Oxymoron?

[Pogle]

Never get married and you'll never get divorced. There's nothing wrong though with marrying when you're young as your wealth is produced by your partnership, so it is only fair to split 50/50. What I would resent is marrying at 50 and losing half of my hard-earned wealth within a few years to a moneygrabber who has contributed very little. The law at the moment unfortunately deters marriage in later life.

It is a very cold and lonely place inside your head.

[TimberWolf]

Is this all down to house prices again?

(e.g. are credit card debts secured on a house, which always rises in value. Never done it myself, except a mortgage)

[NotAllThere]

No. Were you trying?

Not really. I mostly agree with your sentiments.

[Platypus]

I remember ... 1976

What is the average life expectancy of a lizard? You're clearly pushing the boundary

[alreadypacked]

A lot longer than the average hu-man...

So that explains this

"the over 60s in Wales had one of the highest debt levels in the UK at £25,947."

[Gonzo]

The banks ARE largely to blame. <snip> I’m not saying the bankrupt consumers should be compensated, but somehow the law needs to come crashing down on those in positions of ‘expertise’ and responsibility who have knowingly misled us all.

I can foresee a whole new arena for people to abdicate their responsibilies - people who were "missold a credit-card". If they cannot repay then the bank shouldn't have sold it to them.

Not only should the person then be excused from repaying their debt, they should get compensation for all the interest that they have already paid. Brilliant!

[Cyberman]

I can foresee a whole new arena for people to abdicate their responsibilies - people who were "missold a credit-card". If they cannot repay then the bank shouldn't have sold it to them.

Not only should the person then be excused from repaying their debt, they should get compensation for all the interest that they have already paid. Brilliant!

I agree with you. People who take on debt must take personal responsibility for that decision. To continually blame the banks is just a diversionary tactic by HMG to procure votes.

[OwlHoot]

Some of the most affluent people in this world live on debt. There is no contradiction here at all. They are affluent as long as they can service that debt. If Richard Branson had to repay all of his debts right now, I bet he would struggle too because he would have to realise his assets at very low current valuations.

That's very true - Also, peoples' lifestyles naturally expand to take account of extra income, even apparent income from rising house prices while that lasted.

I bet most permies becoming contractors go on a binge when the invoice payments first start rolling in, maybe not so much these days; but I know I did when I started contracting 10 years ago.

It looks like more than half, if not most, people admitting their debts on that savings site were caught out when their income suddenly took a dive.

[Mich the Tester]

I can foresee a whole new arena for people to abdicate their responsibilies - people who were "missold a credit-card". If they cannot repay then the bank shouldn't have sold it to them.

Not only should the person then be excused from repaying their debt, they should get compensation for all the interest that they have already paid. Brilliant!

My point is it’s the fault and responsibility of both the borrowers AND the lenders. You don’t excuse one by punishing the other. In this case, the bankrupt borrowers have probably had enough punishment to learn their lessons; they’ve lost all their personal wealth and have an atrocious credit rating, which will make it difficult for them to get jobs or get mortgages for a long time. And that's right. What isn't right is that the people who sold them credit irresponsibly get away with multi-million pound pay offs and huge pensions, while the innocent victims are taxpayers, small and medium sized businesses who can’t get normal credit, and pensioners who’ve seen their investments destroyed.

Those bankers who have lent irresponsibly (and borrowed irresponsibly to do so) should be prosecuted or sued through whichever legal means will work to strip them of their personal gains. It’s not a case of simply getting retribution or apportioning too much blame to one party, but enshrining the principle that a director or a professional has real responsibility in return for the high salary and bonuses. It’s about protecting capitalism against pseudo-capitalists who ignore their duty to look after other people’s money in a professional way and act irresponsibly and unprofessionally for personal gain.

[Platypus]

I agree with you. People who take on debt must take personal responsibility for that decision. To continually blame the banks is just a diversionary tactic by HMG to procure votes.

And yet your view on holders of NR shares seems to be one where "caveat emptor" does NOT apply and you blame the government?

So basically, someone else's problem is their fault, meanwhile your problem isn't your fault.