Monday, January 5, 2009

Savers screwed while the Govt. falls over itself to help the reckless and stupid

Savers not spenders need the tax breaks

THE MOST numerous victims of the economic crisis are not, and will not be, the unemployed, or those who lose their homes. They are savers. The first people to suffer are not reckless borrowers, or greedy bankers, who are mostly being protected, at public expense, from the full consequences of their follies. They are those who committed the stupid mistake of acting responsibly. ... Savers' treatment by the state has always been inexcusable. Now it is starting to look dangerous.

Posted by hubbers @ 03:14 PM (2026 views)
Please complete the required fields.



26 thoughts on “Savers screwed while the Govt. falls over itself to help the reckless and stupid

  • phdinbubbles says:

    Sorry for the rant……….., but you’re still a tw*t Gilligan – a liar that lied about the word of an honest and very capable man called David Kelly to the extent where Kelly believed that Gilligan’s source was actually someone else. This aided the lying b*stard government in getting away with the greatest foreign policy folly in living memory, whilst simultaneously destroying the credibility of the BBC and contributing to the suicide of Kelly. Tw*t.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Saving unfashionable?

    I am saving for a house how can that be so bad.

    The only problem is that they are still unaffordable.

    I will do my duty for Queen and country as a spender, when I can afford one and still keep a lifestyle.

    The quicker the better.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • why can’t we organise ourselves to temporarily withdraw all savings from bank accuonts on the same day in protest at this government theft?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • agreed phd. I’d probably broadly agree with what he’s saying today, but I can’t even bring myself to read anything with his name on it to this day.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • As I am reminded many times on this site, there is no such thing as conspiracy.
    Cut wrists no blood!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Browneconomy says:

    Yes inbreda @3, I’d like to be part of a saver’s strike!
    If just 5% of a banks funds were withdrawn in one day it would go t1ts up quicker than Northern Rock
    Savings rates have fallen by 60% since Oct.(base rate reduction from 5 to 2%).
    Imagine the row in the media if say Nurses, Journalists or (heres hoping) MPs had their income cut by this amount.

    Savings rates at half of inflation are a CRIME – you can’t “debate an issue” with criminals – so action is the only solution.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “Savings rates at half of inflation are a CRIME – you can’t “debate an issue” with criminals – so action is the only solution”.
    Couldn’t agree more, Browneconomy.

    I’m not too well up on the constitution etc, but the govt ought to need some kind of special mandate from the people for the extreme measures they’re taking??? How many people think it’s a good idea to effectively confiscate savers wealth and redistribute it to the reckless like this? Yes, the reckless obviously but are they a majority? Can we call for a referendum?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Am I the only one who is getting very tired of this idea that savers are ‘responsible’ and occupy the higher moral ground.

    Somebody please remind me exactly which part of the capitalist system relies on savers as opposed to every other part that relies on spending and sensible borrowing.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @nickolarge

    You ask which part relies on savers, that would be the banks.

    Savers do have the moral high ground as they haven’t been foolish and spent all their cash leaving nothing for a rainy day, they won’t be expecting the government to bail them out when it all goes wrong either.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • nickolarge said:
    “Somebody please remind me exactly which part of the capitalist system relies on savers as opposed to every other part that relies on spending and sensible borrowing.”

    That would probably be the bit where the banks lent a percentage of those savers deposits to investors, businesses etc. That was before the days when they figured out new ways of conjuring money via SIVs and other mirages.

    Sensible spending and borrowing would be nice too. I don’t sit on the high ground but it does irk me that the return on my savings is now close to pointless and to top it off, we as taxpayers will also be saddled with an enormous tax burden to pay for Brown’s expensive attempt at bribing the electorate at the next election.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Browneconomy says:

    a saver @ 7

    On the subject of savers rights I wrote to my MP, David Heath (Lib Dem), on 11 th of December but am still awaiting a reply.
    I am still awaiting a reply from David Cameron & Nick Clegg – I wrote to them on 4th December. And guess what, I am still awaiting a reply to my letter to Gordon Brown from 12th November. What can I say?
    Action will speak louder than words!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • 8. nickolarge said…

    “Am I the only one who is getting very tired of this idea that savers are ‘responsible’ and occupy the higher moral ground.”

    Can you get tired of the truth? Not really just savers, just those who haven’t spent beyond their means. I’m of the traditional belief that those who stay out of trouble should be rewarded, not the irresponsible and greedy. This should apply regardless of how the economy works, otherwise we have a deeply flawed system.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Actually i’m getting tired of this idea that seems to be gaining ground that I am somehow not doing my duty by not spending. As crunchy said, i’ll spend when the thing I want to buy is a reasonable price and not before. If the economic system can’t tolerate that then obviously we need a new economic system.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Bailout for savers.Savers are the banks.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • A return on your savings is getting money for nothing more than having money. Some would argue that you should pay for the service of having your cash held in a ‘safe’ place.

