Freefall

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

I think they picked the wrong target meself to highlight as a "scam" I'm thinking he maybe should have gone into politics.

Solar systems have been, and continue to be, terribly mis-sold all over the place - it'll only cost you this much and you'll save [make up a number] this much each year. Scamsters! Same with domestic wind turbines, etc. This is where many dodgy salesmen have ended up. Good choice.

Edited July 15, 2009 by gruffydd

[Fudge]

I would have thought only those that didnt get caught up in the housing mania could bear to watch this programme.

It would be too painful to watch for people like those portrayed.

[Minos]

My thoughts exactly RFD, I enjoyed the program as a piece of drama, but the spiv's suicide was unrealistic. Those guys are narcissitic to the point that suicide wouldn't even enter their minds, they'll just move on, keep a low profile and wait for the next big thing to take off.

They are more likely to kill someone else than themselves.

[Charterhouse]

Yep, Cap and Trade is what Goldman Sachs et al are looking at next.

Aww did you read that in the Rolling Stone article?

[juvenal]

A couple of points about the drama Freefall

The security guard's flaw wasn't greed. It was that his self-esteem came to rest solely on home ownership. He lost sight of what he had (solvency, family) and bought into the notion that you are no-one unless you are 'on the ladder'. The mortgage broker's artful mention of good schools helped a simple man rationalise a selfless element into his fatally wrong decision.

The film was very much about the ultimate primacy of human relationships over simple greed, and about our lack of self-knowledge and its consequences.

The masturbating executive was seen as a hollow man, incapable of any relationship other than with his own hand, the next deal and his bank balance. He'd been offered the chance of love from wife/daughter/mistress - but couldn't even begin make the leap of empathy or self-sacrifice needed.

The broker was portrayed as lost in his own image of himself, shuttling from one sexual episode to another, radio blasting, another sales cliche ever at the ready. His relationships were interchangeable, and thus degraded to a string of sexual experiences, only marginally different to the high flyer's solitary orgasms.

The security guard essentially was a victim of lack of self-knowledge, unable to see that what he believed himself to be doing - the best for his wife and family - was in fact to counter his own self-image and his feelings of failure.

The drama was one of victory-in-defeat. The guard, reduced to tower block renting, retained the support of those who loved him. He could theoretically rebuild - just a little.

The slimy broker/solar power salesman - in middle age - will taste the ultimate loneliness of affluence without any real human connexion. That's if a client doesn't kill him first.

A morality drama, exposing the snake pit of credit, but asking us to re-examine the priority of our personal values. Does money, self-image and status dominate, or our close relationships?

'No man is an island, entire unto itself

Each is a piece of the continent, a part of the main...'

Edited July 15, 2009 by juvenal

[SleepyHead]

The spivs selling dodgy mortgages will be the very same spivs selling the dodgy solar panels. You know, ones that are crap and have a net energy cost, and are sold at inflated prices. I'm sure they will be able to arrange finance for you though

I'm sure you're right. But it really doesn't seem as awful as the property scam. I mean, you could live without solar panels. Alright energy might get so expensive we need em. But I bet I could knock up an old style wind turbine to provide a bit of power. Reduce my energy needs to a minimum etc.

You couldn't escape the property bubble. That's the point. Even if you didn't buy into the pyramid, you end up wasting your time writing a pointless post on HPC.co.uk, ranting against the whole thing........................ oh that's me isn't it?

[Guest Steve Cook]

A couple of points about the drama Freefall

The security guard's flaw wasn't greed. It was that his self-esteem came to rest solely on home ownership. He lost sight of what he had (solvency, family) and bought into the notion that you are no-one unless you are 'on the ladder'. The mortgage broker's artful mention of good schools helped a simple man rationalise a selfless element into his fatally wrong decision.

The film was very much about the ultimate primacy of human relationships over simple greed and our lack of self-knowledge. And the damage this can inflict.

The masturbating executive was seen as a hollow man, incapable of any relationship other than with his own hand, the next deal and his bank balance. He'd been offered the chance of love from wife/daughter/mistress - but couldn't even begin make the leap of empathy or self-sacrifice needed.

