How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:30 am

One quarter of Brits could only afford Christmas this year by borrowing money, and the coming year is unlikely to see an easing-off of tight household budgets, a survey has found.

One third of people surveyed by consumer group Which? said they had to dip into savings to pay for the festive period, taking an average of £450.

And 40% of those said they needed to use credit to pay for food.

Which? found nearly half of the 2,000 people surveyed expect their budgets to be squeezed even harder in 2014 than 2013.

Less than one third (29%) of those asked expect their family's financial situation to improve in 2014 - and after a string of price hike announcements by energy firms, three-fifths (60%) of consumers said they are already "dreading" the cost of their winter fuel bill.

Which? found that 30 to 49-year-olds used more credit than other age groups, with those who borrowed taking on debts of around £490 to pay for Christmas compared with the average of £350.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/28/christmas-shoppers-had-to-borrow_n_4512639.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

I have posted this for a reason, lets see if it can be figured out with the point I am always making and what has been missed out from the survey!

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:14 pm

PhilDidge wrote:One quarter of Brits could only afford Christmas this year by borrowing money, and the coming year is unlikely to see an easing-off of tight household budgets, a survey has found.

One third of people surveyed by consumer group Which? said they had to dip into savings to pay for the festive period, taking an average of £450.

And 40% of those said they needed to use credit to pay for food.

Which? found nearly half of the 2,000 people surveyed expect their budgets to be squeezed even harder in 2014 than 2013.

Less than one third (29%) of those asked expect their family's financial situation to improve in 2014 - and after a string of price hike announcements by energy firms, three-fifths (60%) of consumers said they are already "dreading" the cost of their winter fuel bill.

Which? found that 30 to 49-year-olds used more credit than other age groups, with those who borrowed taking on debts of around £490 to pay for Christmas compared with the average of £350.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/28/christmas-shoppers-had-to-borrow_n_4512639.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

I have posted this for a reason, lets see if it can be figured out with the point I am always making and what has been missed out from the survey!

Slightly confused by a few of the figures there - it says "one third had to dip in to savings" then "and 40% of those said they needed to use credit to pay for food"

Does it mean 40% of those who dipped in to savings used credit or 40% of people in the survey?

Also, the issue of heating bills is of course quite huge in the UK - people really do need to tackle this by wearing more clothing.

Another point i'd like to make is that the younger people in the UK really are going to suffer so much more than those who are already over 50. We are going to suffer unthinkable austerity in years to come - it pains me to hear others whinge and ask for more money.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:28 pm

...I have never borrowed money for years Didge, I'm just lucky I don't have to, we pay all our kids Christmas presses ourselves and our mother's give the kids money to spend ...

For the people who do borrow money to pay for their kids Christmas , it's their only option as they are so cash strapped and will most likely never have hundreds of pounds at any one time, so rather than not give their kids a Christmas, this is the only way they can make it happen...

And don't tell me everyone can save money up, those on benefits don't even have enough for life's necessities, let alone hundreds of pounds for Christmas.

I'm not going to get drawn into another ' pick on the poor and sneer at them', your like an obsessed wee laddie full of hatred towards these poor folk, picking on them with nearly very post you make.

And please stop pretending your something special Didge.

You know something didge, a couple of my mates are hardcore fund raisers for sick and poor children, my mate Charlie in particular is constantly raising money in Ninewells hospital , Dundee for sick kids and also raising money for the needy, like buying people a car to go back and forward to see their seriously ill child in hospital in Edinburgh.

My brother was also a fundraiser, walking the west highland way often,and me and my wife donate money to cash for kids on radio Tay.

You are much of what I loathe in a person Didge...selfish, uncaring, not understanding, sneering at poor people and their kids, picking on the poor and most vulnerable and sick.

We are not so much doing much fundraising by way of events, but we regularly donate to children's charities...and annually we give a large payment, well it's large to us.

Anyway...here is one of my mates Charlie Kean....

http://www.4children.org.uk/Page/Scotland-Family-Hero---Charlie-Kean

http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/news/local/charlie-kean-hopes-to-make-dundee-s-kids-smile-this-christmas-1.153485

http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/news/local/dundee-folk-rally-to-help-sick-tot-1.136872

Many of you RW lot make me feel sick, picking in poor and Ill children.

