Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
McLaren_Field wrote:T'was always thus, I had an almost carbon copy experience with two Individual Savings Accounts (there's that word, "Savings" again) back in '99 to '04 - the money I made on two £5k accounts over that period could have been made far, far easier, and quicker, if I'd stuck the ten grand under the bed and put £10 of it on red at a casino.
And after all of that, to rub salt in the wounds, I had to cash them in to pay a fekkin tax bill.
But it's not a gamble – and it's not an approach that is remotely reflected in the way that those oh-so-sober bastions of society, the financiers and bankers behave. Oh no.
And there never was a time when you could go to a bank and trust that bank to actually look after your money properly – and pay you a small but regular amount of interest on your deposit account: oops, did I mention an account that was phased out to be replaced by more lucrative ones for the gambling tossers who, via political decisions, were deregulated so that they could do more gambling.
How anyone can claim – and presumably keep a straight face – that gambling is not key to the economy these days, and it central to the crisis, is beyond me.
You can, incidentally, download a The Casino Economy by Noam Chomsky for just 89p.
Or there's a book, first published in 1989, called Beyond the Casino Economy by people who obviously didn't know what they were talking about (indeed, the phrase crops up all over the place).
But hey, someone who denies that real wages have fallen for the majority also scoffs at such a phrase.
As I said, he's either Bob Diamond or Bob Diamond's bag boy.
McLaren_Field wrote:T'was always thus, I had an almost carbon copy experience with two Individual Savings Accounts (there's that word, "Savings" again) back in '99 to '04 - the money I made on two £5k accounts over that period could have been made far, far easier, and quicker, if I'd stuck the ten grand under the bed and put £10 of it on red at a casino.
And after all of that, to rub salt in the wounds, I had to cash them in to pay a fekkin tax bill.
But it's not a gamble – and it's not an approach that is remotely reflected in the way that those oh-so-sober bastions of society, the financiers and bankers behave. Oh no.
And there never was a time when you could go to a bank and trust that bank to actually look after your money properly – and pay you a small but regular amount of interest on your deposit account: oops, did I mention an account that was phased out to be replaced by more lucrative ones for the gambling tossers who, via political decisions, were deregulated so that they could do more gambling.
How anyone can claim – and presumably keep a straight face – that gambling is not key to the economy these days, and it central to the crisis, is beyond me.
You can, incidentally, download a The Casino Economy by Noam Chomsky for just 89p.
Or there's a book, first published in 1989, called Beyond the Casino Economy by people who obviously didn't know what they were talking about (indeed, the phrase crops up all over the place).
But hey, someone who denies that real wages have fallen for the majority also scoffs at such a phrase.
As I said, he's either Bob Diamond or Bob Diamond's bag boy.
"You are working for Satan." Kirkstaller
"Dare to know!" Immanuel Kant
"Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive" Elbert Hubbard
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Oscar Wilde
Mintball wrote:It's 'you're'. That's called basic literacy.
As to basic economic literacy, I doubt if I could hope to educate you.
We have bankers and financiers gambling with money that is not theirs. Did you spot the 'gambling' bit? This is the sort of thing that caused the financial crisis. Remember that? Happened in 2008. People buying debts and feck knows what else. Not with their own money.
Much so-called investment is nothing other than a gamble – it is a bet that you will end up with more than you put in, but the latter is possible, to a greater a lessor degree, depending on the situation.
So, for instance, that's why (to give but one specific example) paid into two ISAs (these are supposedly 'savings' schemes). The first was a straightforward one. It now has about £5K of my money in it. Do you know how much interest that earned in the last year? £10. The bank in question got to play with my money for 12 months and they gave me a tenner for that.
Second one had a percentage of investment risk built in. I thought that might not be a bad idea with a little money – at the least risky of the riskier options, so to speak.
After around six years, it's just getting back to what I put in in the first place.
So not remotely a gamble. No, no, no – not a sort of a bet. And these things were sold as good ideas for savings – they're an Individual Savings Account, don't forget. They were portrayed as a sensible and safe way to save. Saving's good and responsible, yes? A tenner on effing 5k.
We've been conned.
And it seems that you've been conned more than most.
Or do you actually really believe that everything's hunky dory and people are just having a whinge instead of, for instance, going out and getting a job, because there are loads of jobs out there really if only people would be prepared to work for nothing. Or, erm, they could make loads more money easily because pay is rising in real terms, the cost of living is going down and it's a piece of the proverbial to get yourself a better job with more pay (and if you need to train and learn more, you'll easily get a loan to do that).
