Originally posted by Mich the Tester
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Let the free market rip!
Collapse
X
-
-
And you do not look for the best deals? The Icelandic banks were not offering that much more than the other banksOriginally posted by sasguru View PostAre there that many savers who have lost everything?
I'm sorry but people who put their money in Icelandic banks offering huge interest rates are guilty of not heeding the cardinal rule of money: "nothing's free, if it seems too good to be true, it certainly is"The court heard Darren Upton had written a letter to Judge Sally Cahill QC saying he wasn’t “a typical inmate of prison”.
But the judge said: “That simply demonstrates your arrogance continues. You are typical. Inmates of prison are people who are dishonest. You are a thoroughly dishonestly man motivated by your own selfish greed.”Comment
-
Originally posted by TimberWolf View Postsavers should lose their money as borrows should lose their debts.
So those of us who have lived within our means should loose it all while those who racked up huge credit card debt should get off scott free?
For example according to your viewpoint a family who have lived prudently, do not have credit cards and only bought what they could afford should loose everything, whilst some selfish bast'd of a chav gets to keep everything?Last edited by Scotchpie; 15 December 2008, 16:07.Comment
-
Sounds like a Labour policy in the making.Originally posted by Scotchpie View PostSo those of us who have lived within our means should loose it all while those who racked up huge credit card debt should get off scott free?
For example according to your viewpoint a family who have lived prudently, do not have credit cards and only bought what they could afford should loose everything, whilst some selfish bast'd of a chav gets to keep their plasma TV's. flash cards and big houses, which, incidently, they probably had no intention of paying for when they bought them?
Savings are theft Comrade.Comment
-
Only Caroline Flint. Phwooar!Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostWould you have sex with any of them first?
sasguruǝןqqıʍComment
-
Originally posted by Scotchpie View PostSo those of us who have lived within our means should loose it all while those who racked up huge credit card debt should get off scott free?
For example according to your viewpoint a family who have lived prudently, do not have credit cards and only bought what they could afford should loose everything, whilst some selfish bast'd of a chav gets to keep everything?
loseComment
-
Does letting the bank go bust imply all their portfolio is destroyed?Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostOK, but how about the savers who've lost everything? Do they have to start all over again?Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
-
Originally posted by Scotchpie View PostSo those of us who have lived within our means should loose it all while those who racked up huge credit card debt should get off scott free?
For example according to your viewpoint a family who have lived prudently, do not have credit cards and only bought what they could afford should loose everything, whilst some selfish bast'd of a chav gets to keep everything?
I like how you quoted a post with the correct spelling of "lose" but typed "loose" yourself. Twice.
Nice one.
HTHComment
-
Not if the savings are guaranteed.Originally posted by d000hg View PostDoes letting the bank go bust imply all their portfolio is destroyed?And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
No tulip Sherlock !Originally posted by sasguru View PostI have been doing a lot of thinking recently and have come to conclusion that all these bailouts etc. are merely postponing the inevitable.
I expect better from sas. It took you "a lot" of thinking to come up with this brainwave?
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andy Burnham is PM: 5 new IT policies set to shape UK tech and its contractors Yesterday 06:29
- Taxed on money I haven't earned yet? Bold move, HMRC Jul 17 08:36
- The Fair Work Agency has got zero hours in its sights. Do you? Jul 16 08:44
- Cookie Policy Jul 15 11:50
- Cloned again: an umbrella company founder's warning on fraud, JSL and Companies House Jul 15 07:47
- How is JSL bedding in for contractor umbrella companies, 100 days in? Jul 14 07:45
- IT contractor demand cools in June 2026 amid UK heatwave Jul 13 08:18
- How could zero hours contract reform create unexpected problems for contractors? Jul 8 06:40
- Three Loan Charge conflicts of interest show Labour ministers knew the McCann Review was compromised from the start Jul 7 05:44
- What’s happening with HMRC off-payroll working enforcement? (IR35 update) Jul 6 08:20

Comment