Banks

[teamsaint]

That is remarkably simplistic. It was not all the fault of the banks. Governments across the world, poor regulatory frameworks and organisations and anyone who took advantage of the 'cheap' money to go on that extra holiday or buy a bigger house, for example, all have a share of the blame.

By the way, you posted twice up there, old chap.

deleted, slow running internet.
yes, you are right, it iS a bit simplistic, but it is the truth to a great extent.
All(or most) of us bought into government spending at around 40% of GDP over the long term, for better or worse.
The bank induced recession and the "necessary" bail out sent deficits out of, or almost out of control. So the truth is that our new reality, where governments are doing what they are, was induced by bank greed.

A western economy built on a huge bubble of credit without the backing of real assets is surely part of a longer term issue...and as you say, we and our political parties joined in that too..or were perhaps conned into accepting it.

[Resurrection Man]

.....
And if you can you can explain how running a bank account to pay in and take out one's own money, above board, declared to HMRC, is a fraud then I will be impressed.

.....

OK...try this for size. What you are saying, in essence, is that you don't want to pay for a service that the bank is providing you because they are charging too much. You are using their services, all the same, to run your business. Just that you're not paying for it. Sounds very equitable to me.

High Streets are empty also because the landlords are charging far too high a rent. Most local authorities round our way actively promote and reduce their business rates to start-ups to try and encourage them. Out-of-town supermarkets also have a very significant effect on the High Street.

[teamsaint]

Business accounts for self employed people are a rip off. My bank have made money out of me over 30 years.
To charge individuals who are self employed, and maybe not even VAT registered to pay money in, and draw it out is a rip off. Its the same "service" that you get as an individual, but at a much higher price. you would do exactly what everybody else does.

High rents, supermarkets etc are a problem in the High st..but business rates are a HUGE part of the issue. Do you know what services businesses get for the privilege of paying them ?
I meet a lot of high St traders, have done for 25 years and they complain at least as much about rates as they do about rents. And they pay council tax on their own homes of course.

[Resurrection Man]

....

Being self employed means that you are precisely that , there is no separate "business"
the bank doesn't give me any other "service" than what it gives to someone who is on PAYE

Economical with the truth, as ever, Gong. Self-employed ...you are still running a business. Just too convenient to pretend it is not. As I said....being a bit of a hypocrite.

[Dave2002]

The business/personal thing is sometimes an arbitrary decision, not only in tax or bank affairs, but also in relationships with other providers. Communications providers are bad, or have been previously. How many small firms run web sites using "personal" broadband accounts? Reason? If they tell the comms firms they're running a business they may get fleeced, and not necessarily receive any better service. I believe one phrase which applies is "discriminatory pricing". Things may have changed in recent years, but I think this was roughly the state of affairs a few years ago.

[MrGongGong]

OK...try this for size. What you are saying, in essence, is that you don't want to pay for a service that the bank is providing you because they are charging too much. You are using their services, all the same, to run your business. Just that you're not paying for it. Sounds very equitable to me.

I think the point is that for people who are self employed the "service" the bank is giving them is the same as it would be for a non self employed person, it's not as if the bank is actually financing our businesses or even giving any "service" that makes it more effective. I do work, I sort out contracts, I send an invoice I pay the money into the bank and then either take it out in cash or use online banking or cheques etc SO in what way would this be "fraud" as I can't see it being much different to me being paid PAYE ?
I pay an accountant to sort out my accounts , even if I opened a "business" account the bank wouldn't do any more than what they do already........

Economical with the truth

like I say
you don't know my friend Jack !

and I hope you open a business account and declare the earnings to the revenue if you ever sell anything on Ebay

[Resurrection Man]

deleted, slow running internet.
yes, you are right, it iS a bit simplistic, but it is the truth to a great extent.
All(or most) of us bought into government spending at around 40% of GDP over the long term, for better or worse.
The bank induced recession and the "necessary" bail out sent deficits out of, or almost out of control. So the truth is that our new reality, where governments are doing what they are, was induced by bank greed.

A western economy built on a huge bubble of credit without the backing of real assets is surely part of a longer term issue...and as you say, we and our political parties joined in that too..or were perhaps conned into accepting it.

I still don't buy in to your view that it is 'all the banks fault, greed etc'. While certainly a major contributory factor, there were others that I have already mentioned. Rather than rehash what's gone before elsewhere, I'd point you in the direction of this article which seems to give a very balanced overview as to what caused the recession and why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2...obal_recession

[Resurrection Man]

......

High rents, supermarkets etc are a problem in the High st..but business rates are a HUGE part of the issue. Do you know what services businesses get for the privilege of paying them ?
I meet a lot of high St traders, have done for 25 years and they complain at least as much about rates as they do about rents.

