I thought British Gas was sold to the general population? The fact the same day they got their shares they sold them to stockbroker and pocketed the profit is hardly the same as selling it off to their chums now is it?

If you think British Gas was responsible for doling out North Sea licences and then generating public revenues from such licences, then you really do need to do some more research before making stupid comments.

Norway now has no national debt, not only that, the oil & gas revenues generated by Statoil (now known as The Government Pension Fund), are currently in surplus by over $200 bn, despite paying out one of the most generous pensions in the world. We flogged ours off, on the cheap, to BP in order to fund tax cuts and pay benefits to people thrown out of work through tory dogma

Sorry, but I'm paid enough, because I budgeted it and live within my means. Something a good portion of people seem unable to do.

My wage is actually irrelevant (although by lowly, I mean a little over minimum wage) as it doesn't matter how much you earn you need to keep your outgoings relative to whatever that figure is, in other words not stretching yourself too thinly financially where the slightest problem will cause financial catastrophe. Many people apparently, do live too close to the that line and then cry about it when it goes wrong for them. My point was simply that that is not living within your means and my problem is why people can't manage that.

Oh and no doubt you'll sight redundancy again, yes it's largely out of your hands if it happens to you, but, and I know this from a colleague who was made redundant, life doesn't end. He didn't get another job for 18 months, he took out a 10k bank loan to cover himself and well as using his redundancy pay and was never under threat of defaulting on his mortgage (which I know he was already pushed to cover). Yes I'm sure it's difficult but with proper planning redundancy is not the end of the world either.

I think it's safe to assume that you think that having outgoings that are anything from 95% - 105% of your income is perfectly acceptable and it's that attitude that people are struggling so much from.

It's difficult to budget for, say, a 15% hike in domestic fuel bills – especially when your pay has been frozen (ie cut) for a couple of years or so, or your employer is looking to actually slash your pay (sack you and then rehire on far worse terms).

No, if you're Enicomb, you'll already have built-in to your reserves calculation any such contingency. If you didn't, you're a profligate fool who deserves no sympathy.

In Alaska they were (at least until recently and maybe still are) paying dividends on the oil direct to individual households.
Bunch of pinkos, those Alaskans.

Presumably he had to leave his wife and kids in the bank vault as security - or are you seriously suggesting that if I fill in an application form for a loan from my current bank this afternoon and declare myself as unemployed they'll happily divvy up the £10K ?

I'll tell you without trying - Santander won't.

TBH his whole post had so many holes in it I got bored and didnt even bother getting to the end of it.

Taking out a 10k bank loan whilst unemployed! Comedy gold!

I agree wholeheartedly with this post (and subsequent ones) but must take issue with your point about Redundancy Insurance. I have Redundancy Insurance and it is relatively cheap, covers the important things and in today's uncertain world is pretty much essential.

The article provided was written in 2008 and is no longer relevant - "A good choice is to put your emergency cash in a high-interest savings account such as the market-leader, Kaupthing Edge Savings which currently pays 6.55% AER on easy access savings."

Good luck with that.....

To be honest, his whole situation was a farce, I believe he lied to get loan but I'm sure; the guy is a complete fruit cake generally. But never the less my point was simply that he got by for 18 months.


To the other posters, I described my real situation (that would include a hike in energy bills as well as other bills like fuel and council tax). My point is simply that it is possible and I question why (the apparent majority as many are now disagreeing) struggle to leave enough leeway in their budget for the bad times (a criticism I'm sure has been leveled at the government in recent times)?

Hang on you posted this.

So you are saying ' in other words not stretching yourself too thinly financially where the slightest problem will cause financial catastrophe. Many people apparently, do live too close to the that line and then cry about it when it goes wrong for them.'.
You then site
'Oh and no doubt you'll sight redundancy again, yes it's largely out of your hands if it happens to you, but, and I know this from a colleague who was made redundant, life doesn't end. He didn't get another job for 18 months, he took out a 10k bank loan to cover himself and well as using his redundancy pay and was never under threat of defaulting on his mortgage (which I know he was already pushed to cover)' as proper planning.
Are you on drugs?

Life is about choices and choices are gambles/sacrifices.

So it is entirely rational, for example, that you might stretch yourself to buy a more expensive house in the catchment area of a good school, so your children (hopefully) get better exam marks and opportunities. The risk being that you're stuffed if interest rates, fuel prices and/or inflation rise.

Or you could buy something cheaper, have greater financial security, but your children's education maybe suffers.

You just have to make the best decisions you can, recognising you're at the mercy of forces beyond your control and try to second guess them. There's no morally right or wrong answer to the above conumdrum - you pays your money (or not), you take your chance.

Equally then, if your view it like that, you (figuratively speaking) can't complain so loudly if it goes wrong?

Equally you can't complain if your income is nullified.

Figuratively speaking, of course.

No - though obviously, they will. Human nature, innit?
And tbf, some will be genuinely unlucky.

I guess people whose judgement pays dividends should only smug it up if they've been clever rather than fortunate. Which is subjective, to say the least!

Neither should you be vilified if it goes wrong. Sometimes people find themselves in financial difficulties due to circumstances beyond their control.

Why big bonuses and excessive rewards are bllx (with top whiteboard animation) Courtesy of Stephen Fry on Twitter Quote “@stephenfry: Magnificent. Explains why bankers and bonuses are so crap. Plus the animation is hypnotic. t.co/13fpM6ul”'"

Why big bonuses and excessive rewards are bllx (with top whiteboard animation) Courtesy of Stephen Fry on Twitter Quote “@stephenfry: Magnificent. Explains why bankers and bonuses are so crap. Plus the animation is hypnotic. t.co/13fpM6ul”'"

I'm sure. I'm also not referring to those people, maybe I haven't made that clear enough? I'm talking about those, that borrowed money to the hilt and now complain as even the smallest change in their income means massive problems. I'm not referring to those that have been unfortunate enough to suffer redundancy or similar (I merely used an example to illustrate a different point).

It's amazing how a thread takes its own twists and turns. I started this one hoping to point out that our DEBT BASED money system is THE PRIME REASON the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting ever poorer. SBR still parrots the line that I don't understand banking, and that banks can't create money (as credit) from nothing . . . . . viewtopic.php?f=11&t=514230&p=16622506#p16622506

It's amazing how a thread takes its own twists and turns. I started this one hoping to point out that our DEBT BASED money system is THE PRIME REASON the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting ever poorer. SBR still parrots the line that I don't understand banking, and that banks can't create money (as credit) from nothing . . . . . viewtopic.php?f=11&t=514230&p=16622506#p16622506