Saver's Safety Net Is Upped To £85K

[juvenal]

Anyone posted this yet?

FSCS rules chnage from £50K protected at present.

Guardian Money. Rupert Jones Article 18.12.2010.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/dec/17/fscs-savings-safety-net-raised

Sorry if this is old news. It wasn't to me.

[kenny dalglish]

Anyone posted this yet?

FSCS rules chnage from £50K protected at present.

Guardian Money. Rupert Jones Article 18.12.2010.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/dec/17/fscs-savings-safety-net-raised

Sorry if this is old news. It wasn't to me.

to my mind it's not worth the paper it's written on. If there is a full scale banking collapse, the govt could not guarantee the deposits. That's why I have moved everything I have to national savings. Not that I think that it is sacrosanct - in these days nothing is - but I figured, perhaps wrongly, that it would survive any private sector banking collapse,although maybe for a short while, we'll see...

[bumpy]

to my mind it's not worth the paper it's written on. If there is a full scale banking collapse, the govt could not guarantee the deposits. That's why I have moved everything I have to national savings. Not that I think that it is sacrosanct - in these days nothing is - but I figured, perhaps wrongly, that it would survive any private sector banking collapse,although maybe for a short while, we'll see...

You are deluded in thinking your money is any safer in National Savings.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

You are deluded in thinking your money is any safer in National Savings.

and even if they were safe in a case where all other uk banks failed then sterling would lose about 90% of its value, so yep ten percent is better than nothing but you arent exactly retaining your wealth

[General Congreve]

to my mind it's not worth the paper it's written on. If there is a full scale banking collapse, the govt could not guarantee the deposits. That's why I have moved everything I have to national savings. Not that I think that it is sacrosanct - in these days nothing is - but I figured, perhaps wrongly, that it would survive any private sector banking collapse,although maybe for a short while, we'll see...

It certainly isn't worth the paper it is written on. In the event of a bank failure the other (already insolvent) banks all pitch in to pay customers of the failed bank back.

The system is plainly only any good in the event of one or two smaller bank failures. With the current bank solvency issues, a systemic bank collapse would take the compensation system with it.

National savings are better than a bank deposit, but there's still counter party risk there.

[General Congreve]

and even if they were safe in a case where all other uk banks failed then sterling would lose about 90% of its value, so yep ten percent is better than nothing but you arent exactly retaining your wealth

Very good point.

[kenny dalglish]

and even if they were safe in a case where all other uk banks failed then sterling would lose about 90% of its value, so yep ten percent is better than nothing but you arent exactly retaining your wealth

As I think I ma implied, the issue for me is not about putting money in a safe place, to my mind the system is so fecked, there is no such thing anymore, it's more a case of looking for the "least worst", am happy to hear alternatives *

* I don't class speculative investing as alternatives, ditto foreign currencies, they would be a hedge at best....besides when everybody has nothing that 10% would be pretty significant

[General Congreve]

As I think I ma implied, the issue for me is not about putting money in a safe place, to my mind the system is so fecked, there is no such thing anymore, it's more a case of looking for the "least worst", am happy to hear alternatives *

* I don't class speculative investing as alternatives, ditto foreign currencies, they would be a hedge at best....besides when everybody has nothing that 10% would be pretty significant

Well, as you may already realise, I am long gold. Worked out pretty well for those Icelanders when they had their collapse. The Kronor folded in half and the value of gold in kronor trebled in the days following the collapse. Two years later it has quadrupled from its pre-crash level of 40,000 ISK/Oz to 162,000 ISK/Oz. Not a bad place for your money if you're an Icelander. Same rules apply here and elsewhere.

Bear in mind, the collapse of no financial system in history has ever taken gold down with it. It is not the speculative risk that many make it out to be, whereas sterling, the dollar, the euro, the Yen etc are IMO.

Edited December 23, 2010 by General Congreve

[bumpy]

Well, as you may already realise, I am long gold.

I think we get the message, as you have been ramping it at every occassion you can.

[General Congreve]

I think we get the message, as you have been ramping it at every occassion you can.

I have to take issue with the accusation of ramping. There is no point to me 'ramping' gold on HPC, even if I convinced every member here to rush out and buy a kilo it would make no odds to the spot price. There is nothing for me to gain personally by this so-called 'ramping'.