While BA does have a go at the idle , I very much doubt he would mock sick and poor children.

You truly have no morals Didge and your posts picking in these folk are nauseating.

Stop picking on vulnerable families who are ill, poor or both, a real RW trait, and nobody is impressed ...

Bar your ilk.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:36 pm

I'm gonna stick up for Didge here JD - not in the way you think though.

I very much doubt Didge hates poor people. I don't and i'm absolutely positive he doesn't.

This is a political thing, and a moral one that he is arguing. At some points, so are you, and at others you bring in hatred - you say that others hate the poor.

We could put the odd article up about millionaires and celebrities going bankrupt - they are just as useless with their money and just as greedy. I too could go spending too much - so could you, but we don't - not because we are rolling in money but because we spend what we have.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:49 pm

BigAndy9 wrote:I'm gonna stick up for Didge here JD - not in the way you think though.

I very much doubt Didge hates poor people. I don't and i'm absolutely positive he doesn't.

This is a political thing, and a moral one that he is arguing. At some points, so are you, and at others you bring in hatred - you say that others hate the poor.

We could put the odd article up about millionaires and celebrities going bankrupt - they are just as useless with their money and just as greedy. I too could go spending too much - so could you, but we don't - not because we are rolling in money but because we spend what we have.

..of course we spend money we have on our kids Andy, but I'm not a millionaire butting feels GOOD to give to others who are so needy , like very sick children, they never asked to be sick Andy, so we give what we can, and it's a fairly regular thing, we, along with many others in the Tayside area either pledge services or donate money to radio Tay's cash for kids...

And we love doing it as it makes someone's day or at very least, helps them with something, be it a trip abroad for a terminally ill child, or a child's favourite toy...

There is a whole list of the things it can cover Andy, like an electric scooter for a bairn who can't walk.

It's not always about how much we give Andy...but the very fact that we give something...even a wee bit of money can go a long way when added to the rest.

I'm sorry Andy, but Didge's posts are getting more ridiculous by the day and constantly pick on the sick and poor.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:54 pm

Joy Division wrote:

And don't tell me everyone can save money up, those on benefits don't even have enough for life's necessities, let alone hundreds of pounds for Christmas.

Oh bollocks JD

I am on benefits and I have more than enough for lifes necessities if you count necessities as enough food to remain healthy, enough protection against the elements to remain healthy, and treatment to hold whatever health conditions are a problem at bay as best as we are able. I can do way more than those necessities - I can choose from a range of food, I live in a whole house not a single room and keep it warm enough to wear ordinary winter clothing. Beyond that add car, internet, travel, socializing etc and I can save around £5 a week.

It is not "necessary" to spend hundreds on Christmas it is choice and people can make the choice whether to do it or how to do it - and should expect to live with the consequences of those decisions if they are unpleasant.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:00 pm

sphinx wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

And don't tell me everyone can save money up, those on benefits don't even have enough for life's necessities, let alone hundreds of pounds for Christmas.

Oh bollocks JD

I am on benefits and I have more than enough for lifes necessities if you count necessities as enough food to remain healthy, enough protection against the elements to remain healthy, and treatment to hold whatever health conditions are a problem at bay as best as we are able. I can do way more than those necessities - I can choose from a range of food, I live in a whole house not a single room and keep it warm enough to wear ordinary winter clothing. Beyond that add car, internet, travel, socializing etc and I can save around £5 a week.

It is not "necessary" to spend hundreds on Christmas it is choice and people can make the choice whether to do it or how to do it - and should expect to live with the consequences of those decisions if they are unpleasant.

Ah...But you are probably in the support group or in the WRAC group at present and are not having to rely on £70 a week?

You certainly couldn't do all of what you describe above on £70 a week.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:11 pm

...I don't believe you Sphinx, how the hell can you possibly run a car and all the necessities from £70 a week....car insurance, fuel! not , road tax.

We run two cars Sphinx, and there is absolute,TY no way we could even run one of them from£70 a week..as well as a house, gas and electric, food, clothing et etc...

NO WAY!!!!not even close.

Do you get any help with rent and CT?

And I clearly remember your way of keeping warm, you and BA's theory that ,regardless of how cold it is, we can all wear a jumper and be as snug as bug, that is just utter tosh , that is when it becomes dangerous for children and elderly especially to go without proper hearing, they start getting not well...