We know that you refuse to accept that there has been a widening income gap between those at the very top and everybody else (although presumably you were walkabout the last time that I responded to your denials of that with a shed load of info). Or was that the time you had a minor hissy fit and flounced away from the discussion rather than respond to the data?
Are you Bob Diamond's bag carrier?
Are you Bob Diamond?
But did the investment bankers cause the crisis? The failure was one of government policy (especially in the USA) and in traditional banking. Let's think about the UK situation - Northern Rock (not an investment bank), HBoS (not an investment bank), RBS - principal problem was a poor acquisition, Lloyds - messed up due to Brown facilitating a "rescue" of HBoS - which I pointed out at the time was stupid - why weaken a sound bank by encouraging to takeover a broke one?
Joined: Aug 12 2002 Posts: 5064 Location: Not Didcot
Mintball wrote:It's 'you're'. That's called basic literacy.
Cheers for that.
Mintball wrote:to a greater a lessor degree
Mintball wrote:So, for instance, that's why (to give but one specific example) paid into two ISAs (these are supposedly 'savings' schemes).
You may wish to consider moving your money into an ISA that pays more interest. Here are some options. I assume your investment ISA was an index tracker and the value of your investment has moved in line with the movement of the tracked index? However I don't see how your poor money management is relevant.
There is no gambling here. You deposited your money in one account and received the interest that account pays. You invested some money in another account and the value of that investment changed in line with the performance of the underlying investment.
Mintball wrote:We know that you refuse to accept that there has been a widening income gap between those at the very top and everybody else
I've never said anything about the widening income gap. What I don't accept is that everyone apart from the top few are worse off now than thirty years ago. That specific claim. I got bored of you trying to evade addressing that claim, going off on tangents and making spurious claims. Like the one above.
Mintball wrote:It's 'you're'. That's called basic literacy.
Cheers for that.
Mintball wrote:to a greater a lessor degree
Mintball wrote:So, for instance, that's why (to give but one specific example) paid into two ISAs (these are supposedly 'savings' schemes).
You may wish to consider moving your money into an ISA that pays more interest. Here are some options. I assume your investment ISA was an index tracker and the value of your investment has moved in line with the movement of the tracked index? However I don't see how your poor money management is relevant.
There is no gambling here. You deposited your money in one account and received the interest that account pays. You invested some money in another account and the value of that investment changed in line with the performance of the underlying investment.
Mintball wrote:We know that you refuse to accept that there has been a widening income gap between those at the very top and everybody else
I've never said anything about the widening income gap. What I don't accept is that everyone apart from the top few are worse off now than thirty years ago. That specific claim. I got bored of you trying to evade addressing that claim, going off on tangents and making spurious claims. Like the one above.
(23:25:06) Thecko: who'd want to rent a book? (23:25:10) Thecko: oh, libraries
Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
SBR wrote:Cheers for that.
You may wish to consider moving your money into an ISA that pays more interest. Here are some options. I assume your investment ISA was an index tracker and the value of your investment has moved in line with the movement of the tracked index? However I don't see how your poor money management is relevant...
Ah yes; of course. It's the fault of myself – and the likes of McLaren – for not being financial whizz kids; for not having particular skills to know when we're being conned or offered a good deal by people are are actually professionals in the field.
For not being able to spend hours and hours trawling through savings policies to find the best ones – just as we now need to spend hours trawling through every utility company to find the 'best deal' and so on and so forth.
SBR wrote:There is no gambling here. You deposited your money in one account and received the interest that account pays. You invested some money in another account and the value of that investment changed in line with the performance of the underlying investment...
It is supposed to be savings. The clue is in the word.
In the olden days, you would put your money into a savings account and you would know that they would be safe and would grow gently but continually.
You weren't expected to be an expert – that's why you went to banks and other trusted institutions where you would be given trustworthy advice. You'd get a service – an ethos that has been sadly lost in the last 30 years, as has been commented on , on these forums, by more than just me.
You, however, appear to think it's a dirty ethos: that ordinary people should not be able to trust, say, banks, but should themselves take responsibility for knowing more than the professionals giving them the advice and selling them the products.
There's something profoundly wrong with that and, if you can't see that, then that's rather sad.
SBR wrote:I've never said anything about the widening income gap. What I don't accept is that everyone apart from the top few are worse off now than thirty years ago. That specific claim. I got bored of you trying to evade addressing that claim, going off on tangents and making spurious claims. Like the one above.
