Ed Milliband


Nope, Just very weary of sucessive governments pandering to the Eurocrats, telling them what they can and cannot do and people who haven't put a single penny into the system coming to this country and getting the benefits and then when people who have lived here all their lives, worked here and paid into the system come to need it, they are told to get stuffed.
 
I also think that there are probably more 'people who have lived here all thier lives' not putting a penny into the system.
The 'people who come to this country' tend to want to work IMO.
 
Interesting a lot of people think granting more credit will get us out of the mess a credit bubble created....

It wasn't the credit that got us in to the mess, it was poor lending. We have been using credit facilities for a lot longer than when the recession hit.
The processes involved in granting the credit were flawed not the concept of credit and lending.
The "state" keep telling is they are skint so can't inject equity nor create any financially stable entity to fill the gap. They set the banks lending targets in order to stimulate growth and in not one of the quarters since the bail-out have all banks met these targets. Have they been punished for this failure? Have they hell.

Classic example, we were declined a new mortgage by our bank a few months ago (looking at maybe moving), the reason? We were 2 days late in paying our credit card statement (due to an online payment issue), this was the only late payment we have had - the bank's response when we questioned it? "Under the new rules, you are classed as high risk...!"

Gobsmacking stuff!
 
Nope, Just very weary of sucessive governments pandering to the Eurocrats, telling them what they can and cannot do and people who haven't put a single penny into the system coming to this country and getting the benefits and then when people who have lived here all their lives, worked here and paid into the system come to need it, they are told to get stuffed.

You need to put down the Daily Mail and step away. The current economic disaster was caused, in part, by Thatcher's deregulation of the City in the 80s, and the relocation of US companies over here so they could do their dodgy deals away from the then more strict US regulations. Nothing to do with the EU at all. In fact, the EU has been damaged by the dodgy dealings in London and is doing more to fix it than the UK is.

This anti-Europe mantra simply doesn't stand up to intelligent scrutiny, its just really an opportunity for little Englanders to have a bit of a bigoted rant.
 
It wasn't the credit that got us in to the mess, it was poor lending. We have been using credit facilities for a lot longer than when the recession hit.
The processes involved in granting the credit were flawed not the concept of credit and lending.
The "state" keep telling is they are skint so can't inject equity nor create any financially stable entity to fill the gap. They set the banks lending targets in order to stimulate growth and in not one of the quarters since the bail-out have all banks met these targets. Have they been punished for this failure? Have they hell.

Classic example, we were declined a new mortgage by our bank a few months ago (looking at maybe moving), the reason? We were 2 days late in paying our credit card statement (due to an online payment issue), this was the only late payment we have had - the bank's response when we questioned it? "Under the new rules, you are classed as high risk...!"

Gobsmacking stuff!

I should have said "partly caused"

How do you distinguish between granting of credit and the process of? Credit was too freely available resulting in companies and individuals leveraging themselves to an unsustainable point.

The point I make re equity is to inject the same money as would have been lent (by the state owned banks) but without the short term implications on SME type companies that loans bring. Companies are struggling for cash flow s it stands with the reduction of consumer spending, stressing that still further with additional debt repayment obligations seems illogical and short-termist to me.

Your view is, rightly, influenced by your recent experience no doubt. I have a pretty good understanding of how mortgage lenses assess applications and one missed payment would not, in 99% of my experience, result in a declined application.

Depends which lende it was, all are looking to shrink their balance sheets as I said, on particular long term exposures (I.e mortgages) due to uncertain funding positions. It seems, unfortunately, you're in the wrong place at the wrong time.
 
This anti-Europe mantra simply doesn't stand up to intelligent scrutiny, its just really an opportunity for little Englanders to have a bit of a bigoted rant.
Come on Ethan, there's no need to go down the road of belittling people and insinuating a lack of intelligence or bigotry.

For most of Thatcher's term as prime minister I wasn't old enough to vote and paid more attention to playing football or riding my bike, it would only be the last three years of her reign and the 87 election where I would have first voted and I've no idea who I voted for. At that time in my life as an 18yr old I was chasing women and drinking beer not taking one bit of interest in world affairs or UK affairs for that matter. So whether the current european problems are down to her or not, didn't matter then and as much as makes no difference doesn't matter now as you cannot go back in time and change it.

As for the bigoted remark you are well wide of the mark. The definition of a bigot;

"a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race"

The comments I made on people coming to this country and claiming benefits without paying anything into the system I think are a little harsh, especially if you see them as bigoted.

