[QUOTE="Ace"] Too much to stomach, eh?[/QUOTE] It's galling.
It was only 3 yrs ago that I started doing a job that I could honestly say I loved doing and was really good at. Tho after 3 yrs Im now frustrated with how much better the job could be done if I was given a bit more freedom and control. So after 22nd August I will be self-employed and will have all the freedom and control I want. Time will tell whether it was a good decision or not. I am mostly very confident and enjoying developing new workshops.
Yes, Michael, it's *all* the fault of the bankers. Absolutely everything. You can go back to colouring in the Daily Mirror now.
That's where the invitation came from. It's a little bit of a "there were four in the bed, and the little one said ..." sort of situation. The "thumpee" is entirely voluntary.
I can get all the recognition I need from the customers I work with, but I can only get money from the company employing me. They need to stick to their core competencies, the lot of them..
Who, bar the finance `industry' and the politicians who encouraged them, is responsible for the current shambles?
Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, darsy Don't be ridiculous. They were held down and forced to sign. Well known fact.
Not greedy bankers who made loans that couldn't be repaid? The `proles' were told they could afford them and if they wanted to buy a house, they had little choice.
The greedy fools who thought that taking out a mortgage for more than the house was valued at was a good idea? Nobody went round and beat them up to force them to speculate that their property would continue to rise in value yet when it didn't they blamed the banks. The banks were at fault for lending the money _but_ they always knew they could grab back that property and minimise their losses. The speculators were just greedy cunts who never spared a thought for the next generation who'd have to pay for their gamble.
Bush, mainly. He forced the US lenders to give mortgages to people they didn't want to, who then defaulted in large numbers, which killed inter-bank lending thus ensuring the plague spread.
not in all cases, no - it's just not as black-and-white as you've made out. If you must blame some sector of the finance industry, just saying "bankers" marks you out as prejudiced; blame financial product sales people instead - they're the ones who were in it for the short term (commission based selling). Do you really think "bankers" wanted to loan money to people who couldn't repay it? It's not their fault they're stupid, I'll grant you that. Being stupid isn't an excuse though. what was the motivation for wanting to buy a house with a sub-prime mortgage, though? Choose from (but not limited to): Misplaced Pride Hubris Greed Ill-advised Social Climbing et al. I'd be surprised if a socialist like yourself could defend any of those motives.
Chicken and egg innit. more credit > prices (for houses worth living in) go up > quality of life goes down Lets not forget that huge levels of lending had a nice little knock on. Ever greater levels of interest being accumulated by a lucky few. People are mostly just sheeple.
Well, we've now got two groups in the frame, rather than one as before. Banks will do what they can, within the laws and regulations imposed upon them. Out of interest which banks fucked up? A select few, or "all of them"?