That specific "claim", which I then posted masses of links and stuff on – and you then disappeared from the discussion? That one? The one where I found loads of data on housing costs and other living costs, and wage levels and heaven alone knows what else? You mean those?
And there are plenty of actual economists who use the phrase 'casino economy'. I have posted one such comment here. You better tell them you know better than they do.
As I asked before, are you Bob Diamond or his bag carrier?
SBR wrote:Cheers for that.
You may wish to consider moving your money into an ISA that pays more interest. Here are some options. I assume your investment ISA was an index tracker and the value of your investment has moved in line with the movement of the tracked index? However I don't see how your poor money management is relevant...
Ah yes; of course. It's the fault of myself – and the likes of McLaren – for not being financial whizz kids; for not having particular skills to know when we're being conned or offered a good deal by people are are actually professionals in the field.
For not being able to spend hours and hours trawling through savings policies to find the best ones – just as we now need to spend hours trawling through every utility company to find the 'best deal' and so on and so forth.
SBR wrote:There is no gambling here. You deposited your money in one account and received the interest that account pays. You invested some money in another account and the value of that investment changed in line with the performance of the underlying investment...
It is supposed to be savings. The clue is in the word.
In the olden days, you would put your money into a savings account and you would know that they would be safe and would grow gently but continually.
You weren't expected to be an expert – that's why you went to banks and other trusted institutions where you would be given trustworthy advice. You'd get a service – an ethos that has been sadly lost in the last 30 years, as has been commented on , on these forums, by more than just me.
You, however, appear to think it's a dirty ethos: that ordinary people should not be able to trust, say, banks, but should themselves take responsibility for knowing more than the professionals giving them the advice and selling them the products.
There's something profoundly wrong with that and, if you can't see that, then that's rather sad.
SBR wrote:I've never said anything about the widening income gap. What I don't accept is that everyone apart from the top few are worse off now than thirty years ago. That specific claim. I got bored of you trying to evade addressing that claim, going off on tangents and making spurious claims. Like the one above.
That specific "claim", which I then posted masses of links and stuff on – and you then disappeared from the discussion? That one? The one where I found loads of data on housing costs and other living costs, and wage levels and heaven alone knows what else? You mean those?
And there are plenty of actual economists who use the phrase 'casino economy'. I have posted one such comment here. You better tell them you know better than they do.
As I asked before, are you Bob Diamond or his bag carrier?
"You are working for Satan." Kirkstaller
"Dare to know!" Immanuel Kant
"Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive" Elbert Hubbard
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Oscar Wilde
Mintball wrote:You weren't expected to be an expert – that's why you went to banks and other trusted institutions where you would be given trustworthy advice. You'd get a service – an ethos that has been sadly lost in the last 30 years, as has been commented on , on these forums, by more than just me.
You, however, appear to think it's a dirty ethos: that ordinary people should not be able to trust, say, banks, but should themselves take responsibility for knowing more than the professionals giving them the advice and selling them the products.
When I was sold my ISA's the "advisor" (who I now know was no better than a sales rep), couldn't over-emphasise the fact that if I had "invested" my ten grand with them five years previously then it would have increased in value THREE times, in other words I'd be getting thirty grand back in my hand, tax free.
Of course, I know now that he was merely a sales rep for himself and his manager, but at the time he was my "Personal Advisor" and had been for several years, remember at this time that I had a business, did all of my personal and business banking with NatWest and every year they would send my "Personal Advisor" around to discuss our requirements, so yeas, of course I trusted his "advice".
Again, this was in '99, there was a huge change in the way that banks approached customers in the 90s, our bank manager of 20 years was pensioned off early and we got a succession of automatons who pushed products harder and harder - but stupidly I still trusted them at this point.
You'll understand why, by 2000 or so, I had realised that they were all no better than spivs.
And like you, I don't really understand this attitude that I should be the one who follows the stock markets every morning, not when I'm paying handsomely for self-proclaimed experts at a national institution to do so - thats a bit like paying a roofer to replace some rooftiles and then climbing up his ladder to hold his toolbag for him.
AT THE RIPPINGHAM GALLERY .................................................................... ART PROFILE ................................................................... On Twitter ................................................................... On Facebook ...................................................................
Joined: Aug 12 2002 Posts: 5064 Location: Not Didcot
Mintball wrote:You, however, appear to think it's a dirty ethos: that ordinary people should not be able to trust, say, banks, but should themselves take responsibility for knowing more than the professionals giving them the advice and selling them the products.
There's something profoundly wrong with that and, if you can't see that, then that's rather sad.