I also think that there are probably more 'people who have lived here all thier lives' not putting a penny into the system.
The 'people who come to this country' tend to want to work IMO.

Doon, you are taking my post, selecting what suits and thus changing the context. The line you quote from my post if you take the sentence in it's entirety, you get the correct context "when people who have lived here all their lives, worked here and paid into the system come to need it, they are told to get stuffed."

However I do agree and have no doubt there are plenty people who have lived here all their lives and not contributed in anyway.
 
Fuel duty and VAT, cut them by an appreciable amount and things will start moving again, money cant buy happiness but it sure as hell beats depression.
 
I should have said "partly caused"

How do you distinguish between granting of credit and the process of? Credit was too freely available resulting in companies and individuals leveraging themselves to an unsustainable point.

The point I make re equity is to inject the same money as would have been lent (by the state owned banks) but without the short term implications on SME type companies that loans bring. Companies are struggling for cash flow s it stands with the reduction of consumer spending, stressing that still further with additional debt repayment obligations seems illogical and short-termist to me.

Your view is, rightly, influenced by your recent experience no doubt. I have a pretty good understanding of how mortgage lenses assess applications and one missed payment would not, in 99% of my experience, result in a declined application.

Depends which lende it was, all are looking to shrink their balance sheets as I said, on particular long term exposures (I.e mortgages) due to uncertain funding positions. It seems, unfortunately, you're in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Process and action are easily distinguished. As I said the concept and success of credit facilities is nothing new. The process used allowed for the lax lending that ultimately led to the problem of it being freely available. Being freely available and companies being able to leverage themselves to unsustainable levels were merely symptomatic of the process being flawed.
The process, in this case, was the decision making and scoring used to grant credit. It became lax and the requirements lowered to a point where it was a fill-yer-boots free for all.
The situation I had with RBS hasn't influenced my view, only validated my theory.

People, by and large, don't have disposable income to spend, the economy needs people spending money - it's a stalemate of the worst kind.
 
They are now saying that we are into the third generation of some families being on benefit.
It is a culture that needs to be addressed.
10 years ago I was interviewing for casual staff. A couple were obviously there because the dole office had forced them.
No way on gods earth would I have employed them but they were 'actively seeking work'.
 
They are now saying that we are into the third generation of some families being on benefit.
It is a culture that needs to be addressed.

And it will no doubt take another 3 generations to sort - with the right Government of course!!

Reminds me of a conversation that I overheard about 10 years ago:

Mother said to teenage daughter, "When you go for your interview tomorrow, make sure you find out how much money they'll be offering you. If it's less than your benefits, there's no point in taking it."

At the time it left me speechless - but now it's the norm.
 
Come on Ethan, there's no need to go down the road of belittling people and insinuating a lack of intelligence or bigotry.

For most of Thatcher's term as prime minister I wasn't old enough to vote and paid more attention to playing football or riding my bike, it would only be the last three years of her reign and the 87 election where I would have first voted and I've no idea who I voted for. At that time in my life as an 18yr old I was chasing women and drinking beer not taking one bit of interest in world affairs or UK affairs for that matter. So whether the current european problems are down to her or not, didn't matter then and as much as makes no difference doesn't matter now as you cannot go back in time and change it.

As for the bigoted remark you are well wide of the mark. The definition of a bigot;

"a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race"

The comments I made on people coming to this country and claiming benefits without paying anything into the system I think are a little harsh, especially if you see them as bigoted.



Doon, you are taking my post, selecting what suits and thus changing the context. The line you quote from my post if you take the sentence in it's entirety, you get the correct context "when people who have lived here all their lives, worked here and paid into the system come to need it, they are told to get stuffed."

However I do agree and have no doubt there are plenty people who have lived here all their lives and not contributed in anyway.

When you spout rubbish you cannot expect to be accused of intelligence.
Weren't we all proud Europeans last weekend.
 
When you spout rubbish you cannot expect to be accused of intelligence.
Weren't we all proud Europeans last weekend.

Someone else who likes to insult and insinuate a lack of inteligence. The UK maybe part of Europe, but I'm proud to be British not European, I would fly the George cross not the Euro flag.

I don't see how you can use Golf as your lever for your argument when the topic was intially Ed Millaband and later how imigrants are taking advantage of the benefit system.
 
Top