Economy Why don't they

Discussion in 'The Quarterdeck' started by Jack_McHammocklashing, Mar 9, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Bang up mortgages and loans to 17%

    The banks will kill to get people to take it up
    People like I can live again on my pension and investments

    People with loans and mortgages must be working or they would not have taken the debt on, Thus they like I DID tighten their belt and get on with it

    Or are we frightend that the kiddies that over spent their visa card on everything for nothing and pay later,have a bigger car, or home than they can actually afford go down the pan

    Oh well that is what happens when you spend money you have not got to impress others. tough

    You do not have to have a three bedroom detached house
    You do not have to have a NEW top of the range car, a banger will get you from A to B $EITY FORBID YOU HAVE TO SERVICE IT YOURSELF Get hands dirty changing the oil
    You do not have to have new furniture, just what you can afford (second hand saleroom stuff comes to mind)
    You can live without an X box or latest plasma big screen cinema sound tv

    The country is in this mess due to people living beyond their means and now the rest of us have to suffer

    You do not have to have a pizza delivery, you CAN eat beans on toast

    I bet even in the MOB they provide pizza for nine o'clockers and not two Jacobs cream crackers and one triangle of dairylea


    Jack McH
  2. Please read this:
    I am sorry for the length of this:
    I have written to all leading political parties and i am getting nowhere.
    Below is a sample of why the UK people are increasingly getting in debt.

    MY Email:

    To the Government Parties,

    Over the last year i have written on various subjects that i believe you should be addressing, so this is a summary:

    In the UK you have Governing Regulatory Bodies who are responsible for Regulating many of it's services.

    These regulatory Bodies have to be paid for by the UK Tax Payers and they are failing.

    They are:


    I will outline some examples of their failures!

    These examples of failure are why so many of your citizens are in debt and are loosing their homes.

    The way it affects people are mainly in the fact that these charges are taken in the form of direct debits from peoples bank accounts.

    Remember people are paying for

    Mortgages £XXXXXXX pounds per year on top of below.

    Very high Council Taxes per year ranging from £1200 to £3000 per year.

    Your Government should also be addressing these charges as i only pay £135 per year for both my water and council tax combined, so i have nothing to gain by even writing to you.

    All i can say is that you have too many councils and bosses who are giving themselves large salaries and bonuses and your people are being rediculously overcharged in this area.

    As a responsible Government you should be aiming to get these prices down to £100 to £450 per year for Council taxes and £80 per year for your water bills.

    If it can work for me, it can work for your people and it is up to you to address it.

    It is for this and the charges below, that is the reason why your economy is in a mess and your people are living under a cloud of constant worry.

    So look at below and how it is failing.

    OFCOM: They are responsible for regulating TV services


    OFCOM: Are failing because companies such as the Satellite Provider BskyB are charging the UK Public high subscription charges that can run well over £1000 per year to watch Satellite TV.
    In order to watch these channels (Not including Sports or Movie Channels) Each subscriber has to pay a minimum amount to BskyB of £252.
    This £252 is used to fund TV Channels who only screen repeat TV Programs already paid for by the UK TV Licence Fee payer. These TV Channels also receive revenue from Advertising. If the Subscriber doesn't pay, the TV Channels are encrypted. There are millions of Subscribers in the UK who are paying for this, and this allows anyone to set themselves up as a TV station and share in this pool of money by allowing itself to be encrypted.
    Many people say "The UK Government allow this because Rupert Murdoch who owns BskyB is providing funds for the Labour Party and this is why it is allowed to happen" as a result OFCOM are failing to address this. If this is true then it explains why you are allowing this to happen!

    OFCOM are failing to address the fact that Satellite TV also has an ever increasing amount of pornographic channels, many of which are free and by this Children are being exposed to it, whilst normal children's TV Channels run by BskyB are being encrypted which forces parents to pay the above prices.

    OFTEL: They are responsible for regulating the Telephone Companies.


