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!
Define "High Risk" lending.
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »This is research by Broadbent. Hardly someone who you could describe as "level" when it comes to this sort of stuff.
Seriously?
You think a leading economist, and member of the BOE's MPC, isn't "level"...
Are you accusing him of lying?“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Letter from my MP again asking if I can be referenced in his taking up my points with the FSA but I ignored his last letter as I decided it would be all waste of energy. I'm still thinking its a waste of time so I will likely ignore the letter.0
-
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Seriously?
You think a leading economist, and member of the BOE's MPC, isn't "level"...
Are you accusing him of lying?
Does it look or sound like I'm accusing him of lying?
I said, in response to one of his outlooks on debt (that being assets owned vs total debt) that it just looks at 2 end points.
It doesn't consider those who own the debt don't in general own the assets.
What I'm saying is, the arguments are flawed. The arguments are defined by the analysis and how you analyse the base. And so are yours, as you still won't tell us what high risk is.0 -
Letter from my MP again asking if I can be referenced in his taking up my points with the FSA but I ignored his last letter as I decided it would be all waste of energy. I'm still thinking its a waste of time so I will likely ignore the letter.
Please take his offer up. As educational value will be immense.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »UK lending in 2007 was working. After all, the current default figures include all those loans.
Why claim something was high risk when it clearly wasn't?
In part because it has been handled with kidgloves, rates are near enough on the floor.
Had interest rates at remained at pre 2007 levels with no softly softly approach, and stagnating, falling valuations the picture would be different."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: »Does it look or sound like I'm accusing him of lying?.
It looks like you're muddling.
Again.
So do you now accept, as Broadbent's paper claims, that UK banks lost 15 times more on foreign mortgages than they did on UK mortgages?
And if not, what is your source to say that Broadbent's figures are wrong?
And do you now retract your wholly without foundation claim that those foreign mortgages are actually UK ones repackaged?“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Letter from my MP again asking if I can be referenced in his taking up my points with the FSA but I ignored his last letter as I decided it would be all waste of energy. I'm still thinking its a waste of time so I will likely ignore the letter.
Rather bizzare that after all that time trying to get him to listen, you plan to ignore him as soon as he does.
Don't like the idea of him referencing you?0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »
They were overseas misadventures.
Like purchasing MBAs (of unknown quantity) to prop up the balance sheet so they could lend even more?
Like dodgy a car dealers passing off cut and shut with the speedos clocked. Nice forecourt full of shiny motors. Someone ends up with the lemon."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 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »
So do you now accept, as Broadbent's paper claims, that UK banks lost 15 times more on foreign mortgages than they did on UK mortgages?
And if not, what is your source to say that Broadbent's figures are wrong?
I haven't read the paper. No doubt the figures he recorded were his take on the facts as he saw them.
Were these mortgages lent directly from a subsidiary of a UK bank? Or were they picked up along the way as part of a package?"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: »What I'm saying is, the arguments are flawed. The arguments are defined by the analysis and how you analyse the base. And so are yours, as you still won't tell us what high risk is.
As always the discussion goes in decreasing circles. Selectively picking out the relevant bits to his view then discarding the rest.
I assume this thread is back on the 95% lending trail again. Actually nothing to do with operational risk decisions by the Boards of Banks.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards