The Irish Are Educating Themselves

[RufflesTheGuineaPig]

I'm gonna point out again for all the sociopaths on here that haven't grasped this yet.

It's not the bankers money.

It's not the banks money.

It's the banks CUSTOMERS money.

It's the banks SAVERS money.

It's peoples savings and pensions. Ordinary people like us.

When you say people should "screw the bank" what your actually saying is they should SCREW ALL THE ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO SAVED RATHER THAN SPENT.

Edited February 26, 2012 by RufflesTheGuineaPig

[Venger]

I think the gullible/greedy got suckered into the scam by the bankers the prudent have now been suckered into paying for the gullible/greedy by the banker`s ,but what every one needs to focus on is the fact the banker`s fraudulently rigged there bet so they could not lose

So the way I see it if nobody pay`s there debt and and nobody takes on new debt (the likes of us buy not joining the ponzi scheme ) the banks are going to starve without the central banks printing and that can`t go on forever ,as soon as wage inflation starts to take of that will be the end of printing and that cannot be a long way away

Gullible and greedy. Not very innocent were they. What about all the people who took the time to learn about finances, making efforts to save and live within your means whilst keeping their sense of value, if the gullible and greedy who bought at ever higher prices, pushing house prices up all the time, don't have to suffer any loss when they can't keep to the repayment contracts they've agreed?

What you're saying is those who don't own should continue to pay rent for years, and those who overborrowed shouldn't lose their fine homes but be forgiven much of the debt they agreed to repay. One group seems to get it a lot easier than the other.

And homeowners who lived within their means but didn't trade up because of fear of debt, should remain trapped in the market, because the higher end still remains priced higher than it should be with mass repossessions and bankruptcies for debtors who can't repay.

Even with your wage inflation, were it ever to happen, it would still mean the non paying mortgage freeloaders who got to keep nice homes have homes which are even more expensive for someone starting out, or wanting to trade upwards, to buy. RTGP is right. It's the savers money, including ordinary people including renters hoping to one day buy their homes at a reasonable price.

[MRMX9]

I'm gonna point out again for all the sociopaths on here that haven't grasped this yet.

It's not the bankers money.

It's not the banks money.

It's the banks CUSTOMERS money.

It's the banks SAVERS money.

It's peoples savings and pensions. Ordinary people like us.

When you say people should "screw the bank" what your actually saying is they should SCREW ALL THE ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO SAVED RATHER THAN SPENT.

Well we won't see any of it - paid back or not paid back!

This nation built its housing market on mutual building socieities which had a community focus and believed in some sort of concept of fairness - until the big banks took over and rigged the market. The local - not the multinational corporate monolith is the only way forward.

[Ulfar]

I'm gonna point out again for all the sociopaths on here that haven't grasped this yet.

It's not the bankers money.

It's not the banks money.

It's the banks CUSTOMERS money.

It's the banks SAVERS money.

It's peoples savings and pensions. Ordinary people like us.

When you say people should "screw the bank" what your actually saying is they should SCREW ALL THE ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO SAVED RATHER THAN SPENT.

If your going to put something in big letters at least get the facts right. It is not the saver's money that was lent that is not how a fractional reserve system works. Banks write of millions of pounds of bad debt every year but no savers have suffered for this because the banks didn't lend money they gave credit.

Savers are suffering much more due to high inflation with low interest rates. There is no correlation between the interest you get paid as a saver compared to what the bank is charging.

[LJAR]

The banks made loans that they knew would not be repaid, they got bailed out ad are now trying to have their cake and eat it by repossessing the properties as well.

screw them.

They need to renegotiate all the loans on terms that will allow them to be repaid and take a big hit to their profits or go bankrupt.

either way, I don't see why they should be able to walk away without losses and then take away people's homes as well.

[Ulfar]

The banks made loans that they knew would not be repaid, they got bailed out ad are now trying to have their cake and eat it by repossessing the properties as well.

screw them.

They need to renegotiate all the loans on terms that will allow them to be repaid and take a big hit to their profits or go bankrupt.

either way, I don't see why they should be able to walk away without losses and then take away people's homes as well.

