Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,122
If 15,000 can benefit from switching, that means that 285,000 won't benefit.
Brendan
Sarenco, I think you are far too deferential to mr Honohan.As per usual, in this country, he suggests that the consumer do the leg work in order to secure some fairness. In a properly functioning economy (backed up by a decent consumer advocacy agency) this wouldn't be a problem. If we could secure even a 0.5% to 1.0% reduction in our Svr mortgages many more than 15,000(a derisory number) could benefit a lot. In which case the economy would also benefit and hence there would be more employment and more societal cohesion. Surely this is a fairer way of distributing wealth rather than the excess profit from my Svr going to a shareholder who by dint of the fact that they can afford shares are already wealthier than me
You haven't said who your lender is but I would point out that the State now holds a major shareholding stake in our banking system. The State obviously funds a large number of social welfare programmes that benefit people that would never have had sufficient income or wealth to secure a mortgage. Would you put your welfare ahead of such people?
Paying2much spoke about "excess profit" from his SVR going a shareholder who by dint of the fact that they can afford shares are already wealthier than him/her. I am simply making the point that any such profits may well go to the State, as a major shareholder in our banks, which funds programmes that benefit people that in many cases are almost certainly less well off than Paying2much.
I agree that banks are not, and should not be, State agencies and the quicker the State's shareholdings can be sold back into private hands the better IMO.
To be frank, I don't really have much sympathy for consumers that are not prepared to do the leg work to secure a better deal for themselves. The gods help those that help themselves.
You haven't said who your lender is but I would point out that the State now holds a major shareholding stake in our banking system. The State obviously funds a large number of social welfare programmes that benefit people that would never have had sufficient income or wealth to secure a mortgage. Would you put your welfare ahead of such people?
The answer is no, I don't put my welfare above others-I pay my income tax which is deemed by our government to be sufficient to cover social matters which require funding. I have no savings whatsoever and frequently get to the end of the month with 40cent in my pocket having paid my mortgage and all my bills. There are no agencies that I can turn to as I'm regarded as well off. You also assume that I am well off because I was given a mortgage a numer of years ago-now I will assume something about you. You seem to be financially savvy and probably have some cash on deposit so how about the government starts charging higher DIRT on your savings to pay for social issues. If you remember I was the one who mentioned societal cohesion. I have no problem paying my fair share. To suggest that 300,000 SVR people alone should be charged this stealth tax smacks of an "I'm alright Jack" attitude.
Well I'm afraid your assumption is incorrect, although I was fortunate enough to be in a position to switch out of a SVR mortgage some time ago.
I've obviously no problem with anybody arranging their affairs in such a way as to lawfully minimise their tax liabilities but I wouldn't assume that a shareholder in any company (or any dependant of that shareholder) is better placed to bear economic pain than a person that owes money to that company.
I suppose it's fair to say that my general philosophy is to try to understand and accept the world as I find it and then to try to make the most of it. I have had my fair share of misfortunes (and made some terrible mistakes) through the years but I never expected any white knight to come to my rescue.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?