Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Pensioners have been doing OK under the triple lock rule.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

The other problem is that the reason for the inflation is outside of the BoE's control. With EU talks floundering because the UK won't commit to the red lines the EU have set for trade discussions then it is becoming more likely that a hard or semi-hard Wrexit will occur. That will drive down the £ further, forcing more increases in inflation on pretty much everything given the trade deficit. Interest rises might not even start to cap inflationary rises in such a case. Interest rises also means the debt people have grown will increase, further decreasing spending at a time when the economy is just about stuttering along (pretty much stagnant). A UK recession whilst the rest of the world grows will see us fall further behind and by the time things might start recovering and become rebalanced then we can reasonably expect a global recession which will take us back down again. It doesn't help the UK Government is opposed to any form of tax increases on middle to upper earners as a way to at least try and get some investment into the country.

Heaven help us is if we are in the middle of this and fuel prices skyrocket like they did 10 years ago as the rest of the world grows, then we would be in a complete mess.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

It’s not true that credit = bad/saving = good. The reason we have low interest rates is to get people to spen. Spending drives the economy. Saving keeps money out of the economy. It is highly questionable if we have irresponsible borrowing at the moment. There is also an issue that we have a structural problem in the UK with irresponsible saving. People sitting on large funds expecting them to provide an income, especially baby boomers. Private landlords and early retirees.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

It’s not true that credit = bad/saving = good. The reason we have low interest rates is to get people to spen. Spending drives the economy. Saving keeps money out of the economy. It is highly questionable if we have irresponsible borrowing at the moment. There is also an issue that we have a structural problem in the UK with irresponsible saving. People sitting on large funds expecting them to provide an income, especially baby boomers. Private landlords and early retirees.

Seems fair enough, spending and credit drives growth as money sloshes around the economy. But it does agitate the po-faced savers who feel they have a moral high ground, or something. Personally, I save money to have a contingency fund for emergencies, invest my money, and use credit when it's cheap enough. With interest rates as they are, saving is not the sensible option.
However, interest rates will start to rise again, and savers will start to get all moist over their return. Unfortunately I'm old enough to remember the days of double digit interest, and a paucity of credit. It was gak.

 r_squared wrote:


Seems fair enough, spending and credit drives growth as money sloshes around the economy. But it does agitate the po-faced savers who feel they have a moral high ground, or something. Personally, I save money to have a contingency fund for emergencies, invest my money, and use credit when it's cheap enough. With interest rates as they are, saving is not the sensible option.
However, interest rates will start to rise again, and savers will start to get all moist over their return. Unfortunately I'm old enough to remember the days of double digit interest, and a paucity of credit. It was gak.

I've always wondered just how effective moving interest rates back and forth is when compared to wider global and local issues. In the early 2000s we had relatively high interest rates (compared to now) but inflation was relatively low starting at 1.5% and rising to just under 3% (pre-crash and changes to VAT). Yet during that time we weren't saving and the government introduced ISAs to encourage this. I think the populace as a whole is more savvy than is made out and that they move 'savings' to where it is most effective. For example this could be into housing; these have a likely much higher rate of return over a long period than a bank account.. It could be argued that this supports part of the economy but only part of it, but it can also lead to overcooked house prices and people investing as much money as possible into the housing market. That leaves less and less money for the 'high street' expenditure. This is what appears to be happening. I would fall into this category. Although I don't own a property I am saving as much as I can to get the largest deposit possible. This will lead to lower interest payments and long term will make me much better off. However it does mean that I am acutely aware of every luxury expenditure is less money to this cause. They can increase or decrease interest rates as much as they want it won't change the luxury expenditure. I know that the money in the bank won't accrue much interest, but that is not the primary aim. The actual investment will be the house. The problem is of course those on the lowest incomes that never have enough money either to save or invest for the long term.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

It’s not true that credit = bad/saving = good. The reason we have low interest rates is to get people to spen. Spending drives the economy. Saving keeps money out of the economy. It is highly questionable if we have irresponsible borrowing at the moment. There is also an issue that we have a structural problem in the UK with irresponsible saving. People sitting on large funds expecting them to provide an income, especially baby boomers. Private landlords and early retirees.

I didn't say credit is outright bad. The problem is the huge number of people who have several maxed out cards running into the thousands and only making minimum payments. It really concerns me that students I'm teaching now will go to Uni next year and be offered credit cards which they'll just use to buy expensive shoes because their skills at managing money are so poor.

TOTAL CREDIT CARD DEBT IN AUGUST 2017 WAS £68.8BN. PER HOUSEHOLD THIS IS £2,539

http://themoneycharity.org.uk/money-statistics/

It looks like a time bomb to me, given that's only credit card debt alone.

