WHY WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF A BIGGER FINANCIAL CRISIS THAN 2008

[scottbeard]

55 minutes ago, Nick Cash said:

Mine was a slightly tongue in cheek response to spending money. That was why I went back to pre-tv days for examples of free activities. Games developed then had to be entertaining for all. 

In my view, board games developed since the mid-1990s are MUCH more entertaining for the whole family than those prior.

Monopoly is just an awful game, with some people eliminated early and others playing for hours.  Scrabble and Trivial Pursuit are hard for kids to play adults at as the adults know so much more.

Newer games like Carcasonne or Ticket to Ride are a lot more fun: no-one is eliminated early and there is no "general knowledge" advantage to being older.  They go down really well with my nephews aged 10-18 (and me!)

[MancTom]

15 hours ago, scottbeard said:

I think his point was he wasn't sure what ELSE other than the night out he could cut, unless i misread it, ie he could cut expenditure by just £50 but after that was stuck fir ways to do so easily

Not sure telling a typical 14 year old that the new marvel film cinema trip is cancelled so its scrabble tonight will go down well.  

They'll cope.

I was told I couldn't have lots of things as a child because we couldn't afford it. It didn't harm me and actually benefited me in that I appreciate to be careful with money.

[Nick Cash]

50 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

In my view, board games developed since the mid-1990s are MUCH more entertaining for the whole family than those prior.

Monopoly is just an awful game, with some people eliminated early and others playing for hours.  Scrabble and Trivial Pursuit are hard for kids to play adults at as the adults know so much more.

Newer games like Carcasonne or Ticket to Ride are a lot more fun: no-one is eliminated early and there is no "general knowledge" advantage to being older.  They go down really well with my nephews aged 10-18 (and me!)

I know nothing about board games from the 90s. But when we played Scrabble we helped our kids to find good words. Winning wasn’t the point. Even today my son (now  17) occasionally surprises his teachers with his vocabulary. 

[scottbeard]

8 minutes ago, Nick Cash said:

I know nothing about board games from the 90s. But when we played Scrabble we helped our kids to find good words. Winning wasn’t the point. Even today my son (now  17) occasionally surprises his teachers with his vocabulary. 

Nice - good to hear.

I'm much too competitive (even more so as a teenager) to be interested in a game I didn't think I could win, but that just shows how children's personalities are different and you parent accordingly.  I used to play Scrabble against my friends (because I usually beat them) but would never play with my parents (because I'd lose).

As an adult I LOVE word games like Scrabble and play them all the time (as well as Letter Tycoon, Hardback etc).  

[Nick Cash]

8 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Nice - good to hear.

I'm much too competitive (even more so as a teenager) to be interested in a game I didn't think I could win, but that just shows how children's personalities are different and you parent accordingly.  I used to play Scrabble against my friends (because I usually beat them) but would never play with my parents (because I'd lose).

As an adult I LOVE word games like Scrabble and play them all the time (as well as Letter Tycoon, Hardback etc).  

I’m more of a numbers chap - Kakuro and chess are my free time filling activities. 
 

But that is where many people will have to get to to save money. Finding free leisure filling activities. It may not be fashionable or social media orientated, but necessary.

[Housepricecrash91]

In 2008 I was still in full time education and about to go off to university so can't really remember what it was like. I only remember that it was difficult to even get a job in retail in 2008. I presume it was hard to get a professional job?

2024 could be a bad year... we're told we have a tight labour market, but I'm not currently seeing it in careers that pay average to well. The job market may be tight in low paid unskilled work though. The problem is if you lose your decent paid job, it may be difficult to find another job that will cover your £2000+ per month mortgage payment.

 

[Bear Necessities]

17 hours ago, scottbeard said:

I think his point was he wasn't sure what ELSE other than the night out he could cut, unless i misread it, ie he could cut expenditure by just £50 but after that was stuck fir ways to do so easily

Not sure telling a typical 14 year old that the new marvel film cinema trip is cancelled so its scrabble tonight will go down well.  However such is the vast availability of films on TV now including Netflix etc and better board games than scrabble I'm sure there's a way to catch the films eventually on the cheap and find ways to engage them

We do have board games (ticket to ride and some short fun games like throw throw burrito, cat goat cheese pizza, bananagrams etc) which they enjoy when they aren't on the switch or watching nextflix, but as far as the Marvel films go - the last few films that came out - my (14-yesterday-year-old) son has just said "well we could just wait until they are on Disney plus" which is usually only 4 to 6 months these days, and even to rent them (at about £3.50) is only a few weeks after they are out at the cinema. 

