Film Noir Buff Style Forum / How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

formby · 2012-06-30 15:29:06

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNgF-Zaw_3o

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-02 08:34:20

^Can we elect Stephen Bayley our Prime Minister? A man who should be in charge.

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-10 12:39:40

More sordid tales of the banks:

http://blogs.channel4.com/snowblog/human-cost-banking-misbehaviour/18139

JDelage · 2012-07-11 02:42:13

BJS · 2012-07-11 03:21:59

^^ Based on the facts presented in that blog post, I really don't see what Jon Snow's point is. He doesn't say whether the £32k per quarter repayment (on a £1.7m loan) is just interest or whether it includes some principal as well. If it's just interest this works out at an annual rate of 7.5%. Well above inflation and current base rates yes, but hardly the usurious rates charged by pay-day loan sharks. And if it does indeed include some repayment of principal then the rate of interest may actually be quite reasonable. It would also not be unreasonable to ask why a pensioner who wants to retire is taking out a £1.7m loan in the first place without a succession plan for his family business.

It reminds me of a BBC2 Money programme that was aired when the credit crunch first broke. A young family were sadly being evicted from their house because they could no longer afford the repayments on their 120% Northern Rock mortgage but it seemingly didn't occur to the feckless BBC reporter to ask the parents what they'd done with the 20% difference between the cash advance and the house purchase price. New 42" plasma, foreign holiday, new car perhaps?

I'm no apologist for the financial community in the UK (far from it) but this just looks like sloppy journalism and lazy jumping on the (already full) banker-bashing bandwagon. The undermining of 200 years of integrity and trust caused by the Libor scandal is far more serious - as is, in the long-term, the widespread financial incontinence of the UK population.

Last edited by BJS (2012-07-11 03:23:49)

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-11 04:05:12

Banker bashing must continue until they are reformed and their death strangle hold and vampyric qualities erased.

The incontinence of the UK population? What does that mean, we're all in it together ain't we?

The bankers love blaming other people: first it was manufacturing that we had to sink or swim in the new globalised economy, and yes, we could have a manufacturing base so long as we did away with restrictive legislation, just like in the city. And as soon as Darwinian natural selection comes into play, the banks become too big to fail and must be bailed out with filthy lucre. The arrogance and hypocrisy of these people make moral people sick. Now its the peoples fault for getting 120% mortgages and losing their jobs and hey, we sold you toxic shit, but you didn't read the small print did ya'!

A vile cancerous breed that must be cut-out and the real producers of wealth must take over. It may take time.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bAFITGnjrg

My gang will get you.

JDelage · 2012-07-11 05:32:06

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-11 05:41:47

Exactly, some are more equal than others.

NJS · 2012-07-11 05:48:33

Absolutely right, Hep, about the banks becoming too big to fail but I think that they didn't do it alone: they lent money to likely defaulters - who did then default.

The banks threw due diligence to the winds and applied a Brummellian economic theory to their business models. They certainly needed a management clear-out after that. The British public might also wonder what is going on when industries which were nationalized because they were bankrupt are doing paying up to 20 MILLION POUNDS IN BONUSES TO THE BONEHEAD CHIEFS WHO MUST HAVE BEEN IN THE SYSTEM WHEN THE SHIT HIT THE FAN.

formby · 2012-07-11 07:49:11

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-11 08:18:01

eg · 2012-07-11 08:39:54

formby · 2012-07-11 08:57:04

formby · 2012-07-11 09:01:42

Kingston1an · 2012-07-11 09:06:36

formby · 2012-07-11 09:25:22

Kingston1an · 2012-07-11 09:38:57

The other version is that he knew the result but started dumping bonds so other traders assumed France had won and did likewise.

Then when prices were at rock bottom he bought all the bonds he could.

JDelage · 2012-07-11 17:38:02

BJS · 2012-07-12 00:53:42

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-12 04:40:11

Agree, the savers and pensioners are being stuffed. And those about to retire anytime in the forseeable!

But I really don't have a problem with people having 120% mortgages so long as their putting the money into their house. Here in the Netherlands everyone use to get 120% mortgages, infact I am the only expat I know who only got an 80% one having put a hefty deposit down. Of course now, you can only get 100% ones.

I see nothing morally wrong with 120% mortgages, but yes, there are those who consider that extra 20% is a ticket to the Rolex Daytona and second hand Porsche and all that bling lifestyle entitles one too.

JDelage · 2012-07-12 05:49:47

There's nothing morally wrong with a 120% mortgage. However, unless you have the cash available somewhere to cover for the 20% and then some, it's a financially stupid decision. And putting the 20% into the house is only a *potentially* good move for obviously necessary improvements on a fixer. It's not a good move if you are building a deck with a hot tub or even redoing a serviceable Giant vibrator.

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-12 06:18:07

People didn't think like that back in the 90s and early 2000s when lower middle class houses were going up 50K plus a year, a living wage, infact, more than what a lot of people were making a year. People perceived it as an income and that's how people talked at dinner parties and that's how the media and government wanted people to think of it.

In my home town, I remember the average semi-detached and working class houses were for a time six or seven times the average wage. How did people get mortgages? Well, we now know they were self-certifying and can we blame them? The only way they could get on the housing ladder was by doing this, or live with mum and dad forever and in any event, the houses were going up so much each year, they would eventually be on a winner.

You can blame the people for being niave, but the banks, politicians and media were all in on it and feeding the frenzy.

4F Hepcat · 2012-07-12 06:23:45

One of the reasons, actually the prime driver why I left the UK, was that I saw what my parents had and their generation housing wise, and it was obvious that my aspirations would have to be limited to what a factory line worker at the local car factory would hope to own in the 60s and 70s.

That's how crazy the UK house market had become.

JDelage · 2012-07-12 07:18:13

BJS · 2012-07-12 08:21:41

#901 2012-06-30 15:29:06

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#902 2012-07-02 08:34:20

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#903 2012-07-10 12:39:40

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#904 2012-07-11 02:42:13

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#905 2012-07-11 03:21:59

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#906 2012-07-11 04:05:12

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#907 2012-07-11 05:32:06

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#908 2012-07-11 05:41:47

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#909 2012-07-11 05:48:33

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#910 2012-07-11 07:49:11

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#911 2012-07-11 08:18:01

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#912 2012-07-11 08:39:54

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#913 2012-07-11 08:57:04

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#914 2012-07-11 09:01:42

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#915 2012-07-11 09:06:36

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#916 2012-07-11 09:25:22

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#917 2012-07-11 09:38:57

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#918 2012-07-11 17:38:02

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#919 2012-07-12 00:53:42

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#920 2012-07-12 04:40:11

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#921 2012-07-12 05:49:47

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#922 2012-07-12 06:18:07

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#923 2012-07-12 06:23:45

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#924 2012-07-12 07:18:13

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

#925 2012-07-12 08:21:41

Re: How Low will it Go? (Dow touched down to 7882 so far)

Board footer