The broker was portrayed as lost in his own image of himself, shuttling from one sexual episode to another, radio blasting, another sales cliche ever at the ready. His relationships were interchangeable, and thus degraded to a string of sexual experiences, only marginally different to the high flyer's solitary orgasms.

The security guard essentially was a victim of lack of self-knowledge, unable to see that what he believed himself to be doing - the best for his wife and family - was in fact to counter his own self-image and his feelings of failure.

The drama was one of victory-in-defeat. The guard, reduced to tower block renting, retained the support of those who loved him. He could theoretically rebuild - just a little.

The slimy broker/solar power salesman - in middle age - will taste the ultimate loneliness of affluence without any real human connexion. That's if a client doesn't kill him first.

A morality drama, exposing the snake pit of credit, but asking us to re-examine the priority of our personal values. Does money, self-image and status dominate, or our close relationships?

'No man is an island, entire unto itself

Each is a piece of the continent, a part of the main...'

I've got clothes on my back and shoes on my feet

A roof over my head and something to eat

My kids are all healthy and my folks are alive

You know, it's amazing but sometimes I think I'll survive

I've got all of my fingers and all of my toes

I'm pretty well off I guess, I suppose

So how come I feel bad so much of the time?

No man is an island. John Dunn wasn't lying.

Deep below the ocean of fear

Designed to separate them

All of the islands

Are really holding hands.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Steve Cook

[ccc]

In reference to the many times mentioned jacking off incident.

I have jacked off more than once in a Bank Office Toilet. It wasn't because I had just made a multi million pound CDO deal. It was because I was bored.

Highly strung city boys taking gear and jerking off in the toilets ? I imagine it happens quite a lot.

As for the rest of the story, over the top but very close to the bone. I imagine it was uncomfortable viewing for many watching.

[Minos]

In reference to the many times mentioned jacking off incident.

I have jacked off more than once in a Bank Office Toilet. It wasn't because I had just made a multi million pound CDO deal. It was because I was bored.

Highly strung city boys taking gear and jerking off in the toilets ? I imagine it happens quite a lot.

As for the rest of the story, over the top but very close to the bone. I imagine it was uncomfortable viewing for many watching.

The moral of the story is never to shake hands with your bank manager?

[Minos]

I've got clothes on my back and shoes on my feet

A roof over my head and something to eat

My kids are all healthy and my folks are alive

You know, it's amazing but sometimes I think I'll survive

I've got all of my fingers and all of my toes

I'm pretty well off I guess, I suppose

So how come I feel bad so much of the time?

No man is an island. John Dunn wasn't lying.

Deep below the ocean of fear

Designed to separate them

All of the islands

Are really holding hands.

Only sensible thing to be is the shark in the water.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Minos

[Guest An Bearin Bui]

It really has been a very nasty decade indeed.

Similar sentiments here - nothing really good has come out of the decade as far as I can see. The 90s were much better in terms of improvement of standards of living, new technology, lifestyles etc. I'm hoping that the 2010s are better and we see some innovation and improvement instead of the plastic, fake, bubble-driven decade we've been through.

As for the TV show, I found it disappointing in the end although it started off well. It seems everyone got their comeuppance except the spiv-chav selling the mortgages. A great scene to add would have been a raid by the Serious Fraud Office on the offices of the mortgage brokers and Mr Spiv-Chav being taken away in handcuffs. There have actually been cases of mortgage brokers getting done for fraud in the last year as mis-selling scandals have emerged so it wouldn't have been that unrealistic or over-the-top.

Instead we got to see him living in Footballers Wives heaven with a new tacky bimbo and a new line of spiv-work, still driving his Audi. Meanwhile the bankers lost their jobs - a very unlikely outcome in reality as we've seen from the bailouts.

[chevin]

The mortgage broker bought his house for £800k then wanted £1.4m or £1.5m for it but we were never told what he got were we?

He was living in a flat! Quite clearly he didn't get much.

[contractor]

The moral of the story is never to shake hands with your bank manager?

ISTR someone on here telling the story of not wiping his hands properly after knocking one out and then shaking hands with someone.

edit: grammarf*ck

Edited July 15, 2009 by contractor

[self]

I thought it was great. Some of the acting was a little ropey though. However, this programme was exactly what was needed. To me it gave a face to the names in all the scenarios. All of us who see numbers and figures see just that, numbers and figures, it's all too easy to forget that those numbers represent actual people, families, people with dreams and aspirations. In some ways it could have been written as a documentary.