That's become a vast gap now.  It was one thing when cinema tickets were super cheap (still are if you get deals etc) and to rent the latest film at Blockbuster meant waiting the best part of a year and then suffering VHS quality on a pokey little telly at home.  But now the at home experience is so much better and not many months after the cinema, there is very little any of us will bother to make the trip to the multiplex for. (I'm happy to pay for them to go, so it's not a money thing, but there's just no interest)

I'm not sure about the future of cinema if my eldest son is typical - he told me that he doesn't think the bigger screen is worth not having the sofa, the microwave popcorn and a cupboard full of snacks on hand just to see something a few months earlier, on a "big" screen (given that most TVs these days are vastly bigger than the 21 inch "big" telly we had to suffer as kids.  He also says "the cinema is full of people who don't even want to watch the film properly and are on their phones or talking.  So I think cinema etiquette is a lost art too.

We did see Mario on the big screen as a family activity, but I don't think it gained all that much from being 50ft high. and before the last thing my wife and I saw there was the Matrix reboot, but definitely came away thinking that would have been fine as a Friday night movie on the sofa, but wasn't worth the price of admission!   John Wick 4 was good as a cinema experience though so I think it still has its place, but I can't see how they will survive like they did in previous decades.

[scottbeard]

4 minutes ago, Bear Necessities said:

We do have board games (ticket to ride and some short fun games like throw throw burrito, cat goat cheese pizza, bananagrams etc) which they enjoy when they aren't on the switch or watching nextflix, but as far as the Marvel films go - the last few films that came out - my (14-yesterday-year-old) son has just said "well we could just wait until they are on Disney plus" which is usually only 4 to 6 months these days, and even to rent them (at about £3.50) is only a few weeks after they are out at the cinema. 

That's become a vast gap now.  It was one thing when cinema tickets were super cheap (still are if you get deals etc) and to rent the latest film at Blockbuster meant waiting the best part of a year and then suffering VHS quality on a pokey little telly at home.  But now the at home experience is so much better and not many months after the cinema, there is very little any of us will bother to make the trip to the multiplex for. (I'm happy to pay for them to go, so it's not a money thing, but there's just no interest)

I'm not sure about the future of cinema if my eldest son is typical - he told me that he doesn't think the bigger screen is worth not having the sofa, the microwave popcorn and a cupboard full of snacks on hand just to see something a few months earlier, on a "big" screen (given that most TVs these days are vastly bigger than the 21 inch "big" telly we had to suffer as kids.  He also says "the cinema is full of people who don't even want to watch the film properly and are on their phones or talking.  So I think cinema etiquette is a lost art too.

We did see Mario on the big screen as a family activity, but I don't think it gained all that much from being 50ft high. and before the last thing my wife and I saw there was the Matrix reboot, but definitely came away thinking that would have been fine as a Friday night movie on the sofa, but wasn't worth the price of admission!   John Wick 4 was good as a cinema experience though so I think it still has its place, but I can't see how they will survive like they did in previous decades.

100% agree - I don't think bananagrams (fun though it is) replaces Marvel at the cinema...but Marvel AT HOME for sure replaces it, and is arguably better as well as cheaper.

I don't think cinemas will disappear entirely, just as theatres didn't disappear when TV came along.   However, i think they will become an expensive and niche activity with other extra value adds - and not just a way to watch films.

 

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, Housepricecrash91 said:

In 2008 I was still in full time education and about to go off to university so can't really remember what it was like. I only remember that it was difficult to even get a job in retail in 2008. I presume it was hard to get a professional job?

2024 could be a bad year... we're told we have a tight labour market, but I'm not currently seeing it in careers that pay average to well. The job market may be tight in low paid unskilled work though. The problem is if you lose your decent paid job, it may be difficult to find another job that will cover your £2000+ per month mortgage payment.

 

The big difference for me is that COVID has caused a lot of people to retire early or scale back their work, either because they realised "there's more to life than work" or just got furloughed and called it a day etc.

This means that although the economy is stagnating now there are still lots of jobs around (or were in 2022/23 anyway).  In 2008 the whole economy just fell off a cliff.

That - again as I harp on about a lot - is because 2008 was the biggest banking crisis that almost everyone on here will ever live through.  What we are heading into now is likely a recession, but not a banking crisis.  They play out very differently.

[Bear Necessities]

2 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

100% agree - I don't think bananagrams (fun though it is) replaces Marvel at the cinema...but Marvel AT HOME for sure replaces it, and is arguably better as well as cheaper.

