The problem with this analysis that you keep bringing up is that you're assuming the poor are those that are most indebted. The people that have gained most direct benefit out of the low interest rates are the middle classes that were climbing up the property ladder and mortgaged themselves to the limit just before 2009 and so have enjoyed lower repayments than would have otherwise been expected.

I know people talk about the 'poor' having debts from buying on catalogues etc but those sort of debts are usually very high interest rates that have not been brought down by the Bank of England rate being low, the beneficiaries are mainly mortgage holders. Most of the 'poor' are not home owners and do not have the debts that the middle class homeowning types do.

The main benefit of the lower interest rates is that it has prevented the economy from going back into recession and hence more people losing their jobs (recessions tend to hit the poor proportionally harder in terms of unemployment outcomes)

That's why I said the debtors [uand[/u poor. In fact, one could argue that big mortgage holders are poor. They do not own their own house like they think and are encouraged to believe. What the "own" is a large debt with the right to occupy whilst they service that debt. In many cases the value of that debt exceeds or is close to the value of the property (and the latter will probably decrease in value as the UK prospectively loses its AAA rating and unemployment increases, whilst the former will only decrease if repaid).

On the other hand its a huge apple cart to upset if and when mortgage providers decide that they want their money back now rather than ride the depression for two or more years.

It never ceases to amaze me how organisations who are very quick to emphasis the long term nature of investments, especially mortgages, suddenly become very nervous when house prices start to fall and start reviewing their books for those who are about to fall into negative equity - its only negative for as long as it takes for demand to pick up again, and that demand is triggered by the very same people who are doing the review, in other words lend more and you'll create the demand that will cause your negative equity figures to fall back again.

From a personal point of view I am very happy with the mortgage service that the Nationwide offer as a "traditional" building society as they do seem to take a long term view on their loans and are more than happy to discuss extending terms or reducing for short periods your repayments rather than go through the hard man routine and get you out on the streets, it is after all in their interests to keep you in the property and have you pay something every month rather than own an empty property that they can't give away at auction let alone raise their equity in.

I think you'll find most banks in the UK revised their foreclosure strategies as a result of housing price collapses in the 1980s. As you say, its far better to partially write down the value of mortgages in aggregate on your books than crystallise actual losses by foreclosure. Especially since the very act of mass foreclosure adds to the vicious cycle of negative equity and further foreclosures. Banks obviously do sell from under defaulters, but generally not as quickly as in the 1980s.

On a case-by-case basis the main thing borrowers in difficulty should do is pre-emptively talk to their bank, rather than wait for the wheels to fall off completely. I know of some very good deals made with high street banks in difficult times, including long interest holidays. The customers they do tend to hammer are those that bury their heads in the sand, don't talk to them up front, and refuse to answer letters and phone calls. In those cases the banks tend to act tough because the customer themselves leaves them no option.

sorry,you can't have dear old Gustav - he was Austrian

So why were they happy to offer 125% motgages then?

Damn!

I'd excluded Mozart and assorted Strausses already on the same grounds.

I'd agree with that, a couple of years ago with only one of us working we needed a bit of slack cutting, I rang the Nationwide and they offered to extend the mortgage which brought the payments down to half what we were paying - ok so its going to take five years longer and more interest but the short term relief was the primary concern - the extended years are irrelevant as we will sell this house and down-shift long before it comes to an end, the next move will wipe out the mortgage, everyone happy.

well,no one's perfect !

except for James Roby............



NB :
useless infomation - you could have had Richard Strauss a well known [uGerman [/ucomposer, roughly at the same time of Mahler who was also a 'romantic' composer following the later Wagner trend and totally unrelated to the austrian Strauss clan

see,I told you it was useless infomation !

Damn again! Did I not include Richard Strauss in that initial list? I'd meant to. <i>Also sprach Zarathustra</i> is quite glorious – possibly the apotheosis of 19th-century romanticism.

The first movement is famous as a result <i>2001</i>, of course, but the second is like floating in honey.

agreed but at the risk of being reprimanded for going off topic (as usual !)

yes,a much underrated composer

as for 'floating on honey' ? my equivalent would be swimming in a vat of Corbières whilst enjoying the finest of all symphonies,The Titan by Herr Mahler.....mmmmmm

I like that as an image? But what about a Rivesaltes dessert wine?

yuk !!!!!

it's 'orrible, too sweet for me just like Montbazillac - it's tastes like syropy sugar eerrghhhh !

as a confirmed 'rougeiste' I don't mind a nice smooth white or rosé but nothing too sugary..

ok,I know i'm a bit strange but I don't like honey either !

You probably won't like any of the Trockenbeerenauslese or Eiswein categorisations then.
(Just gently nudging back in the Deutsche Direktion)

no,far to sweet & syropy for my palate i'm afraid - I just need to look at a glass of the stuff and i'm 5kg heavier !!!

strangely enough i've never found the german people inflexible,on the contrary i've found them to have a similar outlook on life as the brits - I suppose i'm in the minority on this one ?

the french on the other hand are THE most inflexible group of people ! the french way is the best way and anything the grandfather a father did is good enough for the next generation in my experience

classic example is the groundsman at Perpignan,a council employee who had been instructed to water the pitch the night before as well as on the morning of a Catalans game (all games) without any regard to the weather conditions or any possible consequences - he did it because he was told to in his general orders - now that's what you call being inflexible ! - useless tool !!!

Not necessarily anything wrong with that, though.

Better than a 'do something for the sake of it' approach or as we're seeing in the UK at present with the NHS.

The groundsman probably had a little bit of German in him if he was 'only following orders.' The fatherland should have shown more flexibility when Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg were knocking about. History may have turned out a little different.

true enough I suppose - apologies to the french for such a sweeping generalisation

Or Hitler (which I note she excluded, but wasn't sure whether or not that was on grounds of nationality or shame).

another notable exclusion has to be Pope Benedict XVI ?

as well as Jürgen Klinsmann...

If we start down the track of sportsmen and women, we'd be here ages – Beckenbauer and Rummenigge for starters (the latter of which reminds me of Karl Heinz Stockhausen). You''d have to include Lothar Matthäus too at a minimum.

Then there's the likes of Becker and Graff and Schumacher. I hadn't mentioned Bert Trautmann (nearly criminal of me), Max Schmeling and loads of track and field athletes.

Without checking back did I mention Werner Herzog?

If you want religious mentions, then Martin Niemöller, Dietrich Bonhoffer and Heinrich Gruber.

There are loads more I could have included.

If you want politics/historical figures etc – Frederich der Grosse (his 300th anniversary this year), the Great Elector, Otto von Bismarck, Helmuth von Möltke (the elder), Carl von Clausewitz, Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher ...

I've been rather fond of Prussian history since I found it the only part of my O' level history course that really gripped my imagination.

But apart from all that lot (and providing the stimulus for a massive rebuilding programme in the 1940s and 50s), what have the Germans ever done for us...?

yes,all interesting stuff - such a vast subject matter

just the classical composers are enough for me to cope with but certainly not Mr Stockhauzen i'm afraid - call me an old fuddy duddy but my progressive persuasion can only stretch as far as Tippett,Shostakovitch & Paul Hindemith,another fine german composer.
I watched a concert with Julia Fischer the suprb german violinist/pianist who gave a rendition of the Ist movement of Hindemiths Piano Concerto on the solo violin as an encore after a performance of Tchaiks violin concerto - it was breathtaking
speaking of german virtuosos,Anne Sophie Mutter...brilliant

so 'what did the germans ever give us ?' well,where do we start and where on earth do we stop ?

Gave us our beloved Royal Family.