Don't tell me a jumper or even a coat is sufficient for kids without any source of hearing if the temperature is say...minus -10.

Your just making things up so you can say...' Oh I can do it,so everyone can' .

Don't try with that with me again.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:20 pm

And to claim that because one gets by easily enough on £70 , certainly does not mean the same for everyone else..it's like saying we all have the same size of feet.

Please remember that some parents are single parents with a brood of several kids at the one household ..

Does your partner who lives with you not have a source of income Sphinx?

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:23 pm

Oh so we are going to go for the old £70 a week fiction are we?

That is the amount a single person gets and I am part of a couple with one child.

However £70 is sufficient to meet the necessities of adequate food, adequate protection for a single person. A car is not a necessity. Neither is a whole house. Nor is endless choice of food. Nor is central heating.

As for clothing - well when I was child we had no central heating and experienced temperatures that low. Nobody claimed just a jumper or coat was sufficient - what was sufficient was several layers to go out and collect wood and other combustible stuff, to burn in a proper fire place plus the going to bed fully clothed and sharing a bed with siblings.

I do not just say I did it I say every one of our ancestors did it - and JD your ancestors did it more than mine cause you are from Scotland. If our ancestors did without things then those things are not necessities for us.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:25 pm

Joy Division wrote:And to claim that because one gets by easily enough on £70 , certainly does not mean the same for everyone else..it's like saying we all have the same size of feet.

Please remember that some parents are single parents with a brood of several kids at the one household ..

Does your partner who lives with you not have a source of income Sphinx?

The single parent with the brood of kids gets more than £70 JD - they get around £80 a week for the first child and £73 for each subsequent child.

Yes my partner lives with me - he is my carer. No he does not have a source of income.

by nicko Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:40 pm

£80 a week for the first child, £73 for the second. your way off there mate first child £23 a week all other kids £13 my daughter would be well off if that were true!!

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:45 pm

Sphinx and Andy are getting my point, but more to the point what did this survey even ask people. of the 40% Andy this would be of those who sought credit for food out of the quarter that needed to borrow, but does it say what they spent on gifts and that they needed money because they had over spent?

No of course not, thus a survey is already leaning to one side to promote a distorted view and claims by the Joy with stupidity to claim I hate the poor shows how desperate some posters are when debating when they only have this to accuse people with when there is no evidence, it shows they are nothing more than imbeciles to claim such false hoods.

Now again what is telling from this survey, people have borrowed and spent £450 on what exactly for Christmas? Was it needed or necessary? Ask yourself these points, I grew up where sometimes on Christmas we made presents for each other, but as shown here people place more on living beyond there means. If you cannot afford to spend at Christmas, then you do not spend money you do not have, this point is the main reality of today, as did the survey ask if they really needed to borrow in the first place

This is why such questions asked can be misleading as they leave so much out and then can form such a distorted picture, but one thing this proves of which I keep saying is that people will live beyond their means. Yes we would all like presents at Christmas, but you reign in what you need to spend, as if giving and spending money to buy presets is more important than food on the table then there is something drastically wrong with the beliefs people have and this is what is being missed here.

A good example is both Sphinx and Costa, have little income but manage their money well and they do not live beyond their means, yes it is tough, but they also do not even ask for more, as they make do well with what they have. The fact this is lost on some lefties is they allow emotions to get the better of clear thinking. The reality is here and a very good point is why even would you need to spend £450 on Christmas. This was the average of a certain age group, seriously that is enough money to feed a family of four for nearly two months. Yes we would all like to splash out but if you cannot, then you are an idiot to borrow, if it places you in an even worse situation.

I certainly rest my case on people being irresponsible with money

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:56 pm

Single parent gets £70(ish) a week Income support plus £20(ish) child benefit for first child £13(ish) for subsequent children plus £60(ish) per child, child tax credits.

Those working may get less child tax credits depending on earnings but may also get get working tax credits.

I live this life - I am dependent on benefits due to health and live on a street of social housing where there is a fair cut of lower income society. As I still have a working brain some of the time and have had issues with the benefits system myself I act as a sort of unofficial benefits advisor and I have basic benefits rates tattooed on the inside of my skull.