    OFTEL: Are failing because many private companies are allowed to charge premium rate telephone charges that affect millions of people in the UK.
    Examples include Competitions where people are charged £3 to enter a competition by either sending texts or making calls. In some cases these charges can be as high as £10. Many calls are charged at rates of £1-75 per minute. On Satellite TV, many phone companies are setting up chat lines to call girls and are being charged at similar rates per minute. These companies are also promoting pornography, which children can be exposed to and are openly asking people for credit card details.
    There have been examples of family breakdowns over weak minded people calling these numbers and even debt.
    Competitions used to be by post, where people entered using a stamp. This stamp was revenue that the post offices used to receive from millions of people entering competitions. There is strong evidence that the post office's have lost this revenue and could be a contributing factor as to why the post offices are closing down all over the country. These phone charges dramatically affect people's phone bills.

    Many of the Mobile Phone companies are offering expensive phones under contract by advertising we will give you the latest £200 phone for free,
    To get this people have to pay £35 per month over a minimum of 12 months. This costs £420 plus phone calls and texts and internet etc. Consider Two children going to school, you don't need me to tell you how much this would add to the above.

    OFWAT: They are responsible for regulating the UK water Authorities.


    OFWAT: Are failing because you now have an increasing amount of people getting in debt over bills ranging from typically £450 per year to £800 per year.
    Every day you hear of pensioners who are spending their last days on earth, frightened by large water bills and who are too scared to turn their taps on!

    The reason they are so high is because the water companies were put into private hands over 20 years ago, where before they were under National Control.

    Under private control, the UK People saw their bills increase ten fold, this is because under private control, the water authorities put profit first and people last.

    Their bosses, like the bank bosses now, are giving themselves large bonuses. (The people are paying for this)

    Repairs have been slow and in some cases non existent.

    The UK Government put these authorities into private hands because of the state of the water supply pipes over 20 years ago.

    A responsible sollution to this should have been, that the UK Governmend should have had consultation teams work out the price of repairing the Water Supplies for every major town and city in the UK. These costing reports should have been submitted to the Government, and the Government should have totalled these costs up.
    It then should have announced to the UK Public that it will cost £XXXXX.
    The Government could have advanced this money to the Authorities to carry out essential repairs.
    The Government could have taxed the UK Public over X amount of years to recover these monies.

    Had it been done this way, people now would have been enjoying Water bills as low as £80 per year.
    Instead of this over 20 years on, you have Water Authority Bosses giving themselves large salaries and bonuses and actually wasting monies and at the same time charging the UK people £450 to £800 per year to drink water.

    OFGEM: They are responsible for regulating the UK Energy Companies.


    a) British Gas announced recently that they were reducing their Electricity bills by 10%. OFGEM stated "They thought it was good news but didn't know why because they could not see how much profit British Gas were making because they couldn't find out how much British Gas were spending on purchasing wholesale energy"
    Basically, If OFGEM cannot find out how much an energy company is spending on wholesale energy, then how can they possibly know if an energy company is overcharging it's customers? They are not regulating the industry!
    They should go out and find these things out.

    b) Most people are familiar with changing over energy companies to save money, however the system confuses most people!
    In the case of electric, people have to type in postcodes and explain how much electric they used in 3 months and addresses etc.
    This confuses most people and hides the true costs.

    It means that a person living in Manchester does not know how much it costs, say compared to living in London!

    Each energy company should produce a table of charges based on the price of ONE KILOWATT HOUR.
    One Kilowatt hour means the price per hour for one unit of Electric (Typically a one bar Electric Fire is rated at one kilowatt and would cost say 14P per hour under British Gas) If a person ran this fire for 8 hours it would cost them 8 Hours X 14P which is £1-12 for 8 hours.

    So from this example chart below people can quickly make up their minds as to what energy company will offer them the greatest value

    EXAMPLE: (These prices are only for illustration purposes only and are not real)
    British Gas 14P per Kilowatt hour
    Eon 13P per Kilowatt hour
    Swalec 12P per Kilowatt hour

    From this, it can be seen that Swalec offer it's customers a cheaper price, instead of people having to trawl all over the internet, typing in postcodes, names and addresses and having to work out how many units they use in 3 months.
    OFGEM: should be aiming to simplify their system to that above, as many people are not good at maths and wouldn't know how to do this postcode system.
    It is a rediculous and cumbersome system, that means many people are missing out because they don't know what to do.

    I apologise for the length of this email, however if you add up Mortgages, High Council Taxes, High Water rates and all the other charges above that hit the average UK Citizen, is it any wonder so many people are loosing their homes and being declared bankrupt?