But I don't expect much to be done. Payday loans companies with 2000% APR thrived under this government as they dragged their feet to do anything.

Not even the lowest incomes; probably most people in the bottom half.
My family is pretty average in terms of income but we have no savings as it makes sense to pay down (significant) debt instead. Why keep money @ 0.5% when you're paying 5%+?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We really need to cover basic finances at school; how credit cards work, mortgages, savings, billS and so on.
For instance after I graduated from uni I had no idea how to arrange and pay council tax.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

It’s not true that credit = bad/saving = good. The reason we have low interest rates is to get people to spen. Spending drives the economy. Saving keeps money out of the economy. It is highly questionable if we have irresponsible borrowing at the moment. There is also an issue that we have a structural problem in the UK with irresponsible saving. People sitting on large funds expecting them to provide an income, especially baby boomers. Private landlords and early retirees.

I didn't say credit is outright bad. The problem is the huge number of people who have several maxed out cards running into the thousands and only making minimum payments. It really concerns me that students I'm teaching now will go to Uni next year and be offered credit cards which they'll just use to buy expensive shoes because their skills at managing money are so poor.

TOTAL CREDIT CARD DEBT IN AUGUST 2017 WAS £68.8BN. PER HOUSEHOLD THIS IS £2,539

http://themoneycharity.org.uk/money-statistics/

It looks like a time bomb to me, given that's only credit card debt alone.

But I don't expect much to be done. Payday loans companies with 2000% APR thrived under this government as they dragged their feet to do anything.

£2600 is less than the average monthly household take home pay. It’s naff all in the grand scheme of things. The big increase in debt has come from rising house prices and student debt. Two things that the government can control, but chooses not to, and not things that can generally be called irresponsible borrowing.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Still financial groups clamour to warn against an interest rise when inflation is running at 3%. Still being told my wages will be held meaning they are worth less and less.

I understand the problems to many caused by an interest rise - the low rates have led to an enormous credit bill in this country that will cripple people's finances if the interest rate increases. We really need to look at this industry and people's attitudes towards credit, and why so many have to use it - maybe that soaring inflation and wage freezes has something to do with it.

Easy availability of cheap credit means widespread irresponsible borrowing, because while some use credit to cover household bills, many use it just to buy luxury goods. I've never owned a credit card, but the average debt on one is into the thousands. And savers now have to forgo the benefits of being responsible, to prop up irresponsibility. All the reward from banks is in borrowing not saving - and the dependence on credit in this country is a disgrace.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41630943

It’s not true that credit = bad/saving = good. The reason we have low interest rates is to get people to spen. Spending drives the economy. Saving keeps money out of the economy. It is highly questionable if we have irresponsible borrowing at the moment. There is also an issue that we have a structural problem in the UK with irresponsible saving. People sitting on large funds expecting them to provide an income, especially baby boomers. Private landlords and early retirees.

I didn't say credit is outright bad. The problem is the huge number of people who have several maxed out cards running into the thousands and only making minimum payments. It really concerns me that students I'm teaching now will go to Uni next year and be offered credit cards which they'll just use to buy expensive shoes because their skills at managing money are so poor.

TOTAL CREDIT CARD DEBT IN AUGUST 2017 WAS £68.8BN. PER HOUSEHOLD THIS IS £2,539

http://themoneycharity.org.uk/money-statistics/

It looks like a time bomb to me, given that's only credit card debt alone.

But I don't expect much to be done. Payday loans companies with 2000% APR thrived under this government as they dragged their feet to do anything.

£2600 is less than the average monthly household take home pay. It’s naff all in the grand scheme of things. The big increase in debt has come from rising house prices and student debt. Two things that the government can control, but chooses not to, and not things that can generally be called irresponsible borrowing.

Student debt plus mortgage debts.
That's alot higher than the credit card debt.

Students now alone your looking 30-40k per person. Scotland language degree can be 60-70k

Most mortgages are least 100k, 200k. Higher.

Debt is only a problem if it is unmanageable. Mortgages and student loans are a fact of life for many people, and whilst the numbers appear large, if you have the income to pay those debts, and still live there is nothing wrong with that.

Being stuck paying off the minimum payments of a host of credit and store cards, is another thing altogether, as is having to rely on short term, high interest loans to supplement shortfalls.

Those loans are very very lucrative, which is why they tend to be easy to get, and like any other addiction, it's hard to get out of that cycle once you're in it.

