect only about 20 or 30% of deposits would need to be withdrawn to cause mayhem.

The only people anyone would be hurting by doing that is the plebs, who would lose their homes, their jobs, and see their life savings disappear. it wouldn't hurt the banks or anyone with any power.

ILW

ses6jwg wrote: »

The only people anyone would be hurting by doing that is the plebs, who would lose their homes, their jobs, and see their life savings disappear. it wouldn't hurt the banks or anyone with any power.

The only ones it would hurt is the people who overindebted themselves. Those that were prudent have been walked all over, but it appears they do have rather a lot of power.

realaledrinker

opinions4u wrote: »

Ah yes, the whiter than white Co-Op Bank.

Sponsors of the Labour Party and doublers of their chief executives pay.

a) No they don't. Think we've argued this before.

b) Given that the chief exec was only the chief exec for 5 months in 2009, not surprising his pay 'doubled' in 2010!

realaledrinker

ses6jwg wrote: »

Ah the Co-Op bank and the "holier than though" building societies.

Of course neither pay their executives a big fat salary do they, and of course no building society in history has ever offered a 110% mortgage.

If I was responsible for an organisation managing over £100 billon of customers' money, I would want a reasonable screw in return for that responsibility.

Get real.

Alpine_Star

zppp wrote: »

Here we go again.

Someone who doesn't understand economics, and that a full run on all banks, would bring the whole economy to it's knees.

Banks are commercial organisations.

But that's just the problem isn't it?

Unlike any other business sector, banks are exempt from the usual forces of free market principles - because they are the economy.