ozleicester Posted 18 November 2014 Posted 18 November 2014 It's not random at all. Take all global wealth and divide it equally and you'll find every citizen of a developed nation takes a massive hit. That's an imperfect way of looking at it because it relies on current incentives that wouldn't be available in a fully equal economy, so the reality would be even worse for you and I. I didnt say we should divide up the existing, im not sure where you have drawn that idea from. I suggest that, rather than banks deciding on monetary policy (that is designed to benefit the few), it should be governments (that are aiming to help society) who decide.
MooseBreath Posted 18 November 2014 Posted 18 November 2014 Assuming you're talking about that thread you made the other day, I don't think that responsibility should be given to governments any more than it should to banks. Maybe a happy medium like privately owned but transparent, not for profit banks.
SMX11 Posted 18 November 2014 Posted 18 November 2014 What I was getting at is that there is a mass of regulation as mentioned above lobbied by the big banks to stifle any sort of small and medium sized competitors by forcing the cost of compliance on all banks (Crony capitalism). However it also acted as a shield for the banks during the crisis because if they got signed off by the FSA it has complied with the regulations and therefore not done anything unlawful. It doesn't matter how much regulation you have, if it is shit it isn't going to solve anything except reduce the competition within the marketplace. With the lunacy of fractional reserve banking I am not sure any sort solution found will protect against it happening again.
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 18 November 2014 Posted 18 November 2014 Even though they didn't have a mortgage, neither of my parents had very well paid jobs and I had to make do with hand me downs, second hand clothes, Asda football boots etc. Frustrated me at the time that other kids had better clothes / toys / bikes etc but it taught me the value of things, having to save hard for things I really wanted and the pleasure of finally achieving it. Over the years I've had a great time, loads of fun, wonderful memories etc while still being sensible with money and investing well. With hindsight, buying a house (£45k, brand new 3 bed, cul de sac, nice area) when I was 19 turned out to be a bloody masterstroke! I feel for folk trying to get on the property ladder now though.
FoxesAreBlue Posted 18 November 2014 Posted 18 November 2014 I'm so lucky that I got my flat last year for 55k, yes it's a tiny one-bed but once I've pverpaid my way through that mortgage, it will always be there as a safety net for me should the shit hit the fan.
Bayfox Posted 19 November 2014 Posted 19 November 2014 I've never had PPI so forgive the ignorance, but surely you would only get back what you had actually paid for it in the first place? So they were only returning your money (plus interest)? payments made. plus interest, plus some calculation for inflation etc. I got 1900 quid back on a 5 grand loan.
MooseBreath Posted 20 November 2014 Posted 20 November 2014 If offered a swap between what they've got and an equal portion of national wealth I wonder how many would take it. The BBC reported the national balance sheet today, the value of all things in the country, at about £7.2tn. Divide that by the population and you get about £100k each. Ain't nobody owning no house and that's puttingit mildly.
Sir Fynwy Posted 20 November 2014 Posted 20 November 2014 If offered a swap between what they've got and an equal portion of national wealth I wonder how many would take it. The BBC reported the national balance sheet today, the value of all things in the country, at about £7.2tn. Divide that by the population and you get about £100k each. Ain't nobody owning no house and that's puttingit mildly. Children aren't legally allowed to own anything so you can reduce the number you are dividing by 20 percent and get a personal figure of around £140k. Plenty of married couples have less than £280k in assets.
Tommy G Posted 25 November 2014 Author Posted 25 November 2014 Does anyone here have premium bonds? And if so ever won big? I'm guessing you have to be in the top tranch of holdings to get consideration for the two £1million prizes each month?
Vicki Vixen Posted 25 November 2014 Posted 25 November 2014 Does anyone here have premium bonds? And if so ever won big? I'm guessing you have to be in the top tranch of holdings to get consideration for the two £1million prizes each month? My older relatives swear by them. I think its the mentality of "winning" rather than generating interest (from a savings account) that appeals. They are not a great investment - see here for why http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/premium-bonds But with interest rates so low, premium rates are relatively more attractive than they were in the past.
Babylon Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Well that certainly puts you in the minority. Being able to deliver a return of at least 15% per annum over the long term would put you comfortably among the likes of Warren Buffett and Neil Woodford as the best investors in the world. If you could replicate anywhere near that level of performance with the amount of money held in even a small investment fund then quit your day job right now mate because you could be earning literally millions every year working for a fund or investment bank. This is where I stand now a quarter later. The -10% one is the smallest investment, in fact I wouldn't call it an investment. I sold them all out years ago for a decent profit, but I'd gone past ex Div date so they dumped 15 shares in my account a few months later and I've just left them there. The 27% one is just eat. Looking at the stats they are now well over priced so I will probably look at shifting these at some point. But I often go for shares who I've used in real life and like their service so I might gamble and stick with it longer and see how their next period goes.
MooseBreath Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Well it has been a pretty good quarter. The FTSE100 even surpassed 7k! Haven't checked my investments for a few weeks but they were bombing ahead last time I looked. Let's see where we are after the next crash before we get the champagne out though I reckon.