I don't think cinemas will disappear entirely, just as theatres didn't disappear when TV came along.   However, i think they will become an expensive and niche activity with other extra value adds - and not just a way to watch films.

 

Ha yes, I agree that Bananagrams et al are no replacement for cinema Marvel, but at 14 I'm just grateful he still (occasionally) wants to play games with us and his younger brother! I think Disney have shot themselves in the foot a bit with Disney+ (releasing on there when the cinemas were closed due to the pandemic didn't help matters)  For the price of one cinema ticket a month, over the last couple of years I've sat with him and watched every Marvel film since Iron Man (apart from Eternals because that's awful), as a family we've watched every Pixar film and introduced the younger kid to all the Alladin/Lion King era Disney stuff.  Insanely good value and I'm not even a Disneyland holiday kind of a guy.

We've also watched all the New Who stuff (not on Disney).  There's a whole wealth of incredibly cheap content out there, it's staggering. A lot of it in 4K too which on a big TV is something I couldn't have dreamed of at his age!

He's now moved on to starting watching all the classic era Doctor Who episodes (on iPlayer) which shows dedication as there is a hell of a lot of dross to wade through to find the gems.  
 

[Bear Necessities]

11 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

I don't think cinemas will disappear entirely, just as theatres didn't disappear when TV came along.   However, i think they will become an expensive and niche activity with other extra value adds - and not just a way to watch films.

 

Yes, the new one that has just opened here in Chester (to replace the fleapit that closed down more than a decade ago) is one of those Picturehouse ones where it's all about the experience - comfy seats, food and a bar and all that jazz.  Making it an "experience" rather than just a film.  So yes, more of a theatre style "event" with a price tag to match.

I think that chain is owned by Cineworld so there was worry over whether it would ever actually open, as Cineworld regular cinemas were/are in some serious financial difficulties.  But I think perhaps the Picturehouse-style ones are the future and the regular Cineworlds are the past.

[scottbeard]

4 minutes ago, Bear Necessities said:

We've also watched all the New Who stuff (not on Disney).  There's a whole wealth of incredibly cheap content out there, it's staggering. A lot of it in 4K too which on a big TV is something I couldn't have dreamed of at his age!

Agree.  We now have Disney+ and Netflix, and use both all the time.  Much better value than cinema tickets.

I last went to the cinema in 2019 I think (Star Wars 9) but I am planning to go again in January to see a film.  But cinemas aren't going to thrive if people are going every 5 years.  Netflix on the other hand i watch every week.

4 minutes ago, Bear Necessities said:

He's now moved on to starting watching all the classic era Doctor Who episodes (on iPlayer) which shows dedication as there is a hell of a lot of dross to wade through to find the gems.  
 

Good lad!  Love a bit of Dr Who, old or new.  Tom Baker and David Tennant eras especially.  But yes - plenty of duffers.  I'm sure a bit of Googling will point him to the ones worth watching!

[winkie]

2 hours ago, MancTom said:

They'll cope.

I was told I couldn't have lots of things as a child because we couldn't afford it. It didn't harm me and actually benefited me in that I appreciate to be careful with money.

Snap........but not all my siblings are, same upbringing, all people are different.

[Housepricecrash91]

7 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

The big difference for me is that COVID has caused a lot of people to retire early or scale back their work, either because they realised "there's more to life than work" or just got furloughed and called it a day etc.

This means that although the economy is stagnating now there are still lots of jobs around (or were in 2022/23 anyway).  In 2008 the whole economy just fell off a cliff.

That - again as I harp on about a lot - is because 2008 was the biggest banking crisis that almost everyone on here will ever live through.  What we are heading into now is likely a recession, but not a banking crisis.  They play out very differently.

Thanks, makes a lot of sense. I guess a lot of people secured their retirement between 2008-2023.. i.e. paid down the mortgage, saw their assets increase in value massively, debt eroded due to inflation, possibly purchased other properties, inherited a lot of money, took decent redundancy packages, maybe accessed their pensions early... 

2008-2009 was rough, the state of the job market was a lot of peoples motivation to go to university at that time.

[winkie]

Quiz and curry night.

[Orb]

It's very refreshing to see a thread descend into civilised debate about the virtues introducing children to old fashioned board games, and not a cesspit of political slanging match that further demonises leavers and remainers, and slags off Tories and Labour. 

Faith restored. 

[Gussie]

4 hours ago, MancTom said:

They'll cope.