What we need now is a channel four documentary detailing exactly how this happened and who caused it. No ******** about "how banks didn't know what they were getting into", just plain facts in a clearly presented way. This show was a start.

[right_freds_dead]

He was living in a flat! Quite clearly he didn't get much.

yeah, lucky for him the social housing waiting list was only a few weeks.....

there was no need for the bbc to have spend this money making this drama.

they could simply have just run homes under the hammer 2005 followed by the news.

[eric pebble]

cranially challenged....like Doctors, Lawyers, reporters......

no, the greed was encouraged by all VIs with FEAR and a 10 year high pressure campaign from all sides.

renters were killing their money...buyers were INVESTING for their future, with an easy peasy exit strategy.

No. It was HARD not to partake.

URGED TO LIE ABOUT THEIR INCOMES

see below

Edited July 15, 2009 by eric pebble

[Englebert]

I thought it was great. Some of the acting was a little ropey though. However, this programme was exactly what was needed. To me it gave a face to the names in all the scenarios. All of us who see numbers and figures see just that, numbers and figures, it's all too easy to forget that those numbers represent actual people, families, people with dreams and aspirations. In some ways it could have been written as a documentary.

What we need now is a channel four documentary detailing exactly how this happened and who caused it. No ******** about "how banks didn't know what they were getting into", just plain facts in a clearly presented way. This show was a start.

"What we need now is a channel four documentary detailing exactly how this happened and who caused it. No ******** about "how banks didn't know what they were getting into", just plain facts in a clearly presented way. This show was a start."

I am sure Dispatches have done something like this. Jeff Randle has also done a programme detailing this. Problem was both programmes told me nothing that I never knew before.

[steve99]

Exactly, hopefully this will dispense the "blame the banker" syndrome. Everyone in this chain played their part. While we stood on the sidelines and weren't listened to.

No, bankers are the No 1 guilty party. They were given thier freedom back in the 80's and as one Tory minsiter said at the time, 'Bankers are the financial grown ups in the UK' and words to the effect that they would never undermine the UK and its population with shonky 3rd world banking practices. The middle men selling mortgages etc are little more than trained monkeys doing the dirty work of the bankers and the average (or bellow average) person will borrow as much as possible especialy over the last few years since they started drumming into our heads that debt is ok.

I really feel sorry for this security guard guy.

Is it just me thinking this is the "Boys from the Blackstuff" or "This Life" of the Noughties?

First program with a touch of reality for some time

Who knows. Not sure these are meant to be 'riff raff' though. Just naive people duped into thinking they could get something for nothing.

Loved the quote from the mortgage man:

"Owning a house like this is..............DEATH"

. Genius.

Or perhaps they thought they could just pay it off.

Surely the security guard would be on verbal then written warnings - why didn't he explain to his line-manager the stress he's under?

Or, do security guards get fired immediately if they dooze off?

Perhaps they do ... could someone confirm?

Is the Banker guy supposed to be Irish - or is he Irish / American doing a bad accent?

During recessions, most companies behave like this, instead of paid for redundancies they find any excuse and call it 'gross misconduct', particularly in low paid jobs, have seen this over and over in previous recessions. Most people in these jobs can be sacked for doing what the average poster on here does as a matter of course every day, eg using the company internet, phone, pen, stapler etc, or just being 1 min late back from lunch etc.

[VacantPossession]

Even if Green is the next bubble, at least it won't be as damaging as the housing bubble was.

While I'm sure business will exploit the whole thing. It will at least help stabilise the climate, and encourage a more sustainable and less wasteful lifestyle.

I think that's a big statement of over confidence. Manufacturing of "green" products is itself a not very green activity. Take the Prius hybrid car. It is relentlessly promoted as "green" but there is absolutely nothing green about it. Saving on just petrol consumption does not make a car green. The manufacturing process of the Prius, and its high cost, already makes it an inefficient process. The gains in the part battery power are wiped out by its production costs and production materials which themselves call upon wasteful and Un green processes. Now if Toyota were to make a small, light, efficient and cost effective car that might be a stretch be described as "green".