I don't have any issue with that statement....just that in your first post when you raised this issue, it was business rates to the exclusion of anything else. We have now, at least, introduced a broader set of reasons into why High Streets are empty and it's not JUST down to business rates as you now agree.

.
And they pay council tax on their own homes of course.

I don't see the relevance of this statement.

[teamsaint]

I don't have any issue with that statement....just that in your first post when you raised this issue, it was business rates to the exclusion of anything else. We have now, at least, introduced a broader set of reasons into why High Streets are empty and it's not JUST down to business rates as you now agree.




I don't see the relevance of this statement.

I just mentioned business rates, certainly didn't blame them to the exclusion of everything else. That was just an assumption you made.

As to the relevance of council tax, its just one of the complaints that independent traders have. They pay for all the council services through their council tax at home. Its just that they pay twice for one lot of services.
Also, the benefits, directly, that you get for paying very high business rates are pretty much zero.

[MrGongGong]

Thinking about this again I remembered something that has parallels

If you want to take a musical instrument on Ryanair you pay a special fee (£50)
a few years ago I was travelling back from Ireland with a colleague who had been teaching at the same institution
she plays the accordion and had paid for a bag and put a small accordion in her suitcase surrounded by clothes , her bag was the correct weight.
So when we get to checking in the bag they ask to look inside,
"that's a musical instrument" they say
"that'll be £50 please"

Given that in my world more or less anything could be a musical instrument does that mean that it's perfectly legitimate for a company to make up an abitrary rule that says that I should have to pay for thinking this ?

[ahinton]

To return to banks, I agree that charging self-employed customers with small businesses for services where the same bank would not charge personal customers is indeed a rip-off; however, increasing numbers of banks are now beginning to charge those personal customers in the same way as they've been charging small business customers so, although that might be seen as spreading the rip-off charging culture, it is at least starting to get to be a little more of a level playing field. Of course those basic banking services cannot be provided to any customers without involving costs which someone somewhere has to meet if those services are to be maintained; that said, the standard of service offered to customers by most retail banks leaves a very great deal to be desired.

[ahinton]

Thinking about this again I remembered something that has parallels

If you want to take a musical instrument on Ryanair you pay a special fee (£50)
a few years ago I was travelling back from Ireland with a colleague who had been teaching at the same institution
she plays the accordion and had paid for a bag and put a small accordion in her suitcase surrounded by clothes , her bag was the correct weight.
So when we get to checking in the bag they ask to look inside,
"that's a musical instrument" they say
"that'll be £50 please"

Given that in my world more or less anything could be a musical instrument does that mean that it's perfectly legitimate for a company to make up an abitrary rule that says that I should have to pay for thinking this ?

I'd thought (perhaps incorrectly) that Ryanair charged for carrying musical instruments only if they were being carried by customers in addition to, rather than as pat of, the airline's cabin baggage allowance; could you confirm this one way or the other? Whilst I'm no fan of Ryanair, which is often quite justifiably the butt of both jokes and complaints, it has to be said that it is by no means the only airline ever to have sought to make life expensive and difficult for people carrying musical instruments.

[MrGongGong]

I'd thought (perhaps incorrectly) that Ryanair charged for carrying musical instruments only if they were being carried by customers in addition to, rather than as pat of, the airline's cabin baggage allowance; could you confirm this one way or the other? Whilst I'm no fan of Ryanair, which is often quite justifiably the butt of both jokes and complaints, it has to be said that it is by no means the only airline ever to have sought to make life expensive and difficult for people carrying musical instruments.

Sadly not
They will try it on as I described
You can , of course, book a seat for a cello etc (but you don't get any baggage allowance with that )
I think (as with banks and the self employed) they "know" that all musicians are so wealthy that they are fair game

[ahinton]

Sadly not
They will try it on as I described
You can , of course, book a seat for a cello etc (but you don't get any baggage allowance with that )
I think (as with banks and the self employed) they "know" that all musicians are so wealthy that they are fair game

Ah, so that's it! I don't fly with Ryanair very often but, when I do, I ought perhaps to be thankful that I am a composer rather than a performer and I've certainly never been charged extra for carrying a score that falls within their baggage allowance. Mon Dieu! - what do they do about conductors' batons, one wonders?...

[MrGongGong]

Ah, so that's it! I don't fly with Ryanair very often but, when I do, I ought perhaps to be thankful that I am a composer rather than a performer and I've certainly never been charged extra for carrying a score that falls within their baggage allowance. Mon Dieu! - what do they do about conductors' batons, one wonders?...

I think they could get you for the score though

http://www.schirmer.com/default.aspx?tabId=2420&State_2874=2&workId_2874=33579