Eddie_George Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 Nicely put. I too remember an interview with a banker who said something like......... "We thought we were the masters of the Universe, everything we touched turned to gold, and then the whole thing came crashing down around us and we knew that the game was up and that we would lose everything and be lucky to escape with our liberty. But then the establishment bailed us out and it became obvious that we are indeed the masters of the Universe." I'm surprised that he was surprised that they were bailed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron78 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 It put prices up for first time buyers. That obviously isn't much help. If the asset was too expensive for people with decent jobs and decent incomes then THE ASSET IS TOO EXPENSIVE. It's that simple. If you want to regulate that, then tax foreign buyers (like many countries do), build social housing for the middle classes priced out... anything other than "lend people on good money who still can't borrow enough to buy an inflated asset propped up by state money even more state money". Osborne is a dolt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePiltdownMan Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 In short then, I do think that caveat emptor applies. If the bankers win forever then so be it - the public had its chance to demand justice and recompense in the aftermath of the 2008 meltdown, but they passively watched as the perpetrators were openly bailed out, allowing them to keep their gains. How did we get the chance to do this, it wasn't like the bank bailouts were a voluntary action like us being asked to send in a cheque. It was forced upon us by the actions of politicians and public servants. Any action to oppose this would be either totally ineffectual or be considered borderline terrorism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquid Goldfish Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 We all said this would happen. It will take at least a generation before HTB can be stopped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Democorruptcy Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 If the bankers win forever then so be it - the public had its chance to demand justice and recompense in the aftermath of the 2008 meltdown, but they passively watched as the perpetrators were openly bailed out, allowing them to keep their gains. I'd also add though that I believe that the majority of the members here CAN figure out why HTB2 is such a crap deal. They're not buying into the dream - and they should be happy that others are doing so, unless they believe the Government can prop up the housing market in perpetuity through subsidy. The problem is that the bailout was decided in day but anything to do with regulation is decided over years and pushed further into the future. Who do you vote for to change that? The 2008 bailout may have been decided quickly but the public have had plenty of time to see what Help to Buy really is... Help to Bail Banks. We had faux public outrage over banks getting bailed out in 2008, yet now nothing is said about their taxes being guaranteed in advance to do exactly the same again. I still think people actually believe that Help to Buy Bail Banks guarantees their own mortgage payments, not just any losses for banks while they are repossessed. Maybe to think it won't guarantee their payments is two step thinking when three step is required? Nothing would surprise me now. There's all sorts of props I can think of that they could come up with yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) Things gave changed considerably since the economic collapse. Still a way to go of course. Before the economic collapse there was disquiet about house prices, economic policies and the integrity and competence of bankers and politicians etc etc. Now it's pretty much established fact that in the main they're liars and crooks, the housing market and house prices are crazy and economic policies are both incompetent and self serving. The LibLabCon party's cartel policies are now becoming well identified even among the general population. The eu is fragmenting and the US and China has real problems etc. There has been an expression of opposition to things in the UK but that was severely punished. Now a previously unheard of political party (UKIP) is gaining a lot of ground and gaining support. Etc etc etc. Things are far from being the same as before the economic collapse after all the crookedness, fraud, deceit and incompetence. Edited July 12, 2014 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) He admitted that the housing market has the potential to do "real damage" to the economy if it overheats but added that there is no evidence it is doing so. There's plenty of evidence that it's already done massive damage and over decades. He's just pretending otherwise and not even looking now. It's no real surprise to read that Osbourne is again trying to justify the Help to Buy Sell/Bailout policy with twisted words. It's all along the lines of the "helping hard working people" sort of propaganda whilst transferring jobs overseas and importing cheap labour and the all generation theft that goes with their policies. Edited July 12, 2014 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 Things gave changed considerably since the economic collapse. Still a way to go of course. Before the economic collapse there was disquiet about house prices, economic policies and the integrity and competence of bankers and politicians etc etc. Now it's pretty much established fact that in the main they're liars and crooks, the housing market and house prices are crazy and economic policies are both incompetent and self serving. The LibLabCon parties cartel policies are now becoming well identified even among the general population. The eu is fragmenting and the US and China has real problems etc. There has been an expression of opposition to things in the UK but that was severely punished. Now a previously unheard of political party (UKIP) is gaining a lot of ground and gaining support. Etc etc etc. Things are far from being the same as before the economic collapse after all the crookedness, fraud, deceit and incompetence. Very true. For me, the identification within the public mind of a Westminster cartel is the defining change since 2008. The days of Red/Blue politics are over forever, we understand now as never before that they're the same team and that the entire sordid enterprise is run for the benefit of the banking mafia in the City of London. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby81 Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 On the back of HTB, Barratts house prices have increased on average 13% in the last year...but yeah really helped those decent workers out there George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 There's plenty of evidence that it's already done massive damage and over decades. He's just pretending otherwise and not even looking now. Irreparable damage. Osborne can't been blamed for the policy errors of his predecessors naturally, but his failure even to countenance them is morally and intellectually dishonest. So long as he can keep borrowing £120bn/yr cheaply he can get away with the pretence of recovery. The minute he can't it's all over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 How did we get the chance to do this, it wasn't like the bank bailouts were a voluntary action like us being asked to send in a cheque. It was forced upon us by the actions of politicians and public servants. Any action to oppose this would be either totally ineffectual or be considered borderline terrorism. This is correct. This was Gordon Brown saving the world - and his own back. Pure hubris; reckless