 Steve steveson wrote:
£2600 is less than the average monthly household take home pay. It’s naff all in the grand scheme of things. The big increase in debt has come from rising house prices and student debt. Two things that the government can control, but chooses not to, and not things that can generally be called irresponsible borrowing.

Student debt I get, but how do you figure that rising house prices can be controlled by the government.

To take a simplistic view of things, if I build, or own, something, why can I not sell it at the value I deem it to be worth?

Cheers

Andrew

Well for one, prices could be lowered if the Government committed to constructing or subsidising large numbers of council housing. Supply and demand. Houses are scarce, so they're expensive. Build more houses, and houses will be less scarce so prices go down.

Shadow, I think that there are a lot of pitfalls in that view. It, like my example is a bit simplistic. For example, where do we build these houses? Do we run the risk of creating slums or ghettos? Where do we get the money to build them?

The aim of making affordable housing is a laudable one, but I don't think that it is achievable by Governmental meddling and while past policies certainly have not helped the situation I don't think that is the solution.

Cheers

Andrew

Do we have to have yet another talk about how a Student Loan really isn't debt and is essentially a graduate tax that sometimes someone stops paying it before they retire?

Sources: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/students/student-loans-tuition-fees-changes

https://www.moneysupermarket.com/money-made-easy/student-loans-how-do-they-work/

http://www.studentloanrepayment.co.uk/portal/page?_pageid=93,6678775&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

Ya'll can stop paying your school loans?

Man... wish I can do that in the states...

Basically the way it works is:

Did I earn less than £21,000 in the last financial year?
No > I pay a percentage of my income towards my student loan. Probably taken out of my paycheck every month.
Yes > I don't pay any money

Has it been 30 years and I haven't paid off my student loan?
No > I continue to pay my student loan until I pay it off or it reaches 30 years.
Yes > Ok, your student loan is gone now. Just like that, gone, poof.


On top of that, according to the first article, that "£21,000" figure is actually changing, to £25,000. Which means that even less people will be needing to pay their loans back. OR will be paying substantially less.

The loan doesn't even have any real impact when it comes to, for example, applying for a mortgage.

The conversation would most likely go, "ok, do you have a student loan?" "Yup." "Everything going ok with it?" "Yup." "Ok then."


Now, I'm not saying that the government won't pull the rug out from under us at some point in the future but as it stands right now, all the hysteria the newspapers give about 'student loan debt owing half a million pounds per person' - Is just that. Hysteria. Ignorant hysteria designed to panic and outrage people in order to sell papers.

Thanks for the clarification!

We have programs just like that for very narrow groups of borrowers. Not for everyone...

 jhe90 wrote:
Scotland language degree can be 60-70k

Confused by this. Can you explain?

Pause on universal credit passes 299-0. Tories don't bother to vote.

Good for Angus Ross. Who, having campaigned on a 'my referring will never impact my parliamentary responsibilities' ticket was running the line for the Champions League.

nfe wrote:
Pause on universal credit passes 299-0. Tories don't bother to vote.

Good for Angus Ross. Who, having campaigned on a 'my referring will never impact my parliamentary responsibilities' ticket was running the line for the Champions League.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-politics/uk-lawmakers-vent-anger-at-mays-fragile-government-over-welfare-reform-idUKKBN1CN1FF

1 conservative rebelled, and didn't abstain as requested. Unfortunately it's only "advisory", so I expect the government to immediately abandon UC following the "will of the people".

Or does that only work with stupid, ill-conceived ideas that will hurt the country and bolster the conservatives? Maybe Labour should paint it on the side of a bus.

So much for an ineffective opposition, they're certainly twisting Theresa's arm over these unpopular policies.

 AndrewC wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
£2600 is less than the average monthly household take home pay. It’s naff all in the grand scheme of things. The big increase in debt has come from rising house prices and student debt. Two things that the government can control, but chooses not to, and not things that can generally be called irresponsible borrowing.

Student debt I get, but how do you figure that rising house prices can be controlled by the government.

To take a simplistic view of things, if I build, or own, something, why can I not sell it at the value I deem it to be worth?

Cheers

Andrew

You can try and sell for what you want, but you will only get what the market deems it is worth. At the moment there is a serious under supply of housing in some areas due to lack of building. The government control planning law. As it stands planning law restricts building a lot, and cost of land is the vast majority of the cost of any new building. Around 70% of the cost of a new build is the land it is on, something which has little intrinsic value. The cost of a small field goes from about £50k if sold for paddocks or farming to £1million+ if sold with planning for houses, purely because of the lack of availability.

If the government wanted it could hugely reduce the planning process and free up land for large and small builders to build. For example, I would love to build my own house, I have about £100k in equity and if the planning laws were changed I could do that, but as it stands all of that and more would go in to buying a site which may or may not get planning permission.