Nearly every product that is promoted as being green is nothing of the sort. It has to be remembered that the manufacturing of almost every green product you see is itself a non green process.

Back to cars: If you have a reliable ten or fifteen year old car and it has running almost trouble free, the best way to be green is to hang on to it. But our government wants to penalise old car owners in order to persuade them to buy a new, "green" car. This is nonsense. The production process of a new car, however "green" it claims to be, will always create more overall pollution than holding on to an old vehicle.

[Democorruptcy]

I noticed he was living in a flat but if he took a loss on the house why not mention how much?

[SleepyHead]

I think that's a big statement of over confidence. Manufacturing of "green" products is itself a not very green activity. Take the Prius hybrid car. It is relentlessly promoted as "green" but there is absolutely nothing green about it. Saving on just petrol consumption does not make a car green. The manufacturing process of the Prius, and its high cost, already makes it an inefficient process. The gains in the part battery power are wiped out by its production costs and production materials which themselves call upon wasteful and Un green processes. Now if Toyota were to make a small, light, efficient and cost effective car that might be a stretch be described as "green".

Nearly every product that is promoted as being green is nothing of the sort. It has to be remembered that the manufacturing of almost every green product you see is itself a non green process.

Back to cars: If you have a reliable ten or fifteen year old car and it has running almost trouble free, the best way to be green is to hang on to it. But our government wants to penalise old car owners in order to persuade them to buy a new, "green" car. This is nonsense. The production process of a new car, however "green" it claims to be, will always create more overall pollution than holding on to an old vehicle.

So what are you saying. Let's just not bother? We have to start somewhere.

Unless you're one of the many on here that says climate change is a myth. I'd rather not take the gamble personally.

If climate change is all rubbish, then we've just wasted our time with green energy efficiency etc, but at least we'll have a less polluted planet to live on.

But if it's true, and we've done nothing. Life on Earth is under threat. I would say that's "overconfident" risktaking, wouldn't you?

[@contradevian]

I think that's a big statement of over confidence. Manufacturing of "green" products is itself a not very green activity. Take the Prius hybrid car. It is relentlessly promoted as "green" but there is absolutely nothing green about it. Saving on just petrol consumption does not make a car green. The manufacturing process of the Prius, and its high cost, already makes it an inefficient process. The gains in the part battery power are wiped out by its production costs and production materials which themselves call upon wasteful and Un green processes. Now if Toyota were to make a small, light, efficient and cost effective car that might be a stretch be described as "green".

Nearly every product that is promoted as being green is nothing of the sort. It has to be remembered that the manufacturing of almost every green product you see is itself a non green process.

Back to cars: If you have a reliable ten or fifteen year old car and it has running almost trouble free, the best way to be green is to hang on to it. But our government wants to penalise old car owners in order to persuade them to buy a new, "green" car. This is nonsense. The production process of a new car, however "green" it claims to be, will always create more overall pollution than holding on to an old vehicle.

I agree and to some extent the Prius is pointless except that at least switch to electric only albeit for a very very short range. However remove the batteries and the electric motor / electronics it will still get around adequately. Family saloons from 30-70's had smaller engines and were adequate.

If it resulted in a family saloon that was practical with a sub 1000cc engine (with battery assistance) then it might have a point, but the engine I guess needs to be "overpowered" in order to "sell" it.

[VacantPossession]

So what are you saying. Let's just not bother? We have to start somewhere.

Sure, we need to bother. What I object to is bogus green products that simply are not so. And if for example you were to sit in front of your TV for one hour and watch commercial channels, I am willing to bet that approaching half of all corporate type adverts will have a green logo, or mention the word "green", "environment", "energy saving", "looking after the planet", and a lot of other nonsense which bares no relation whatsoever to what they are peddling.

The "green" thing has become a giant excercise in band wagon climbing, lies, deceit and dishonesty. Genuinely "green" companies and manufacturers probably represent less than 1% of the total. It is all PR nonsense.

[eric pebble]

The "green" thing has become a giant excercise in band wagon climbing, lies, deceit and dishonesty. Genuinely "green" companies and manufacturers probably represent less than 1% of the total. It is all PR nonsense.

YUP!! Just MORE BULLSH1T.....

[self]

BTW Eric, I actually watched that BBC documentary last night that you link to in your sig. Very informative, thanks.