Simon Rose on BBC TV news explaining why interest rates should rise

• Tweet
• Pin It

• Tweet
• Pin It

5 Comments

1. Clive Wilson

   October 22, 2011 at 9:40 pm

   I raised an ePetition entitled “low savings rates” which discusses this point made by Simon Rose, on the day that ePetitions started.

   I thought it would raise 100,000 signatures in a matter of weeks as there are thought to be about thirty million savers in this country.

   Total number of responses to date…….wait for it…….89 . About 35 of those came right after a letter I had published in the Daily Mail. Utterly depressing!

   I have been discussing the matter with my MP for well over a year and got precisely nowhere. This isn’t purely a matter of self interest; I actually do believe that the doom laden BoE and the ridiculous comparisons with the 1930s, are dragging this country down fast. We have to get money back into people’s pockets to increase the rate of recovery.

   I am now arguing, along with SOS that the tax can be taken off savings ‘interest’. My MP is adamant that they will not do this.

   When I next see him I shall argue that the tax should be returned to savers in the form of short term tax credits which have to be spent not saved. This would somewhat help the economy whilst encouraging the idea of saving. I know it is far too complicated, nobody will understand it but there we are – I did it. I have done a petition on that as well…..so far…..1 signature (which isn’t mine as it happens; can you sign your own petition?).

   To be frank savers are their own worst enemies. What is actually going to happen next is wage inflation via industrial unrest [By implication the government and the BoE have more or less said that this is all they are looking out for - they wrote off savers at the outset].

   I am afraid that if you don’t make a complete and utter nuisance of yourself in this country, to the point that you are disrupting other peoples lives, no notice will be taken of you.

   Regrettably the feeble responses to petitions so far has just confirmed the government’s view that there is no need to do anything. They are completely cynical with a total lack of moral compass, but on top of that they cannot see that we need a return to confidence (which is easily achievable), before any decent recovery will occur.

   Recommend (4)
2. Realist

   October 23, 2011 at 11:06 am

   Frankly, I think Simon was right to stress the harmful effects of inflation on all of us, not just savers, for that would have been interpreted as special pleading for savers, whose interests are broadly seen as being antithetical to those of the community at large, especially on the matter of interest rates.

   I think it’s true that wage inflation would put the wind up the B of E, but the chances of that happening appear to be slim; not that there isn’t a demand for higher wages but in circumstances of rising unemployment and emasculated trade unions such a demand is likely to be pretty feeble.

   It seems to me that talking down the economy has very little to do with anything. It would grow readily enough if there was any realistic chance of the retail and service sectors making money. Inflation, wage freezes and rising unemployment have put the kibosh on that, however, and for once Merv was right; a return to 1930s standards of living is the most likely outcome of current government and B of E policies.

   I think the only way interest rates will rise is if the government’s hand is forced, for it’s clear that helping savers is not on the the aganda at all. In which case the loss of our triple A rating would be a good thing for savers in that it would spook the money markets, and the B of E would be forced to abandon this damn-fool QE and ‘emergency low interest rate’ … some emergency, getting on for three years now.

   Whether there are thirty million savers or seventeen million, I don’t really know, but either way they have been remarkably quiescient. I can’t understand why that is … perhaps they prefer to sit fuming at home?

   Recommend (2)
3. John

   October 23, 2011 at 11:48 am

   The internet savvy demographic likely to look for and sign petitions like these are predominantly a younger generation and far less likely, on average, to have any savings. While they may well go out on the streets and protest against the government cuts and generic financial mismanagement they have no interest in putting their names to specialised petitions like this.

   The government in their wisdom have obviously determined or gambled on the fact that people with savings are for the most part so lacking in collective coherence, effective representation and national voice, they can be used and abused as necessary to help pay for the reckless banking mess. A silent majority either so ignorant of what is being done to them or fearful of losing what little they already have in terms of housing and job security they won’t be willing to organise and object to the huge inflation compounded interest rate tax imposed on thier savings. Those who might be perceived, quite wrongly, as the well off by a younger generation described in the first paragraph.

   I’d already signed (one of the two!!) Simon Rose petitions which still only has 1708 signatures, I’ve just signed your petition for what that’s worth but it highlights the problem of coherence and effective representation perfectly. There are at least half a dozen very similar epetitions, none have a hope in hell of succeeding.

   Recommend (3)
4. Clive Wilson

   November 5, 2011 at 10:45 am

   Re ePetition entitled “low savings rates”..I put it on the day they started (ahead of SOS I may say!), and was so confident that it would get 100,000 signatures in a matter of days, I opted for the earlier closing date 05/11/11 which is today.

   You will be pleased? to hear that it garnered 90 signatures of which about 30 seemed to come [due to the step change in numbers] from a letter I had in the Daily Mail. Hmmmmmm…….I don’t think I need to comment further on that!

   My MP says, re. discussions with him……………

   The government has helped people to get information so that they can shop around for the best rates…….? There was me thinking you had to use the internet or look in the Daily Mail money section!

   He also says the government has persuaded banks to put the interest rate on ISA statements. Great – ISAs became a minefield for unwary savers with the banks cheating them wholesale. So that is all right then. Very helpful.

   He also says that it “would be cumbersome” to remove the tax on savings. He says “it would be an expensive process to administer”. I’ve got all this in writing – I’m not just making it up. I know what you are thinking – I’ll go and put the kettle on.

   He goes on to say that the increase in the personal allowance for people over 65 “means that the majority of those aged 65 and over will not pay any tax on savings interest or any other income in 2011-12.”

   I think he means that all those baby boomers – the ‘most selfish generation’ [Jeremy Paxman], are scraping along at or below the tax free £9940 limit? Not bad for a lifetime of hard work.

   I would quite like to see him again to discuss, and to try and understand, his arguments but they are so far fetched that I am not sure that it is worthwhile.

   Recommend (2)
5. John

   November 7, 2011 at 12:42 pm

   ” He also says that it “would be cumbersome” to remove the tax on savings. ”

   It would be funny if it wasn’t so stomach churning. Perhaps he’s referring to the “new” scheme they’d have to devise in order to preserve their unethical revenue stream from the double dip taxation of savers. Continuously shafting those in society who live responsibly, within their means, and the only ones with anything left to take who can’t just clear off if they don’t like it, or put their wealth beyond governments greedy reach, isn’t easy you know…… not without them realising what’s happening.

   ” He says “it would be an expensive process to administer” ”

   Well yes, that’s a given. Simply scrapping double dip savings taxation would be far too simplistic and straightforward. The big danger is that just simply scrapping it, without spending obscene amounts of tax payers money on special investigative commissions and tedious talking shop enquiries, would cause the general public to realise a lot of what politicians do is little more than complicate and obfuscate what should otherwise be simple and relatively straight forward proceedures. It’s all about protecting the establishment and status quo, along with the power and privilege these monkeys enjoy, anything threatening that just won’t do.

   If there is one single thing politicians know how to do and do well, it is exploit matters in order to earn, churn and squander tax payers money.

   Recommend (1)