The really annoying thing about the economic downturn...

[funkyrobot]

Is that some highly paid people with massive bonuses (who will be quite financially comfortable at the moment) have really really messed up.

But they are being bailed out, with OUR money!!

WTF!!

What is there to stop this happening again? What a huge 'get out of jail free' card eh!

[HundredthIdiot]

funkyrobot said:

What is there to stop this happening again?

Communism. HTH.

[speedy_thrills]

First: I blame the people that borrowed way above what their personal limits should have been.

Second: It's the banks own fault for doing this and only a few really wanted government intervention.

[johnfm]

funkyrobot said:

Is that some highly paid people with massive bonuses (who will be quite financially comfortable at the moment) have really really messed up.

But they are being bailed out, with OUR money!!

WTF!!

What is there to stop this happening again? What a huge 'get out of jail free' card eh!

Please remember that bankers (and all the financial sector workers) are tax payers too. In fact, proportionally they have contributed a lot more than me to the pot.

The government investment is NOT bailing out the banks - it is allowing them to operate SO THAT NORMAL SUCCESFUL BUSINESS AND THE INDIVIDUALS THEY EMPLOYT CAN PAY FOR A PLACE TO LIVE AND FOOD TO EAT.

This is effecting normal, prudent, succesful people and business too you know.

[215cu]

You know what?

If people borrowing this money actually thought about it and thought "I really can't afford this".

And then didn't borrow the money.

All this would never have happened.

You can blame all you like but the real blame lies with the people who actually created the bad debt in the first place.

The rest of the blame is actually secondary to that. It's convienient and easy though (and it sells papers) to create scapegoats.

So people borrowed the money.

The banks were playing to the rules.

The regulators regulated according to the legislative framework in place.

The Bank of England only sets the interest rates and played according to mandate.

The government set out its stall in 1997 and then didn't intervene.

So pick out who's to blame, it's completely subjective of course.

[tyre_tread]

215cu said:

You know what?

....The banks were playing to the rules.

The regulators regulated according to the legislative framework in place.

....

And therein lay the problem.

The senior management in the banks played the "how close to the wind can we sail to make the most profit (read bonus) and to hell with ethics" card for 20 years and some of the public were greedy enough to believe the hype that property prices will increase forever.

I suspect that the banks knew all along that they were fire proof.

[speedy_thrills]

Can I also just point out that IMO this isn't really a problem the government can tax/borrow/spend it's way out of. They are robbing the public to pay to keep banks solvent in the public interest, the public will (rightly it has to be said) pay the price either way.

[dilbert]

Communism, yes. But basically they're standing by whilst the economic foundations for WWIII are laid(IMO).

Edited by dilbert on Wednesday 8th October 09:12

[raf_gti]

If I were to lend someone an expensive car for the weekend, a Gallardo for arguements sake and they had only been driving for a day who would be at fault for the liability if it was written off? Of course it would be the driver but lets be honest, if I had any sense I wouldn't be lending a car to someone who the chances are would cause some serious damage with it.

Brought to you by crap-anology.com

[shadowninja]

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

[Timmy35]

dilbert said:

Communism, yes. But basically they're standing by whilst the economic foundations for WWIII are laid(IMO).

and I intend to be in Argentina.....eating large steaks, taking a dusky skinned girl up the chuff, and watching it all unfold with interest.

[HundredthIdiot]

shadowninja said:

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

It's a pointless distinction, since each loan is an agreement between two parties.

[maximm]

shadowninja said:

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

exactly..if you cant afford it dont get it....

[raf_gti]

shadowninja said:

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

Lend me a million quid will ya?

No? Is that because it would be pretty irresponsible would it not?

[The Dude]

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1539

[kambites]

shadowninja said:

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

Well it's both. It's the banks' fault that the banks are in trouble and the individual consumers' fault that the individual consumers are in trouble.

Ultimately, the banks lent beyond their means and the consumers borrowed beyond their means.

[raf_gti]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I would then expect the Government to buy me a new one..

[Mr POD]

215cu said:

If people borrowing this money actually thought about it and thought "I really can't afford this".

And then didn't borrow the money.

All this would never have happened.


The banks were playing to the rules.

The banks made up new rules to sell bad debt to other banks dressed up as good debt.

The thing that pisses my off is that, I've been very conservative and risk aware whilst friends have 'lorded' it over me, with the money made from extending thier credit on property. Now they expect me to have symphathy. I'm sorry, but you've got 3 houses which at the top of the boom were worth £800K and are now not worth £500K, and you have £400K mortgages, based on income as a 'financial advisor' selling dubious cedit to people who should have been encouraged to think a bit before taking out a mortgage they can't afford. And your income has dried up to almost zero ?

I sound bitter? I'm not. But I do find sympathy hard.

[raf_gti]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

But at least I'd still have my car even although I made a massive mistake in the first place.

Does anybody want to borrow a 205 GTi?

[tonyvid]

kambites said:

shadowninja said:

I'm getting tired of hearing about irresponsible lending. As people are saying above, it's irresponsible borrowing.

Well it's both. It's the banks' fault that the banks are in trouble and the individual consumers' fault that the individual consumers are in trouble.

Ultimately, the banks lent beyond their means and the consumers borrowed beyond their means.

I think that sums it up perfectly.

As I said yesterday, I save to buy and, apart from my mortgage, have never had a loan - now I appear to be paying for all those plasmas, hols and lifestlyes that I chose not to afford but other people did.