    You need to look at everything i have put here and address it, as it is clear your present system is not working.
    You need to show leadership and realise that these regulatory bodies are failing.

    EXAMPLE: I have been writing to OFCOM for over a year, regarding the abuse of BskyB overcharging millions of UK subscribers and one year on, the situation has worsened with more and more channels being encrypted and more and more pornographic channels appearing daily, and all to often, children are being exposed to it.
    BskyB advertise parental control, however these channels shouldn't be allowed to do this and add to the debts and family breakdowns above all because of their failings.
  3. Brightspark or may I call you Dimwit?
    What's the point of putting this post in two forums?
    Of course the government don't listen to you, why should they? No one else does either.
  4. Jack Mc
    Agree with you on most things but the mortgage at stupid percent. There are tow types of stupid percent Too Low and Too High. If the bank rate was around 4% people would still be able to pay their mortgages and the prudent who have saved for their retirement would get a reasonable but small return on their savings.
    As it is the government have rewarded the spendthrifts by allowing them to borrow even more imaginary money. If they were financially in the sh!t before the bank rate was lowered they will still be in the sh!t now. Some cannot control or amend their spending patterns.
    Brown wants more people spending their way out of the recession of his making, stupid cnut.
  5. New mortgages or all mortgages? Are you saying they should increase the average mortgage rate from 6.72% to 17%? Are you as stupid as you come across?

    A £100,000 repayment mortgage over 25 years at £6.72 will cost £690.91 a month, increase to 17% the monthly repayment becomes £1437.80.

    During the late 80's, when lending rates were extremely high, the relative cost of housing to salary was much lower, despite the massive rates housing was more affordable, a return to massive rates is not an option today.

    That isn't tightening your belt, that's ruining people and destroying the remains of the housing market, thank fcuk you aren't in any position of power.

    If you are struggling to get by on your pension, why don't you "Tighten your belt" yourself.
  6. MontyP
    JackMc, like myself and many others have done as successive governments asked and saved for retirement. None of these governments advocated spend, spend , spend policies for the young and foolish. Stupid people who have paid over the odds for a house simply because the banks and building society offered to loan far more than many could afford to pay. Do you think house prices would have risen to such sky high levels if the old rules had been in force? These were maximum 90% of the house value and I think maximum loan of 60% of salary.
    People cannot pay their mortgages and debts because they overstretched themselves, but it is the prudent that are paying for their mistakes.
    Do you not realise that the old do not have any notches left on their belts to tighten.
    I believe that ALL of us old farts should remove our money from the banks and building societies, put it under the mattress and claim benefits.
    However not many of us will do it because we are too honest and ethical.
  7. or even get a part time job in B&Q!
  8. Just to make a comment on one thing. Subscribers don't 'have' to pay anything to BskyB, it is their choice.
  9. And how is an average increase in monthly payment of £800 odd going to resolve anything? Paying £600 a month for a small 2 bedroomed house is perfectly reasonable but stil to many people a push but the only way to get on the ladder, these aren't massive detached homes, these are starter homes. To then hike it up to £1400pcm for a STARTER HOME is ludicrous, houses don't cost £35000 anymore. Sensible people are taking on these loans at around 7%, they are not overstretching themselves, being unreasonable, borrowing what they can't afford or not being prudent, advocating a rate increase of those proportions is preposterous and would have disastrous consequences.

    I fell for those who are living on pensions I really do, but this isn't the answer at all, this would merely be a water balloon effect, squeezing one part to fill the other, that doesn't work.

    Edited for sausage fingers.
  11. That's as maybe but it would also result in millions losing their homes, yet more wiped out debt at the cost of millions of pounds, the complete destruction of the housing market and critical damage to the retail industry as all homeowners would have to significantly cut back on all spending.

    There is no argument here, it is a ridiculous idea to destroy one person to help another whilst causing more damage to the economy.

    There has to be assistance to those on pension I agree, but this is plain ludicrous and they very notion of entertaining the idea speaks volumes.
  12. Slim

    The problem as ever is that the BoE and the government have dome what they alweays do, dump the pensioner in favour of middle eglands mortgage payer. The reckon that by cutting Mr and Mrs Profligates mortgage by 90% the will stop some of the reposessions and stuuf a chunk of cash in their pocklets which they will spend. So far no governemtn has ever taken the grey vote seriously, though the time is coming I am sure. Perhaps the next election will be the turning point and there will be clear evidence of crinlkly votes deserting Brown.