    Before the days when they figured out ways of conjuring money would be a very long time ago. Even before the ‘new ways’ you refer to came about, money was lent at many many times the amount of actual savings deposited. Money was lent to the extent that the real deposits amounted to an almost insignificant part of the whole scheme.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • 13. nickolarge said…

    “A return on your savings is getting money for nothing more than having money. Some would argue that you should pay for the service of having your cash held in a ‘safe’ place.”

    The bank benefits more than the saver, so they pay. The savings rate rarely covers real inflation and then there’s the compensation for risk – nothing is free.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Some would argue that you should pay for the service of having your cash held in a ‘safe’ place.

    Some would also argue that mortgage lenders should pay mortgage holders for keeping their money safely invested in property, but then they’d have come straight from the Daily Mail School of Pub Economics, half pint in hand and full of advice.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • inflation is eating my savings says:

    crunchy said…
    Bailout for savers.Savers are the banks.

    2nd smartest thing I have heard here for a very long time. This is worse than the GD- it is just much better managed- so it will not feel so bad. Hurrah!

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I think that banks are going to be charging for a lot of things in days to come. When I said ‘some would argue’ it was the banks I was refering to.

    It will be quite a while before anyone will get a ‘good’ return for doing nothing other than sticking their spare cash in an account. It always amazes me that folk expect (some think it’s a right) to beat inflation without doing any work or taking any risk.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Just out of ‘interest’, would you negotiate an overdraft extension the day before this mass exodus of money? You could withdraw some of the overdraft value as well.
    An alternative would be a well-marketed vehicle for the man in the street to effortlessly put his savings abroad (where interest can be very impressive). At the root, perhaps, is the lack of investment know-how.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Why shouldn’t we expect a return on our savings – the banks lend it out to a third party and make money on it?
    Browneconomy, I’d be interested to know what you wrote in your letters to the MPs….
    It’d be good to get a petition going.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Well – fascinating discussion and all – but can someone suggest a date? How’s about 14th Feb – valentines day – WEBMASTER? Can you at least post something on the front page of the site referring to the suggestion for this day? The media will hopefully pick up on it, and so it becomes an ultimatum for that fat bumbling pratt brown. “Quit stealing from us or we pull the rug from under your feet on the 14th”.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Tenyearstogetmymoneyback says:

    nickolarge said:
    “Somebody please remind me exactly which part of the capitalist system relies on savers as opposed to every other part that relies on spending and sensible borrowing.”

    For the past ten years the whole Capitalist system has relied on millions of Chinese savers who believe in hard work and thrift.
    The trouble is they now smell trouble and want their £800 Billion back.

    Rather than talking about fractional reserve banking people should concentrate on the countries Balance of Payments.
    An economics article I read years ago said that at the end of the day the balance of payments had to end up balancing.
    For years it remained out of balance. The trouble is in the long term (25years ?) it probably will end up rebalancing.

    :- Duncan

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Oh my Darling
    Oh my Darling
    Oh my Darling Valentine
    Oh how happy
    You would make me
    If you told me you were mine

    Since the day that
    I first met you
    Knew I had to make you mine
    Now I have you
    Can’t forget you
    Won’t you bail me out just one more time.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “It always amazes me that folk expect (some think it’s a right) to beat inflation without doing any work or taking any risk.”

    Well I’m sure you’d have found friends in ancient temples of Christendom and the modern Islamic banks. However, interest rates are the price of owning money, either as a debtor or creditor. You see it works both ways.

    Without a system of credit or debt, we would indeed be able to do without earning interest on your credit, or paying interest on your debt. However then there would be no incentive to lend money, and no means to build … well, the civilization you see around you, with bad debt warts and all. You can be forgiven for being amazed at that I s’pose.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • inbreda “why can’t we organise ourselves to temporarily withdraw all savings from bank accuonts on the same day in protest at this government theft?”
    et al.

    The idea of threatening this is sound, the idea of doing it, however, is not.

    A run on the banks would not be good for the average saver.
    A few of us would be quick and manage to get our money, sure, but it wouldn’t be long before it becomes impossible to withdraw the money and the system ‘collapses’. The resulting banking crisis would call for an increase in the money supply (recapitalisation) and hence inflation – bad for savers, even those who managed to withdraw, possibly even ‘especially those’, since the govt could decide to inject into savings accounts, either directly or indirectly.

    I vote against.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>