and immoral - of course, supported without question by the political and ruling classes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) "Help to Buy is not having an impact on house prices. The Bank of England have looked at this and don't identify it as a problem. But we have to be very vigilant about the housing market, particularly in London. The housing market has the potential to do real damage." So that even includes London. Interesting that London house prices seemed to go exponential as soon as Help to Buy Sell/Bailout was introduced. Edited July 12, 2014 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderpup Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 He saw it as a simple extension of the 'law of the jungle' and 'survival of the fittest'. But if someone bigger and stronger than he was broke into his house and started stealing his stuff he would probably be on the phone demanding that the 'regulators' in the form of the police come to enforce- not the 'law of jungle'- but the laws of society- the same laws he probably broke or carefully circumvented in order to enrich himself. The truth is that people like this guy are screaming hypocrites- the only competition they are in favor of is one that is rigged to ensure they succeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) A couple of years ago there was an interview published with a retired American banker who was breathtakingly forthright in his views on banking excesses and the subsequent bailout (I wish I had a link, but unfortunately I don't). Paraphrasing what he said, he openly expressed the view that the majority of people were there to be exploited by other individuals who were more intelligent. As it transpired people have very quickly discovered that they weren't being exploited by other individuals who were more intelligent after all - but by others who were able to, in effect, employ force to rig the outcome even if not employing it that intelligently. Edited July 12, 2014 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) Paraphrasing what he said, he openly expressed the view that the majority of people were there to be exploited by other individuals who were more intelligent. He made no apologies for the fact that he and his team devoted their minds to coming up with ways to enrich themselves at the expense of others. He saw it as a simple extension of the 'law of the jungle' and 'survival of the fittest'. When I first read this I was taken aback, but on reflection I realised that I'm not so different. As you're probably aware I spend a lot of time analysing data, thinking about investment strategies, working out ways that I can profit from misinformation and mispricing in markets. In doing this I don't consciously seek to gain at the expense of others, but it's a fact of life that people like me who devote a disproportionate amount of their time in formulating strategies to accumulate wealth are going to ultimately take money off those whose priorities lie elsewhere. Of course that's right - I just wish we had that opportunity to buy assets at lower values that others have bid stupid crazy prices for. Yet some still think of themselves as Judges of Fairness.... even now making excuses for mid-20s couples, who are entitled and can't see anything wrong in buying 2 bed newbuilds with another kitchen in the lounge job. "They only got 5 GCSES", despite them in good jobs, making their own decisions, not flinching from quarter million pound prices and above. They are superior as buyers. No one can be allowed to make mistakes in buying, and stuff it onto younger people, some of who still choose to take up these schemes we've rigged up to bypass deposits, to outbid others. And perhaps they could be correct to do so, given the excuse giver lobby is so powerful, with more hpi reflation recent years. More of the same every single day, more malinvestment, but the excuse givers standing ready to smooth it out, so those of us who've saved, some approaching 40 or over, rented, waited, pay more. Edited July 12, 2014 by Venger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BalancedBear Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 If Osbourne is so concerned about intergenerational theft, why does he continue to borrow over £100 billion per year to add to the country's debt pile, for future generations to deal with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 If Osbourne is so concerned about intergenerational theft, why does he continue to borrow over £100 billion per year to add to the country's debt pile, for future generations to deal with? Because he's a career politician in fear of losing his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wherebee Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Because he's a career politician in fear of losing his job. If Osbourne is so concerned about intergenerational theft, why does he continue to borrow over £100 billion per year to add to the country's debt pile, for future generations to deal with? God wouldn't you love an interviewer on a mainstream program to ask him that. Imagine Paxman going for the kill....it would be car crash TV...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sPinwheel Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 God wouldn't you love an interviewer on a mainstream program to ask him that. An interviewer on a mainstream program wont ask out of fear of losing his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 I love the idea that the housing market hasn't overheated but the only way people can buy is with help to buy. A politician with any intelligence would realise they have headed over the cliff. However hilarious doublethink about intergenerational theft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Osborne was born in Paddington, London,[5] and is the eldest of four sons. His father, Sir Peter Osborne, 17th Baronet, co-founded the firm of fabric and wallpapers designers Osborne & Little.[6][7] His mother is Felicity Alexandra Loxton-Peacock, the daughter of artist Clarisse Loxton Peacock.[2][8] His mother was a Labour voter, an anti-Vietnam War marcher and worked for Amnesty International.[citation needed] Through Anne Parsons, the mother of Sir John Osborne, 7th Baronet, Osborne is the 21st great grandson of King Henry III of England. George Osborne, the Chancellor, says he wants young families to have the same chance as he did to get on the housing ladder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkins Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 God wouldn't you love an interviewer on a mainstream program to ask him that. Imagine Paxman going for the kill....it would be car crash TV...... It would be an easy one for him to answer: "...making tough decisions... deficit already down by a third... cleaning up the mess we inherited from Labour..." etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARTINX9 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 I love the idea that the housing market hasn't overheated but the only way people can buy is with help to buy. A politician with any intelligence would realise they have headed over the cliff. However hilarious doublethink about intergenerational theft. Osborne knows exactly what he is doing - trying to win an election. If everything goes pear shaped later on its not his problem - he will always have his inheritance to look forward to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCountOfNowhere Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Osborne knows exactly what he is doing - trying to win an election. If everything goes pear shaped later on its not his problem - he will always have his inheritance to look forward to. If you lie to people and use other peoples money to gain something you dont have rights to....isn't that fraud ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.