Babylon Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Well it has been a pretty good quarter. The FTSE100 even surpassed 7k! Haven't checked my investments for a few weeks but they were bombing ahead last time I looked. Let's see where we are after the next crash before we get the champagne out though I reckon. What's your best performer? I'm considering just getting rid of all the individual stocks and sticking everything in a tracker.
MooseBreath Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 What's your best performer? I'm considering just getting rid of all the individual stocks and sticking everything in a tracker. I don't have any individual shares, mostly trackers and a couple of active funds. Gave up stock picking when I got hammered trying to catch the falling knife on banking shares during the last crash. Just checked and my best performer at the moment is vanguard lifestrategy 80, which is where I hold the bulk of my money and it's up about 15% in 12 months. Aberdeen emerging markets has done well too, about 7% over three months and 14% for the year. Great times in the markets, I'm braced for a correction to wipe it all out.
Vicki Vixen Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 What's your best performer? I'm considering just getting rid of all the individual stocks and sticking everything in a tracker. For trackers, before investing I recommend having a look at exchange traded funds (ETFs) as well as traditional unit trusts. ETFs can be cheaper in many cases. You won't see them promoted much by platform providers or brokers because, unlike unit trusts, they don't pay them any commissions.
MooseBreath Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 For trackers, before investing I recommend having a look at exchange traded funds (ETFs) as well as traditional unit trusts. ETFs can be cheaper in many cases. You won't see them promoted much by platform providers or brokers because, unlike unit trusts, they don't pay them any commissions. The regulations changed a couple of years ago so brokers don't take commissions anymore, they charge a platform fee instead. Not sure if it applies to every broker yet but most mainstream ones are compliant with it. ETFs still have a place though.
GaelicFox Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 I don't have any individual shares, mostly trackers and a couple of active funds. Gave up stock picking when I got hammered trying to catch the falling knife on banking shares during the last crash. Just checked and my best performer at the moment is vanguard lifestrategy 80, which is where I hold the bulk of my money and it's up about 15% in 12 months. Aberdeen emerging markets has done well too, about 7% over three months and 14% for the year. Great times in the markets, I'm braced for a correction to wipe it all out. The correction 8 years ago was a giant one and just 8 years later we are on record highs ....I cashed in on chasing bad news ...bank crashes , tesco over correction/reaction .... Listed Bookies being hit by favourites etc.... the market is so hair trigger now that lemmings create huge over corrections and if you step into the embers of them fires you can often find to worth while nugget to sit on often for just a few weeks
l444ry Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 "Over-regulation"? "Under-regulation", surely? The politicians were certainly guilty of that - and of allowing banks "too big to fail" - but the banks hardly covered themselves in glory, either, lending on dodgy sub-prime mortgages, over-leveraging their debts by inventing dodgy financial derivatives in their greed to make ever more profit at the expense of financial security etc. Agree with most of this. The Banks need to be taken into Public Ownership. Staggers me how they can be allowed to print money at a whim.
SMX11 Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Agree with most of this. The Banks need to be taken into Public Ownership. Staggers me how they can be allowed to print money at a whim. Central banks are the ones printing money at a whim. QE is the biggest con ever.
l444ry Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Central banks are the ones printing money at a whim. QE is the biggest con ever. The Government alone should control the amount of money entering the system without the need for the Interest added by Bank's. As long as this continues to be the case, another financial crisis will always be on the horizon. All this crap about reducing the deficit is missing the point in my view.
Benji Posted 27 March 2015 Posted 27 March 2015 Anybody invested through Crowdcube before? An exciting concept but not sure it's possible to make much money. The fundraising is usually quite substantial. There is a fun novelty to it though. Peer to peer lending is on the rise. Higher than savings interest rates with most platforms having borrower default funds.
SMX11 Posted 28 March 2015 Posted 28 March 2015 The Government alone should control the amount of money entering the system without the need for the Interest added by Bank's. As long as this continues to be the case, another financial crisis will always be on the horizon. All this crap about reducing the deficit is missing the point in my view. Why on earth would you trust politicians with money supply? They will 'turn the handle' at every opportunity instead of dealing with issues. The reason for all this bad debt is the result of the combination of fractional reserve banking and government legislation encouraging banks to not having high standards of due diligence. To compound matters they knew the governments and their cronies at central banks would bail them out when it would go tits up.
cambridgefox Posted 28 March 2015 Posted 28 March 2015 Why on earth would you trust politicians with money supply? They will 'turn the handle' at every opportunity instead of dealing with issues. The reason for all this bad debt is the result of the combination of fractional reserve banking and government legislation encouraging banks to not having high standards of due diligence. To compound matters they knew the governments and their cronies at central banks would bail them out when it would go tits up. Although with Lloyds the blame should be shared with the last goverment they pushed and pushed for them to buy Halfax before they went down,why on earth due diligence by the bank wasn't adhered to.it was that sale that put Lloyds in that position.
l444ry Posted 28 March 2015 Posted 28 March 2015 Why on earth would you trust politicians with money supply? They will 'turn the handle' at every opportunity instead of dealing with issues. The reason for all this bad debt is the result of the combination of fractional reserve banking and government legislation encouraging banks to not having high standards of due diligence. To compound matters they knew the governments and their cronies at central banks would bail them out when it would go tits up. Because trusting the bankers has proved not to work.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.