We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Killing the goose that lays the golden eggs...in London
Comments
-
I have to agree, regulation and govt support seem to be part of the problem rather than the answer - how many would have put their money in to ice save if there had not been an implicit guarantee, instead high rates would have been treated with the suspicion they deserved.
And of course if consumers got in to the habit of making their own choices and standing by the consequences then the economy might work a lot better.
If there isn't some form of regulation and "guarantee" who would you trust?
The banks don't really appear to be able to regulate themselves in the customers interests only their own.
Perhaps the regulators should hav ebeen all over icesave and down grading the level of protection or removing their license to operate?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »High street demise is partly our fault too, but this is where (local) government interference comes in, making it nigh on impossible for shoppers and business alike.
Even if it means buying less. Buy British.
Consumers vote with their wallets.0 -
Part of the problem IMHO is the shift from bank tellers being clerks to being salesmen. Ironically enough, AIUI that trend started in the UK with Nat West, now part of RBS!
The solution here has to be to allow insolvent banks to go bust. If people think it's a good idea to bail out some of the savers first then that's fine I guess although I wouldn't do it beyond a few grand in the current account. If you do that and make banks to back to being unlimited liability partnerships you might find a few less corners being cut and a longer term view being taken.
I agree with you Banks started loosing their way in the late eighties when they moved away from integrity and sound advice to hard sell sales. Sales shone, risk became the poor bed fellow.
AIUI the government charge a levy on the banks to provide the depositor contingency (appreciate it is no where near enough if required).
Where else would we trust for our hard earned? Not everyone is a debt junkie and savers are already being shafted as it is."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
But the market would provide, insurance companies with good names might offer garentees, the most trustworthy banks would offer the lowest rates, people would spend their funds around, the newspapers would publish advice etc etc - rather like with cars people would trust certain brands and look for advice.I think....0
-
The reason there is regulation is that when something goes bang and everyone loses their money, they demand that the government does something about it and gets them their money back. People don't want to be responsible for their own decisions when those decisions have gone wrong...0
-
But the market would provide, insurance companies with good names might offer garentees, the most trustworthy banks would offer the lowest rates, people would spend their funds around, the newspapers would publish advice etc etc - rather like with cars people would trust certain brands and look for advice.chewmylegoff wrote: »The reason there is regulation is that when something goes bang and everyone loses their money, they demand that the government does something about it and gets them their money back. People don't want to be responsible for their own decisions when those decisions have gone wrong...
Bank services are based on trust. You may be buying services and products, or even depositing money today that you won't "need" until sometime in the future. If they simply aren't there or availble when promised then this undermines that trust.
I have absolutley no confidence that the market would provide. Why would I trust a newspaper, not exactly trustworthy, honest, and unbiased. You can go and road test a car and get a feel as to whetehr it meets your needs.
If I make a bad investment in a particular fund, having had the benefit of key facts and information, fair enough.
If I am deliberately missold a product or can't rely on my money being availble because it has been mismanaged without my agreement then I think it is fair that redress is availble from the centre.
Buying a bad or wrong product, such as a car, is usually readily apparent. You can seek rederess at the time. Without the Sale of Goods Act I doubt your redress options would amount to much either. Without MOTs we would have unsafe and unroadworthy cars.
Interstingly I doubt we would have been having this discussion back in th elate 70s/early 80s. Banks and building societies were considered trustworthy and honest for the masses. Don't dipute they wheeled and dealed but they weren't questioned like now.
What went wrong?
Greed, profit at any cost?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
I don't believe the basic premise here, about bankers leaving when taxes rise.
Where's the data to back it up?
People make these predictions as if economics and human behaviour is like one billiard ball clicking into another like a giant Newtonian mechanism.
They could go to Switzerland. Their wives'll really love it. I'll bet.
Or go and live like a battery hen on level 80 in flatbock 18910 on one of the Asian tiger islands where everybody has to run backwards when the tide comes in.
Nope, it's far more likely they'll just find a mechanism to stay in London. It's a major world city in a prime location. It's a loooong way away from collapsing into the financial version of modern Detroit.There is no honour to be had in not knowing a thing that can be known - Danny Baker0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »Even if it means buying less. Buy British.
Consumers vote with their wallets.
They do indeed vote with their wallets. If those wallets are being filled less then they have little choice not to."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Most won't simply up sticks because most bankers are indeed, just people like the rest of us.
Most will have family in the UK. Local ties. Kids in schools. Partners in jobs. Most will feel comfortable in their home nation.
Only a few will leave, and those are likely to be those with no ties, and may have gone anyway if a better offer came up.
Think it's a little insulting to keep telling us bankers will just leave, pretending the public is so dense they will just believe it.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards