Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Savers told to stop moaning and start spending

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28 September 2010, 11:58 AM
  #1  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry Savers told to stop moaning and start spending

Yep Mr Bean thinks that is if you are a saver you can afford to suffer the low interest rates.

I guess it's for the greater good right?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...-spending.html

Savers told to stop moaning and start spending

Savers should stop complaining about poor returns and start spending to help the economy, a senior Bank of England official warned today.

By Robert Winnett and Myra Butterworth
Published: 10:03PM BST 27 Sep 2010
612 Comments



Mr Bean said low returns on savings were part of the Bank of England's strategy Photo: PA

Older households could afford to suffer because they had benefited from previous property price rises, Charles Bean, the deputy governor, suggested.
They should "not expect" to live off interest, he added, admitting that low returns were part of a strategy.

His remarks are likely to infuriate savers, who are among the biggest victims of the recession. About five million retired people are thought to rely on the interest earned by their nest-eggs. But almost all savings accounts now pay less than inflation.

The typical savings rate has fallen from more than 2.8 per cent before the financial crisis to 0.23 per cent last month.

Mr Bean said he "fully sympathised". But he continued: "Savers shouldn't necessarily expect to be able to live just off their income in times when interest rates are low. It may make sense for them to eat into their capital a bit."

He added: "Very often older households have actually benefited from the fact that they've seen capital gains on their houses."
In an interview with Channel Four News on Monday night, he said that savers "might be suffering" from the low Bank Rate. But they had done well from higher rates in the past and would do so again.

Mr Bean said that encouraging Britons to spend was one reason why the Bank had cut interest rates. They have been held at 0.5 per cent for 18 months, hitting rates offered on savings accounts.

The strategy had led to Mervyn King, the governor, receiving many letters of complaint.

But it was designed to return the economy to a reasonable level of activity as quickly as possible, he said. "The faster we can achieve that, the sooner interest rates will get back to more normal levels."

Had the Bank not acted, "unemployment would have been higher, wage growth would have been lower," Mr Bean added.

The comments angered groups representing the elderly and those putting money aside. The Daily Telegraph has campaigned for protection for savers.
Ros Altmann, director-general of Saga, said: "Savers are being taken advantage of. They did the right thing and have been let down at the other end of the deal.

"I don't think this is what most people would consider fair."
Dot Gibson, of the National Pensioners Convention, said: "For years we've been told to put money aside for our retirement only to find that interest rates have sunk and now we have to use our savings just to pay the bills."
Jason Riddle, of Save Our Savers, said: "The Bank was aware that there was a lack of saving before the financial crisis, but those who were prudently saving while others spent, are being heavily punished."

Official figures show that savers have lost about £18 billion a year in interest as a result of the Bank's response to the worst recession in a generation.
The amount Britons save has fallen by more than a fifth since the start of the year, a survey showed today.

The average person is saving £102 a month, down from £130 in February, according to Santander.
Old 28 September 2010, 12:21 PM
  #2  
dpb
Scooby Regular
 
dpb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Yep , just as long as your not spending in pounds it sounds a good idea
Old 28 September 2010, 12:30 PM
  #3  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm pretty pissed off about it. I mean I have significant cash in the bank which is now getting devalued by inflation.

Silly me for being prudent.

I actually just put a lot of it into a 1 year saving bond paying a paltry ~3% gross. That is atrocious and still means I get eroded by inflation a bit.

Incidentally I did this 'cos I am going to (at least) wait a year before buying a house now. I want to see how things pan out and save a bit more.
Old 28 September 2010, 12:46 PM
  #4  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

I think they are only saying that because of the double dip and deflation fears. If your not spending and actually saving, what difference does it make if your money is worth less than it was?

I appreciate that those living on savings in retirement are going to find it hard but those that work and save, it shouldn't make that much difference to you if your saving rather than spending. Granted your spending "a bit" more and saving "a bit" less but thats only as long as inflation rises. If people don't spend and demand reduces you'll get deflation. Your not earning on your savings but then your money will go further as everything gets cheaper.

Hopefully those that are saving aren't talked into spending - its that that caused this in the first place. We need to be weened off buy now pay later and onto save now, MAYBE buy later.
Old 28 September 2010, 12:48 PM
  #5  
dpb
Scooby Regular
 
dpb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
Default

Shares is a better option if youve got the time maybe
Old 28 September 2010, 12:50 PM
  #6  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EddScott
I think they are only saying that because of the double dip and deflation fears. If your not spending and actually saving, what difference does it make if your money is worth less than it was?
You may as well start saying to homeowners what difference does it make if your house is worth less today than say, one year ago....it's still a roof over your head right?

Cash savings are an asset like many others. Why should cash savers be (de facto) taxed to prop up homeowners?
Old 28 September 2010, 12:51 PM
  #7  
Terminator X
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
 
Terminator X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Interest rates are low to encourage spending (low mortgage should = greater spending power) so we can spend our way out of the mire we are in, trouble is that most people have no savings & Banks are still not lending at low enough rates to encourage it ... won't get better any time soon

TX.

