observer Posted December 3, 2013 Report Share Posted December 3, 2013 Seems the UK population are in debt to the tune of £1.24TRILLION ! Those who have saved and tried to build that nest egg, are apparently dipping into their savings, possibly to manage the bills rising faster than inflation, possibly cos the interest on their cash is negligible or possibly cos their savings have been robbed by the Gov's "quantative easing" . Seems we're still in a financial mess then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted December 3, 2013 Report Share Posted December 3, 2013 Debt is no longer a stigma especially to the younger generation ,neither is bankruptcy ....they want everything new & they want it now ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted December 4, 2013 Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 And some of their parents must share responsibility for not setting a good example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbo Posted December 4, 2013 Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 More so the MP's for not setting a good example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted December 4, 2013 Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 The whole financial services sector of the economy is based on placing people in debt ,nearly every product that is advertised tries to invite you to go into debt to buy it so you can keep up with the Jones's ,but the term being given credit or taking out a loan sounds better than "Yes, i have gone into debt to buy that product " . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted December 4, 2013 Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 Given the interest available on savings these days, buying on credit is the sensible thing to do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stallard12 Posted December 4, 2013 Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 Had an economics proff who's first rule was: No matter how wealthy or poor you are, always use credit. Never spend your own savings when you can spend someone else's. Capital in hand is king. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 4, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2013 The problem is Tex; that folk are living (borrowing) beyond their means (to pay back); which gave rise to the sub-prime bubble and growth of "toxic debt"; which will be written off or paid for by those who've acted with fiscal caution. Whilst economies can be stimulated by the spending of the great unwashed, imo this should be facilitated by redistribution not credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stallard12 Posted December 5, 2013 Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 Get your point Obs. I was trying to keep it 'pithy' and I should have added the line " but never let your credit borrowing exceed your available funds". Don't believe in redistribution because there is absolutely no valid argument to support unbalancing a tax system, by forcibly and disproportionately taking away one persons assets and giving them to someone else, no matter how noble it may seem. Encouraging people, through tax breaks etc to contribute to charities voluntarily is fine, but manadatory state robbery of successful people can never be justified. Government's goal should be to make everyone better off, not some better off and some worse off. To paraphrase the great lady "Socialism takes some happy people and some miserable people and makes everbody miserable". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 Problem with "Reganomics" is that the inevitable concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, stifles demand - after all, they can only eat one meal a day or drive one car at a time. If the cash is regularly redistributed, demand is stimulated throughout the economy - not particularly meant to be noble Tex, just pragmatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted December 5, 2013 Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 The idea of redistribution of wealth by taxation is fine in principle. The problem is that the politicians don't see why they shouldn't help themselves to the bulk of it by way of "administration charges" meaning that the wealthy get a little less wealthy, the middle earners get poorer and the poor stay poor. But the politicians are happy because they get their own way as usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 Agree Asp; it's a terribly inefficient and thus ineffective and unfair process; and the amount outstanding tax avoidance proves it. Mind you, it doesn't help hiring city slickers to devise tax rules, then allow them to move back to consulting on tax loop holes ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted December 5, 2013 Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 Tax avoidance is legal, in fact some people would say it's compulsory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2013 Especially if you can afford a good accountant ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted December 6, 2013 Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Well a good accountant can pay for himself, by definition. No point in employing an accountant who costs you money! 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.