You sought professional advice and they recommended a cash ISA that pays around 0.2% interest? I'd say there is something wrong with that. Did you take this any further?
Mintball wrote:That specific "claim", which I then posted masses of links and stuff on – and you then disappeared from the discussion? That one? The one where I found loads of data on housing costs and other living costs, and wage levels and heaven alone knows what else? You mean those?
As I said you went off on these weird tangents. However you never actually managed to even define 'worse off'. Had your claim been than people are spending more on housing costs then you may have had a point. That does not in itself mean people are worse off.
I still never said anything about a widening income gap. You made that one up. Presumably like you made up the one about the "crisis was causes[sic] by massive over-spending on public services and the gold-plated pensions of public sector workers".
I know these claims are nice sound bites but without any substance they really are worthless.
(23:25:06) Thecko: who'd want to rent a book? (23:25:10) Thecko: oh, libraries
Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
McLaren_Field wrote:... And like you, I don't really understand this attitude that I should be the one who follows the stock markets every morning, not when I'm paying handsomely for self-proclaimed experts at a national institution to do so - thats a bit like paying a roofer to replace some rooftiles and then climbing up his ladder to hold his toolbag for him.
Well that's the problem, isn't it? According to SBR (and others), it's our fault.
All this lovely choice that we've been given by successive governments via deregulation and privatisation has absolutely nothing to do with making it easier to screw the likes of you and me (pensions mis-selling was just an accidental blip) and it is entirely up to us to take the time to learn more about the subject than those whose job it is to do the selling.
Why in the name of goodness anyone still believes – let alone pedals – this claptrap is beyond me. Quite apart from anything else, it's the most ridiculous blurring of the lines between amateur and professional ever.
One wonders why any such salesperson is paid a wage to do their job, since you and I should know at least as much as them, if not more. Presumably, they will not have had any training that we will not have had in doing this. They won't have any support in knowing and understanding their product and how to sell it. They will have no resources that are not available to us too to enable them to sell it.
It's not dissimilar to the 'argument' that, for instance, there is no un-level playing field when advertising (and media that relies on advertising) set out to damage self image in order to boost sales.
"You are working for Satan." Kirkstaller
"Dare to know!" Immanuel Kant
"Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive" Elbert Hubbard
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Oscar Wilde
Joined: May 10 2002 Posts: 47951 Location: Die Metropole
SBR wrote:You sought professional advice and they recommended a cash ISA that pays around 0.2% interest? I'd say there is something wrong with that. Did you take this any further?
See McLaren's post.
I don't recall what the interest rate was quoted as being. I very much doubt it was that. But that's my fault. Obviously. I shouldn't trust a professional to give me trustworthy advice, but should work on the basis that everyone is out to screw me and, therefore, know more about it than the person flogging me something – sorry, providing me with a service.
I vaguely remember the second ISA – the one with a slight risk built in – well, that was how it was described to me by the salesperson. Sorry, financial services professional. Obviously, I should have realised better and not trusted them.
Basic savings accounts were unavailable for years – and have only become available again since 2008. That may tell you something.
SBR wrote:As I said you went off on these weird tangents. However you never actually managed to even define 'worse off'. Had your claim been than people are spending more on housing costs then you may have had a point. That does not in itself mean people are worse off...
I showed exactly that. I also showed that incomes had not kept pace with the rising cost of living.
I provided a stack of data, from a variety of sources.
I don't know why you choose to pretend it isn't the case. I can only assume that you still think 'greed is good' and are, at present, doing okay on that basis. As I asked: are you Bob Diamond or his bag carrier?
SBR wrote:I still never said anything about a widening income gap. You made that one up....
Okay. You didn't. You just denied that most people, except those at the very top end of the incomes scale, have seen a real-term drop in the values of their earnings over the last 30 years.
SBR wrote:... Presumably like you made up the one about the "crisis was causes[sic] by massive over-spending on public services and the gold-plated pensions of public sector workers".
I didn't make the latter up. It was made up by people who didn't want to blame finance and the banks. It was something that started to be pedalled through the media in the late summer of 2008.
BTW – you know better than Keynes, yes?
"You are working for Satan." Kirkstaller
"Dare to know!" Immanuel Kant
"Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive" Elbert Hubbard
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." Oscar Wilde
The problem is that the financial services industry is based on seeing into the future, which under current technological conditions cannot be done. So, invetiably there is great uncertainty with the majority of "financial products". For many years now "products" have had disclaimers attached and so there's little excuse for people to say they did not know...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 94 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
