The media and the market

Dan_Collins_2

Yep, thoses days are gone, the good old days when you had to pay the SVR or nothing, when your interest was calculated annually, when you had to wait for an appointment with the manager and could not call him after 5pm or sat or sundays and def not the day after boxing day! You had to get on your knees to borrow 3X times you income and if you were female told you cant use your income as you may have a baby!

Like our own lives times changed, some for good and some for bad!

Dan_Collins_2

Ps. My last post was not being funny, sounds a little like I am having a go, I was at school during the last crash and had only passed my driving test in 93 so I cant really comment!

PasturesNew

Conrad wrote: »

To moneysave without considering its effects is to my mind short sighted.

We all ought to think about the effects of our desire to save money.

For those on lower wages and spiralling basic bills, it's not that we want to go to the hours and hours and days of effort this can take ... it is because it HAS to be done to have the item at all.

Conrad wrote: »

It is absolutely the case that our desire for cheap goods and services is only sustainable where the worker at the end of the chain accepts very low rates of pay ($100 per month in China, a lot less in Vietnam and so on).

The decisions to provide goods and services to us from these far flung places tends to be made by people who are very wealthy. They are the ones taking the cream off the top so it's not there for the workers.

Moneysavers are providing the income to those organisations when they can find one cheap enough to buy. If things were more expensive, we'd not be buying them at all.

Conrad wrote: »

When we smuggly pat ourselves on the back for finding an oh so cheap mobile phone, lets spare a thought for the children of Angola and other places, forced to work 16 hour days at the expense of an education to dig up the raw materials used in thier manufacture.

I buy 2nd hand. So I am doing my bit for recycling too.

Conrad wrote: »

When we demand ever cheaper insurance lets think about the knock on effect to call centre income levels.

Is it not better for us to all be able to AFFORD the insurance. If the costs are too much more people have to write it out of their budget, yet need the cover for day-to-day living.

Conrad wrote: »

Ive always lived by the code - do unto others as you would want done to yourself.

As do most people. Give most people your income and they'd exhibit different spending habits no doubt.

Conrad wrote: »

By all means shop around, but lets not always get so hung up on cost and price. Dont expect advisers to work merely for commision that is only paid if the client does'nt pull out at the last moment.
Would we expect teachers to only be paid if the kids pass thier exams?

Some teachers are. In fact, I have done such a job. I took on a job as an Online Tutor, where the Govt funding paid out only when the student had completed the course. What in fact happened was I booked 2 days off from my day job to attend 2 interviews, another day off to attend a meeting. Then worked for about 75 hours for free getting up to speed with student lists and systems and course modules and materials, before receiving a letter to say they'd lost the contract and I was redundant with immediate effect.

I received a P60 for about £2.50.

Your black and white world doesn't fit with my black and white world.

kenshaz

Bismarck wrote: »

I remember those days too....people used to know their bank manager too and they were a respected pillar of the community. Sometimes, the staff stayed in the branch all their working lives and if you wanted something you could call your local branch and speak to someone who you'd actually met. Now that is quaint.

Royal Bank of Scotland offer that now.

Dick_here

kenshaz wrote: »

Royal Bank of Scotland offer that now.

They're not an employer that offers much career progression then...

chappers

You do have some valid points there Dan there is good and bad on both sides of the coin the big question is.

"Easy credit ...Good or bad ?"

homer_j_3

Responsible credit is the answer.

chappers

homer_j wrote: »

Responsible credit is the answer.

yes thats the way to put it, we don't all want to go back to the draconian ways of trying to extract blood from astone but neither do we want to continue with the drop of ahat lending we have been seeing.

Responsibility lies on both sides though, many people fail to see the point that lenders will lend beyond a borrowers long term means and when they get into trouble will turn around and say "well why did they lend it to me if they didn't think I could pay it back" , rather than actually taking the responsibility upon them selves.

homer_j_3

The difficulty is that businesses employ people and can do so because they can sell more products through the credit market.

Its easy to expand credit availability but the tough bit is trying to reign it back in. You try and convince currys and comet to not offer anything on credit or for credit cards to be pulled or only accessible with a detailed application and proof of earnings etc.