PS

If you have savings then Good For You albeit that they're worth less & less each year so why not spend & go out with a bang!
Old 28 September 2010, 12:52 PM
  #8  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dpb
Shares is a better option if youve got the time maybe
Directly for most is too risky. A balanced selection of ETFs and Unit Trusts would be my first choice for investment - A pension IF your prepared to put the effort in.

Last edited by EddScott; 28 September 2010 at 12:57 PM.
Old 28 September 2010, 12:53 PM
  #9  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dpb
Shares is a better option if youve got the time maybe
I've been in and out and made some small gains, but I want said money available this time next year so don't want to risk short term losses.
Old 28 September 2010, 12:56 PM
  #10  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
You may as well start saying to homeowners what difference does it make if your house is worth less today than say, one year ago....it's still a roof over your head right?

Cash savings are an asset like many others. Why should cash savers be (de facto) taxed to prop up homeowners?
Er, well actually yes - what difference does it make if your house is worth less?

It only makes a difference if you are buying or selling. The bit in between is really only for the Daily Fail readers to worry about on a Sunday morning.

The second part of your post, you've lost me.
Old 28 September 2010, 01:00 PM
  #11  
stilover
Scooby Regular
 
stilover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Why save when you can spend all your money now?

Because when I'm a pensioner, I don't want to die of starvation or Hypothermia due to not having enough money to eat or pay my heating bills. And because I work in the private sector, I won't have a final salary pension to fall back on.

What a pr!ck.
Old 28 September 2010, 01:01 PM
  #12  
Leslie
Scooby Regular
 
Leslie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I would have thought he would have changed his name by deed poll before sticking his neck out!

How can he condemn those who have saved a nest egg to live off to spend all that away for his convenience? How are those people to continue when their savings are spent up and they are unable to work.

How about his banking mates spending their ill gotten gains to support the country in the mess that they helped to create while they were raking it in.

Les
Old 28 September 2010, 01:04 PM
  #13  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EddScott
The second part of your post, you've lost me.
Interest rates are lower than inflation which means savings are eroded. It's like a tax.
Old 28 September 2010, 01:08 PM
  #14  
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Trout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

It's nothing like a tax - doh!
Old 28 September 2010, 01:09 PM
  #15  
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Trout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I am glad that I seem to be part of a strategy by the Bank of England!
Old 28 September 2010, 01:20 PM
  #16  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Interest rates are lower than inflation which means savings are eroded. It's like a tax.
Oh, I see. Well its a pickle for sure but you have to remember it is only temporary.

If inflation continues to rise, interest rates will have to go up.

OR

Inflation collapses and we enter a period of deflation - you won't get the high rates but your money will go further.

Like I said, the fact that the BoE are now telling savers to spend indicates to me that they have a genuine fear of deflation.

I would say, however that the most likely outcome will be prolonged stagnation - a "lost decade" of sorts.
Old 28 September 2010, 01:24 PM
  #17  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Trout
It's nothing like a tax - doh!
Yes it is, and an unfair one at that.

Savers wake up one day and find they have lost wealth. Where has it gone? The government has confiscated part of their spending power, and given it to people who borrow.
Old 28 September 2010, 01:30 PM
  #18  
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Trout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You do make me laugh

Anyway - it is still nothing like a tax!
Old 28 September 2010, 01:46 PM
  #19  
Terminator X
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
 
Terminator X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stilover
Why save when you can spend all your money now?

Because when I'm a pensioner, I don't want to die of starvation or Hypothermia due to not having enough money to eat or pay my heating bills. And because I work in the private sector, I won't have a final salary pension to fall back on.
Don't know your age of course however those of us due to retire in 20yrs+ will be working like trojans literally until we keel over & die as (a) pensions will be worth nowt by then (b) there will be no pensionable age or it will be so high as to be meaningless. Spend it now you daft begger

TX.
Old 28 September 2010, 02:40 PM
  #20  
classic Subaru Si
Scooby Regular
 
classic Subaru Si's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: location, location, location
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I agree with Terminator - I'm taking my chances now and enjoying what I earn! I'm certainly not putting money in to a pension, for it to be worth crutch when I EVENTUALLY retire! And to be honest, with the way I live, I'll be lucky to see past 60 anyways!
Old 28 September 2010, 02:43 PM
  #21  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Yes it is, and an unfair one at that.

Savers wake up one day and find they have lost wealth. Where has it gone? The government has confiscated part of their spending power, and given it to people who borrow.
It really isn't a tax. Savers haven't lost wealth - in the same way a home owner isn't poorer because his house is worth less. Thats Daily Mail speak.

The government has reduced rates to keep the economy going - it isn't working if they feel the need to tell savers to spend thats for sure. The banks could still offer 5 or 6% on savings but they don't - and don't think for a minute they wouldn't still make a shed full of money by offering (what is our money) back to us and a crap rate and loaning our money back to us at another crap rate.

Its the banks that choose the rates to offer savers.

Originally Posted by Terminator X
pensions will be worth nowt by then
Another media driven missconception. A pension is worth as much effort as you put into it. A rule of thumb (although quite high IMO) is to take your age - half it - and use that as % of your income that you should put aside each year to fund retirement. Sounds high? Well if you commit to the pension and take an interest only mortgage you get a comfortable income in retirement and a decent cash sum to chop out the mortgage.