I was told I couldn't have lots of things as a child because we couldn't afford it. It didn't harm me and actually benefited me in that I appreciate to be careful with money.

Snap again ! Unlike kids of today who mostly that get anything they want who then may grow up to be debt junkies.

[Saving For a Space Ship]

10 hours ago, staintunerider said:

 

Oh and as we only do full recourse mortgages in the Uk, it's on the borrower to make the lender whole for any losses they incur! Even if they can't which will be virtually all of them! So if Auntie Mabel leaves you some dosh in a few years you'll be handing it over....

 

A few years, yes but doesn't the mortgage debt become unrecoverable after 12 years, or has this practise changed ? 

In the past, I believe the borrower should not aknowledge the debt if chased by debt collectors after 12 years, or if they do, the debt is reset & becomes owable again  

[Social Justice League]

5 hours ago, Orb said:

It's very refreshing to see a thread descend into civilised debate about the virtues introducing children to old fashioned board games, and not a cesspit of political slanging match that further demonises leavers and remainers, and slags off Tories and Labour. 

Faith restored. 

What about the issue of printing worthless fiat. 😀

[frederico]

Yeah long way to go yet, just a slow tightening.

[Fishfinger]

10 hours ago, scottbeard said:

In my view, board games developed since the mid-1990s are MUCH more entertaining for the whole family than those prior.

Monopoly is just an awful game, with some people eliminated early and others playing for hours.  Scrabble and Trivial Pursuit are hard for kids to play adults at as the adults know so much more.

Newer games like Carcasonne or Ticket to Ride are a lot more fun: no-one is eliminated early and there is no "general knowledge" advantage to being older.  They go down really well with my nephews aged 10-18 (and me!)

Monopoly was not designed as a game but as a learning tool to show you how rigged the system is and the banks always win. If you read the rules the bank can’t run out of cash because if you do you’re allowed take any piece of paper and be used as currency!

[Tony_Teacake]

20 minutes ago, Social Justice League said:

What about the issue of printing worthless fiat. 😀

We are now paying for this with massive inflation. By turning the money printers into overdrive as you know all they have done is create a phoney economy which has created a massive bubble.

It was never sustainable and will truly burst over the next few years.

[A.steve]

11 hours ago, staintunerider said:

I've had this sneaky suspicion lurking that they know UK real estate is absolute toast by the end of this decade and those in the know are postioned to profit from it....like defaulted bonds bought for pennies on the dollar....the same will happen with real estate.....if you're not leveraged it won't affect you other than the asset value returning to sanity levels but the heavily leveraged that's another thing....and they are the ones who will get ripped a new one!

I disagree.  Probably not in the way you assume.

I think you misunderstand value, wealth and money.

Real-estate represents an important foundation of wealth... Money has very uncertain value... but real-estate is comprehended by everyone - making real-estate the asset of choice for the underclass.

Real estate will be manipulated to make its cost somewhat stable.   Other asset classes will not be afforded the same level of political support.   The major opportunities for the privileged will be in assets other than real estate.  Defaulted bonds might be relevant... but I expect other assets to be even more relevant.

[TenYearToGetMyMoneyBack]

24 minutes ago, Fishfinger said:

Monopoly was not designed as a game but as a learning tool to show you how rigged the system is and the banks always win. If you read the rules the bank can’t run out of cash because if you do you’re allowed take any piece of paper and be used as currency!

Incorrect. To quote Wikipedia 

"Monopoly is derived from The Landlord's Game, created by Lizzie Magie in the United States in 1903".

It is true that it was intended to show the dangers of Monopolies. Why am I think of Ashford and Fergus Wilson ?

Of course nowadays kids get games being pushed on their phones like "Property Tycoon". I've never play it so can't comment but assume it is a simulation of get rich quick.  

Edited December 13, 2023 by TenYearToGetMyMoneyBack
typo

[Social Justice League]

17 minutes ago, Tony_Teacake said:

We are now paying for this with massive inflation. By turning the money printers into overdrive as you know all they have done is create a phoney economy which has created a massive bubble.

It was never sustainable and will truly burst over the next few years.

Totally agree, we are heading for a meltdown not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire, imo.

In 2023, the west has just about every citizen a feckless debt slave along with just about every country 

The only real solution is a 'debt' jubilee imo......because let's face the facts, the currency borrowed by everyone has about as much worth as a bag of sh1te, so why bother paying it back, with interest.......

In fact, why bother selling your precious time to 'earn' it in the first place?

The whole western financial system is a bag of steaming dog sh1te hanging on a fence post.