I completely agree with this, after all some people are going to struggle to pay their mortgages due to the measures being used to help bankers like low interest base rate.

[winkie]

The banks made loans that they knew would not be repaid, they got bailed out ad are now trying to have their cake and eat it by repossessing the properties as well.

screw them.

They need to renegotiate all the loans on terms that will allow them to be repaid and take a big hit to their profits or go bankrupt.

either way, I don't see why they should be able to walk away without losses and then take away people's homes as well.

The problem with people they want their cake and eat it......privatise the gains, socialize the losses....the borrowers are a bad as the banks.....they wouldn't like it I am sure, if their smarties, their gains made from borrowed money were taken from them......as they say 'no good pointing at the splinter in another's eye when you have a plank in your own eye'.

Edited February 26, 2012 by winkie

[GreenWarwick]

Someone with a large mansion style house behind a gate and long driveway isn't paying the full mortgage repayments they agreed to pay, when they laid claim to such a nice property. Probably over 6 months of lenders forbearance, then months of lenders trying to reclaim property in court, sees a court order issued.

Some groups have formed believing the lender has made no loss over the mortgage because of securitization. Implying the debtor should be able to keep their fine house, and fresh young buyers should be forced to pay much higher prices with mortgage debtors in all the nice homes not having to suffer any consequences.

Valid point....I'm somewhat wary of some of the people arguing for debt forgiveness...are they entirely altruistic?

[LJAR]

The problem with people they want their cake and eat it......privatise the gains, socialize the losses....the borrowers are a bad as the banks.....they wouldn't like it I am sure, if their smarties, their gains made from borrowed money were taken from them......as they say 'no good pointing at the splinter in another's eye when you have a plank in your own eye'.

If there had not been a bail out for the banks I would be saying that those who took on loans and are now defaulting should have their properties repossessed.

the problem is that the banks have had their losses neutralised so they have no incentive to renegotiate the contracts so that they recoup some of the money they loaned out.

lower interest rates and longer repayment terms are needed, and a healthy dose of write downs and losses. These are things that we have not had.

Both parties should be taking a hit at the moment - banks should have big losses and write downs, and borrowers should be saddled with a crippling debt (that they can barely service).

[Britney's Piers]

I'm gonna point out again for all the sociopaths on here that haven't grasped this yet.

It's not the bankers money.

It's not the banks money.

It's the banks CUSTOMERS money.

It's the banks SAVERS money.

It's peoples savings and pensions. Ordinary people like us.

When you say people should "screw the bank" what your actually saying is they should SCREW ALL THE ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO SAVED RATHER THAN SPENT.

You don't save with a bank (unless you have a safe deposit box), you lend to them, and take a risk of not seeing your money again, that's why you get interest. This reminds me of the "victims" of the Icelandic banks who didn't seem to understand why they were getting such a high return on their "savings".

Edited February 26, 2012 by Britney's Piers

[Venger]

You don't save with a bank (unless you have a safe deposit box), you lend to them, and take a risk of not seeing your money again, that's why you get interest. This reminds me of the "victims" of the Icelandic banks who didn't seem to understand why they were getting such a high return on their "savings".

I agree with you about savers having internet accounts with Icelandic banks, chasing high returns. They should have been still struggling to get their money today, stuck in red tape, even with compensation schemes.

Non home owning savers who feared house price inflation and stuck with more mainstream accounts paying less interest, whilst house prices continued to rise exponentially, are still being punished today with low interest rates. To the benefit of the mortgage debtors with so many seeing their mortgage repayments fall on SVRs.

There's too much blame on the lenders for me on this thread. It's like you've all forgotten these big borrowers hold responsibility and how Irish society was gripped by love for rampant HPI. The same people who adored the bankers and the debt on offer for borrowers to make their own decisions, now blame the bankers and want to lessened their own role in it.

I'd prefer to see these mortgage debtors sent to work down the coal mines in China, and not be given fine homes they bought at peak stupid prices when they're directly responsible for pushing prices up with the debt they took on to buy.