 AndrewC wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
£2600 is less than the average monthly household take home pay. It’s naff all in the grand scheme of things. The big increase in debt has come from rising house prices and student debt. Two things that the government can control, but chooses not to, and not things that can generally be called irresponsible borrowing.

Student debt I get, but how do you figure that rising house prices can be controlled by the government.

To take a simplistic view of things, if I build, or own, something, why can I not sell it at the value I deem it to be worth?

Cheers

Andrew

Oh that one's easy.

1. BUILD SOCIAL HOUSING. Whilst Right To Buy was a nice idea (and it was), it was poorly executed. All those who benefitted got their house at a hefty discount - and the Government didn't reinvest the money they made. And local councils weren't allowed to use it to replenish their social housing stock.

2. Rent Caps. See the lack of social housing yeah? All those who in the past would've been put up in a council house, are now in privately owned accommodation, with the rent paid for by the tax payer. Great wheeze if you were lucky enough to get on the ladder when housing wasn't insane. Buy cheap, rent for whatever the hell you want because the councils have to pay it.

3. Tax on owning multiple residential properties. People run their portfolio as a business, but aren't taxed in the same way. Housing is not a commodity such as a nice corner sofa, but a necessity. Human's need shelter.

Seriously. It's easy. High demand needs high supply. Artificially restrict that supply, and price spiral.

No offence to Steve and Doc, but aren't you the ones complaining about the amount of interference and control the Govt have on our lives and you're both advocating that they interfere more in our personal lives by manipulating the market which surrounds the one major purchase in our lifetime.

Also rent caps. The only place I see which has major issues with rent raises is the London and London Catchment areas. The rest all pay a 'reasonable' but not excessive cost.

Businesses. Yes quite agree, its a business so tax accordingly.

Cheers

Andrew

Dude. I'm a Socialist.

I don't complain about the control Government has. It's their inaction I find galling.

It's not market manipulation. It's market management. Banks are regulated. Building is regulated. Rental Market needs to be regulated as well.

And when MPs (of any party), vote down a bill to ensure all rental properties are fit for human habitation, you know the rot is in deep.

Do you guys realise how much money we're continuing to piss away on Stormmount despite them being 'in crisis' since March. Hundreds of thousands of pounds on paying MLAs to not work:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/james-brokenshire-wages-war-stormonts-13780723.amp

And almost 300,000 pounds spent on their food. Even though, again, they aren't working:

http://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/stormont-not-sitting-food-bill-13776952

It's sickening. And it really shows their warped mentality. No one else would be paid to not work. When I was out working, nobody was paying for my lunch. Politicians are...inhuman. They're warped, inhuman...sponges. That's what they are. Sponges that have crawled out of the sea and learnt to put on a suit and speak something that sounds vaguely human but isn't quite there.

Ah, remember.

When the working person does it - it's a strike, and it's bad. And needs to be crushed.

When a politician does it - it's like, democracy. And stuff. GIVE THEM MORE MONEYS.

 Future War Cultist wrote:


It's sickening. And it really shows their warped mentality. No one else would be paid to not work.

Nigel Farage.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Do you guys realise how much money we're continuing to piss away on Stormmount despite them being 'in crisis' since March. Hundreds of thousands of pounds on paying MLAs to not work:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/james-brokenshire-wages-war-stormonts-13780723.amp

And almost 300,000 pounds spent on their food. Even though, again, they aren't working:

http://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/stormont-not-sitting-food-bill-13776952

It's sickening. And it really shows their warped mentality. No one else would be paid to not work. When I was out working, nobody was paying for my lunch. Politicians are...inhuman. They're warped, inhuman...sponges. That's what they are. Sponges that have crawled out of the sea and learnt to put on a suit and speak something that sounds vaguely human but isn't quite there.

They are working. Just not in Stormont. They're definitely not fulfilling some of their responsibilities, but the bulk of their job is conducted in their constituencies (or should be - their main jobs are probably actually being done better than usual at the moment).

So is May really asking EU citizens in UK to stay, pretty please?

After telling them you're not welcome, there's too many of you here, we want you to register, you're exploiting the system, etc.?

This takes double faced to another level.

To be honest, I'm kind of not-terribly-secretly enjoying watching the bluster and lies of the hard right (all immigration is bad, Us First, can't trust johnny foreigner. That's just project fear they'll all be queuing up to do deals with us) fall away.

I mean, we're stuffed, so I'm not taking pleasure as such. But enjoying watching them flail about in their filth as a small consolation of the gak they've landed us in.