Originally Posted by classic Subaru Si
I agree with Terminator - I'm taking my chances now and enjoying what I earn! I'm certainly not putting money in to a pension, for it to be worth crutch when I EVENTUALLY retire! And to be honest, with the way I live, I'll be lucky to see past 60 anyways!
And if you do end up living into your 60s and 70s with no money saved you'll be at the mercy of what will constitute state benefits at that time - and if you think the elderly get a raw deal now imagine what it will be like in 30 years!

Last edited by EddScott; 28 September 2010 at 02:45 PM.
Old 28 September 2010, 02:58 PM
  #22  
alcazar
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
alcazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rl'yeh
Posts: 40,781
Received 27 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Been saying this for a while: the BoE would LOVE people to start spending, but watch your TV: EVERY advert break on EVERY channel WITH ads, is filled with ads from banks encouraging us to save, save, save.
Old 28 September 2010, 02:59 PM
  #23  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EddScott
It really isn't a tax. Savers haven't lost wealth - in the same way a home owner isn't poorer because his house is worth less. Thats Daily Mail speak.
Of course it's a loss of wealth, my spending power diminishes if inflation blasts away my savings. How is that NOT a loss of wealth?

Inflation HELPS borrowers, and HURTS savers.

It's a wealth transfer.
Old 28 September 2010, 03:13 PM
  #24  
classic Subaru Si
Scooby Regular
 
classic Subaru Si's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: location, location, location
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

And if you do end up living into your 60s and 70s with no money saved you'll be at the mercy of what will constitute state benefits at that time - and if you think the elderly get a raw deal now imagine what it will be like in 30 years![/QUOTE]

in 30 years time, most people will be working in to there 70's anyway!
Old 28 September 2010, 03:40 PM
  #25  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Of course it's a loss of wealth, my spending power diminishes if inflation blasts away my savings. How is that NOT a loss of wealth?

Inflation HELPS borrowers, and HURTS savers.

It's a wealth transfer.
Its a reduction in spending power, not a reduction in wealth. You haven't lost money.

Inflation reduces spending power for those who live off savings. However, to stave off inflation, interest rates are increased. Without one you can't have the other.
Old 28 September 2010, 03:49 PM
  #26  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EddScott
Its a reduction in spending power, not a reduction in wealth. You haven't lost money.

Inflation reduces spending power for those who live off savings. However, to stave off inflation, interest rates are increased. Without one you can't have the other.
Of course it's a reduction in wealth, money is only worth what goods and services it can be exchanged for!

Er you do realise that low interest rates promotes borrowing and thus inflation!
Old 28 September 2010, 03:51 PM
  #27  
tony de wonderful
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
tony de wonderful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by classic Subaru Si
And if you do end up living into your 60s and 70s with no money saved you'll be at the mercy of what will constitute state benefits at that time - and if you think the elderly get a raw deal now imagine what it will be like in 30 years!
in 30 years time, most people will be working in to there 70's anyway![/QUOTE]

The gov want you to put your money in pension funds a.k.a the stock market ponzi scheme.
Old 28 September 2010, 04:12 PM
  #28  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
Of course it's a reduction in wealth, money is only worth what goods and services it can be exchanged for!

Er you do realise that low interest rates promotes borrowing and thus inflation!
You haven't lost money.

LOL, no it doesn't. BoE base rate is kept low to encourage us to spend. Its kept low so (for most of us) our mortgage is cheaper thus we are likely to spend more. Its got nothing to do with borrowing.

If we spend and spend, demand goes up, prices increase - this is inflation. BoE base rate is then increased to reduce inflation to reduce our spending.

In an ar5se about face way, it would help savers to spend. If we all spend, inflation goes up so interest rates would go up - the knock on effect would be higher rates of savings.

The problem is no one really wants to spend - even those that like spending - hence this act of desperation from the BoE.

Last edited by EddScott; 28 September 2010 at 04:14 PM.
Old 29 September 2010, 09:58 AM
  #29  
GlesgaKiss
Scooby Regular
 
GlesgaKiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Seems some of the people in this thread take a lot for granted. It is an invisible tax as Tony says because it allows the government to spend more than they take in taxes (at least the system which creates inflation does). So where does the difference come from...? It's your reduction in purchasing power for their ability to spend.
Old 29 September 2010, 10:08 AM
  #30  
EddScott
Scooby Regular
 
EddScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: West Wales
Posts: 12,573
Received 64 Likes on 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by GlesgaKiss
Seems some of the people in this thread take a lot for granted. It is an invisible tax as Tony says because it allows the government to spend more than they take in taxes (at least the system which creates inflation does). So where does the difference come from...? It's your reduction in purchasing power for their ability to spend.
You honestly believe low interest rates are a form of taxation?


EDIT - I would add that its in the governments interest to have high inflation because it means its reducing the cost of its debt. In this respect it is unfair to savers, however it still isn't a tax.

Last edited by EddScott; 29 September 2010 at 10:20 AM.


Quick Reply: Savers told to stop moaning and start spending



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:34 PM.