My points are purely rational financial and economic analysis of the situation. Unlike the musings of the MSM houseprice rampers, who are easily discredited, almost every article posted on this site points to the coming implosion of our financial system and the need to preserve wealth in hard assets and hard money. Ignore this at your peril.

Ramper seems as easy reposte to my posts for those that disagree, but I am yet to read a constructive response with any substance that gives an opposing view. Perhaps you would care to enlighten me and everyone else reading this with an alternative avenue for avoiding financial disaster?

Edited December 22, 2010 by General Congreve

[fallingbuzzard]

I understand your argument but don't think you know the gold market

I have to take issue with the accusation of ramping. There is no point to me 'ramping' gold on HPC, even if I convinced every member here to rush out and buy a kilo it would make no odds to the spot price. There is nothing for me to gain personally by this so-called 'ramping'.

My points are purely rational financial and economic analysis of the situation. Unlike the musings of the MSM houseprice rampers, who are easily discredited, almost every article posted on this site points to the coming implosion of our financial system and the need to preserve wealth in hard assets and hard money. Ignore this at your peril.

Ramper seems as easy reposte to my posts for those that disagree, but I am yet to read a constructive response with any substance that gives an opposing view. Perhaps you would care to enlighten me and everyone else reading this with an alternative avenue for avoiding financial disaster?

[bumpy]

I have to take issue with the accusation of ramping. There is no point to me 'ramping' gold on HPC, even if I convinced every member here to rush out and buy a kilo it would make no odds to the spot price. There is nothing for me to gain personally by this so-called 'ramping'.

My points are purely rational financial and economic analysis of the situation. Unlike the musings of the MSM houseprice rampers, who are easily discredited, almost every article posted on this site points to the coming implosion of our financial system and the need to preserve wealth in hard assets and hard money. Ignore this at your peril.

Ramper seems as easy reposte to my posts for those that disagree, but I am yet to read a constructive response with any substance that gives an opposing view. Perhaps you would care to enlighten me and everyone else reading this with an alternative avenue for avoiding financial disaster?

Like any investment a balanced portfolio is required. Gold may be OK, but it is not the panacea you try to make out by your continual ramping

1. Holding physical is exposing yourself to theft. In times of trouble you will not be able to trust ANYONE.

2. Holding physical means you cant respond to a crashing market and gold falls can be dramatictically fast.

3. Everyone is thinking gold is the answer. That is the time to get out.

4. Buying gold that is held for you is nothing more than another Ponzi scheme.

5. If you must have exposure to precious metals then mining shares are a good way to do it.

6. In times of trouble, governments have been known to confiscate physical gold.

7. The price of gold is governed by more than supply and demand. You are at the manipulative hands of other more powerful and shrewd investors.

Edited December 23, 2010 by bumpy

[General Congreve]

I understand your argument but don't think you know the gold market

It's simple, open-ended responses that really vex me.

If you feel you have a point to make, please back it up with something more substantial. For example, please examine the reasons why you think I don't know the gold market, rather than merely stating that you think that I don't...

Edited December 23, 2010 by General Congreve

[General Congreve]

Like any investment a balanced portfolio is required. Gold may be OK, but it is not the panacea you try to make out by your continual ramping

1. Holding physical is exposing yourself to theft. In times of trouble you will not be able to trust ANYONE.

2. Holding physical means you cant respond to a crashing market and gold falls can be dramatictically fast.

3. Everyone is thinking gold is the answer. That is the time to get out.

4. Buying gold that is held for you is nothing more than another Ponzi scheme.

5. If you must have exposure to precious metals then mining shares are a good way to do it.

6. In times of trouble, governments have been known to confiscate physical gold.

7. The price of gold is governed by more than supply and demand. You are at the manipulative hands of other more powerful and shrewd investors.

1. Holding physical in no way exposes someone to theft any more than having an internet banking account exposes you to internet banking fraud, cash in your wallet exposes you to mugging or owning a bunch of antiques exposes you to burglary. If we follow this line of argument to its logical conclusion, we'd all own nothing, reject all forms of wealth and live on the streets in rags. I don't deny that owning gold exposes one to the risk of theft, but no more than any other desirable physical or monetary asset and as long as due diligence is followed, it should not be a concern. I would also add that as I have not fashioned my physical gold into a hat that I parade around town in, the chances of me being mugged for my gold are pretty negligible.