    I think for the next 12 months rates are goimg to be low, though I do think they are already too low.
  13. Those who will lose their homes will do so because of their own gross stupidity of taking loans which they could not afford to pay back.
    I was one of those hit by the Conservatives when they attempted to control inflation by using sky high interest rates. Did I lose my home? No, why? Because I cut back on other things, like holidays, new car and furniture etc. My home is the most important possession and if it means going without to retain it then I will.
    The problem with todays generation is that they want it all, new home, new car, new furniture, new large screen television the latest computer. You name it they have to have it.
    Now we can ALL afford ANYTHING, very few of us can afford EVERYTHING (unless you are on benefits).
    I would rather some idiot who is unable to budget his money lose his home than an OAP die through malnutrition or Hypothermia.
  14. Maxi
    Time for the government to sit up and take notice. The grey vote is much larger than a couple of decades ago.
    Pensioners will make a big difference at election time. :p
  15. Well my idiot daughter and he even bigger idiot husband have bought into Neue Arbiets dream…

    With two kids their joint income is half of mine and the wifes yet you would think they were the moneybags with the shiney cars, **** off big plasma tellies in the sittig room, bedroom and each of the kids has an LCD telly and DVD/x-box etc, fitted kitchens and hols in Florida.

    Problem is, it's all bought on credit.
  16. Yes pensioners will make a difference, but the difference will depend on whether they vote for traditional reasons or whether they vote for the party that will actually do something for them.
  17. You just don't listen do you? Or perhaps you do but are just too ignorant to comprehend what I'm saying. Have you seen how much a house costs now in comparison to salary? Even in the worst areas of where I live, you cannot get a 2 bedroom house for less than 100k. In the rental market, you cannot rent the same for less than £650.

    I agree that those who took on massive mortgages are stupid, if you take on any more than four times your salary you need shot, however.

    How is someone stupid, taking on an 80% 100k loan at £600 pcm if their monthly income is £1500? Especially as this is pretty much the minimum you need to buy housing in a relatively safe area which will retain resale value. It makes sense. A rate rise of 17% would fcuk them, leaving them with £100 a month for all other expenditure. It wouldn't be a few people losing their homes it would be MILLIONS.
    You cannot call all homeowners who earn up to 28k pa stupid, because most are not.

    To be honest, I've had enough of this discussion as it's like talking to a brick wall, you only see what you want to see.

    I'll leave you to your idiot ramblings with your other foolish cohorts.
  18. At what rate of interest was the £600 per calender month taken out?
    Was this rate fixed for a number of years or variable?
    Now if the £600 was taken out at say 6% and not fixed the borrower should consider if they could pay the mortgage if the interest rate increased by say 2%.
    If the rate was fixed for a number of years and would then increase by a percentage the borrower should also take that into their calculations.
    Finance is not difficult but does need to be studied carefully.
    Now as for talking to a brick wall, you seem to think it is your right to have low interest rates to finance your property, how about the right of those who's money that you are using to expect a fair return on their savings?
    I did not suggest a rate of 17% or anything like that. i did suggest a base rate of 5% which in my view would be fair to both savers and borrowers.
    Now as for being the brick wall, best look at yourself.
    For information I no longer have a mortgage, it was paid for during the times that Mortgage rates were at their highest 16%(Tories) and never lower than 6%. At no time did I come close to loosing my property, though for several years holidays and new cars were completely out of the question.
  19. Absolutely, but if everybody planned for an increase of up to 12% to a base rate of 17% there would be no new homeowners as it simply isn't affordable, many who wished to and needed to remortgage at that rate wouldn't be able to.

    At no point did you say you weren't condoning the original posts suggestion of a rise to 17% , and your replies to my posts regarding the 17% indicated that was also your suggestion. My posts are clear that this is the issue I have. I also have not said at any point that it is our right to low interest rates.

    But I would suggest that the gap between salary and property cost was much narrower then, I'm old enough to remember the eighties quite clearly. As I have stated, you get much, much less for your money these days.

    A base rate of 5% is absolutely right and fair to all, in fact I would suggest a little higher. Obviously it is a difficult time for those relying on pensions, but don't let thjat cloud your judgment and common sense.

Share This Page