And who is going to enforce these laws (which largely already exist) – is it the police whose numbers are being cut? On a recent trip to Scotland and back we saw one police car.

Maybe “undertaking” wouldn’t be a problem if drivers pulled over from the middle lane. Maybe pulling over wouldn’t be a problem if there weren’t so many speeders in the outside lanes such that it is difficult to pull out to pass.
In an effort to save fuel, I try and cruise at around 70mph but it is very frustrating when you get stuck in the inside lane or tailgated in the middle or outside lanes.
Another proposal that looks good for headlines but not much else.

I go to http://www.imdb.com and read the parental guide. There is no judgment, it just details what the film contains, language, nudity, drugs, drink etc. then make up your own mind. Works for me.

I might actually research this a little! A lot of what I’ve written could be obllocks 🙂

Well quite! I’m still at a loss as to how Gordon Brown played a part in the US subprime market. Maybe after you’ve done your research it’ll come clear.:)

Gordon Brown sold a proportion of the gold reserves when the price was decreasing. It levelled out after that sale and stayed level for a while before climbing – I’m not sure how he could forecast the steep rise in gold price, especially when it was falling at the time.

But that ignores the real cause of the credit crunch which was the collapse in the US real estate market causing major financial institutions to collapse. I don’t think Gordon Brown or indeed Tony Blair had a hand in that. I don’t recall the government making credit easier post 9/11 either.

Then you end up miles away and petrol is nearly £1.40 a litre then you lose your job and there you are….debt crisis. Is that the individuals fault? I don’t think so. You can be as responsible as you like but there are circumstances beyond your control. I have been fortunate enough to remain in full-time employment since I started work. Others haven’t been so lucky.

It has always been the case that a stretch in the finances is required to buy your first house. We were no different. It worked out well for us.

When you buy at the market peak as I did you have no idea if the house prices will continue to rise, stabilize or plummet. You feel you need to get in there before it gets beyond reach.

In recent years the market hasn’t fallen though, certainly not to affordable levels. I could not afford the house I live in if I had to buy it now and I’m glad I didn’t hesitate in 1989. Financially it was tough and Chancellor Lamont didn’t help, but I would not be in the position I’m in now.
It must be grim for first time buyers, especially in expensive areas. A 2 bed bungalow round these parts is around £180000; a mortgage would cost £1000 a month; rental would be £800 a month. Why give someone else £800 when you could get a foot on the property ladder for an extra £200? That’s the issue.

Governments job is to regulate the banks, which it did until the legislation was relaxed and in the case of the USA, repealed. It is not government’s job to regulate its citizens. We should be responsible for our own actions.

Maybe you could tell us why citizens should be responsible for their own actions but banks need to be regulated. Why shouldn’t the banks take responsibility for their actions as well? Are you saying that banks can’t be trusted but citizens can be?

It is very easy to criticize those that have borrowed too much but think of this. If you need to buy a house when the market is at its peak then the market plummets and you’re in negative equity, whose fault is that? I did exactly that in 1989. Bought a flat for £48000, sold it in 1997 for £36000. Still had a £48000 mortgage though. I could afford the hit (just about) but there were many that couldn’t and lost everything. Sometimes it is necessary to overstretch to get on the housing ladder.

Ok then smart-alec, my job is safe for the forseeable future – is that better for you. Wouldn’t want to be too optimistic now would I?

Sheesh. What a misery.