2. I can get access to my physical and be at my dealer's within an hour or two, if need be. But once again, due diligence. Follow the latest news and the markets and you are less likely to be caught out. As an example, I sold my last property in August 2007 at the peak and I pulled my savings out of Icesave exactly 2 days before it collapsed. I achieved this because I followed the markets every move leading up to property's reversal and Iceland's Banking Crisis. Saying that markets can suddenly reverse is not news or an argument against gold, when taken in consideration with the prevailing global financial situation.

3. Just complete twaddle. Who's everyone? I've never heard a taxi driver, bloke down the pub, or any of my friends even mention the stuff, let alone know a thing about it. If you asked a random sample of 10 people in the street what the price of gold was I bet you'd be lucky to get 1 answer in the ballpark. Those that favour gold are in the minority on here too. Just remember how many people were blabbing about the price of their home during the housing boom and the endless MSM drivel on the TV and in the papers - that's everyone thinking something is the answer. When the cover of TIME magazine shows a golden bull spearing a dollar with its horns, that'll be the time to call the top of the market.

4. That's why you buy physical. To counter the risk of theft you place you physical in a safety deposit box at an institution where the contents of said box are considered assets of the individual, not the institution (in case of failure of said institution). Basically avoid banks.

5. Mining shares are a good addition to a physical position and may provide much higher leveraged gains, this is true. However, physical should be your core position because mining companies can fail and in the event of the crisis there is nothing to stop a government nationalising mines on its soil, meaning you'll be lucky to get back a fraction of the value of your investment, if anything. Mining shares should be used as a speculative play, but as a minority share of your overall gold position, due to the risks, but also due to the fact that the possibility of stellar returns, if everything goes well for the company in question, means a little will go a long way, i.e. many junior miners in the late 70's made returns in excess of 5000% (sometimes far in excess - Lion Mines – 1975 price: $0.07 / 1980 price: $380, i.e. an increase of 542,757%), while physical made about 2400% between 1971 and 1980.

6. When FDR confiscated the gold in the 30's in the US, only about 1% of holders were pathetic enough to hand it over and none of the 99% who didn't comply were ever fined or jailed as a result of the confiscation order. However, this is a reason that ETF's and companies like bullionvault are not recommended. Low transaction costs is great, until the government freeze your account overnight and confiscate it or impose huge amounts of CGT on sales. Then suddenly you are really f4cked. With physical there will always be a black market and it's easy to hide from the authorities. The Goverment banning drugs hasn't prevented their trade, it will be the same with gold if need be, unless you're the type to roll over and take it in the @rse like the gormless 1% in the US in the 30's.

7. As are the FX markets. Sterling, which you no doubt keep in your wallet and bank account, is traded on these markets, is it not? George Soros used the FX markets to help crash the pound in the early 90's. Feel safe?

Do you have any other 'worthwhile' counterpoints you'd like to share?

Edited December 23, 2010 by General Congreve

[19 year mortgage 8itch]

Do you have any other 'worthwhile' counterpoints you'd like to share?

Isn't this thread about the FSCS? From important news about the FSCS to Gold! in less than 10 posts. Good work

Thank you Juvenal

[Bosh]

Isn't this thread about the FSCS? From important news about the FSCS to Gold! in less than 10 posts. Good work

Thank you Juvenal

I`m stocking up on frankincense and myrrh.

[davidg]

> I pulled my savings out of Icesave exactly 2 days before it collapsed

not that it made much difference as individuals were fully compensated... for some reason.

[byways]

I'd be interested in where you think the price of Gold might finally finish up before it takes any real substantial leg down please?

Franklin Sanders wrote this am:

"Silver has fallen through its 20 DMA (2929c) and 50 DMA (2854c) and below here the next backstop appears at 2645c -- coincidentally my highest price target for this correction. Silver's fall is liable to turn vicious next week, so brace yourself."

Gold & Silver prices

I took out an Investec Gold Fund, and many others on 6/12/10 - that is down 11%. Others Funds are up 12% average gain is 3% in just over a month. So when / did you get out of Gold just in time? It may have quite a bit further to fall before it trends up again (hopefully).

Where to next? $53,000? Greenspan ???

"Ramping up" was claimed earlier? As India buys 2 tons EVERY DAY, I doubt 1oz or 1Kg will make a big difference!