I am fed up of people who have no experience of this life trying to make out every benefit claimant is a hard done by abused victim because it is an insult and worse it makes things worse. For every low income person getting into financial trouble there are others managing on the same amount or less without problems. There is not an unlimited supply of money to keep giving more to those who do not manage - and who still do not manage if you give them even more money. They system is not perfect and does have its problems but making victims out of poor people and throwing more money at it is not going to help. What would help would be money management courses and proper debt support for all those getting into trouble.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:00 pm

sphinx wrote:Single parent gets £70(ish) a week Income support plus £20(ish) child benefit for first child £13(ish) for subsequent children plus £60(ish) per child, child tax credits.

Those working may get less child tax credits depending on earnings but may also get get working tax credits.

I live this life - I am dependent on benefits due to health and live on a street of social housing where there is a fair cut of lower income society. As I still have a working brain some of the time and have had issues with the benefits system myself I act as a sort of unofficial benefits advisor and I have basic benefits rates tattooed on the inside of my skull.

I am fed up of people who have no experience of this life trying to make out every benefit claimant is a hard done by abused victim because it is an insult and worse it makes things worse. For every low income person getting into financial trouble there are others managing on the same amount or less without problems. There is not an unlimited supply of money to keep giving more to those who do not manage - and who still do not manage if you give them even more money. They system is not perfect and does have its problems but making victims out of poor people and throwing more money at it is not going to help. What would help would be money management courses and proper debt support for all those getting into trouble.

Excellent post with now you and Costa and Gelico saying the exact same thing, the reality is lost on those trying to make poor political arguments, because they are not in touch with the real world.
Your last sentence hits the nail on the head of which I have been saying all along helping people manage their money, except the lefties don't want to look at the real reasons, they choose only to seek to blame, why their heads are buried in the sand

Have a big thanks as well deserved

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:06 pm

@Sphinx...if you really think everyone has the exact same circumstances as you then you are not seeing the bigger picture...

Does everyone have the same size of feet?

Your posts are as usual to appease the RW on here, you certainly do not speak for everyone on benefits.complete baah's.

Don't tell me that a quilt and coat are enough to keep out the elements when they dip way below minus...a house GATHERS cold of there is no source of heating switched on.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:09 pm

Joy Division wrote:@Sphinx...if you really think everyone has the exact same circumstances as you then you are not seeing the bigger picture...

Does everyone have the same size of feet?

Your posts are as usual to appease the RW on here, you certainly do not speak for everyone on benefits.complete baah's.

Don't tell ema quilt and coat are enough to keep out the elements when they dip way below minus...a house GATHERS cold of there is no source of heating.

Still not grasping this are you Joy, no not every situation is the same but people on low incomes can be very sensible with their money which is lost on you.

So you tell me, why does someone need to splash out £450 on Christmas if you don't have the money?
Why place yourself in more financial difficulty, when there is no need to?

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:12 pm

..but not everyone does that Didge, as they have not the fiancé stoo.

Tour blaming everyone on benefits for being irresponsible when in fact they are not, your using examples of the few who act irresponsibly.

I speak for the majority who are not irresponsible, it's all someone else's fault is it Didge...the poor, disabled and unemployed.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:15 pm

Joy Division wrote:..but not everyone does that Didge, as they have not the fiancé stoo.

Tour blaming everyone on benefits for being irresponsible when in fact they are not, your using examples of the few who act irresponsibly.

I speak for the majority who are not irresponsible, it's all someone else's fault is it Didge...the poor, disabled and unemployed.

that does not answer any of my points, as seen many people 60% of them borrowed money not for food, and of those who did, how much did they spend on presents, which they did not need to buy?
Sometimes you have to go without luxuries, because that is all presents are is luxuries.

Again I have made no mention of people on benefits, so you again make up a lie to say I am blaming only people on benefits, when I never did, then bring up disabled, unemployed ect etc the usual poor tactic of the left, when this is about anyone not sensible with there money, not what status they are

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:18 pm

Joy Division wrote:@Sphinx...if you really think everyone has the exact same circumstances as you then you are not seeing the bigger picture...

Does everyone have the same size of feet?

Your posts are as usual to appease the RW on here, you certainly do not speak for everyone on benefits.complete baah's.

Don't tell me that a quilt and coat are enough to keep out the elements when they dip way below minus...a house GATHERS cold of there is no source of heating switched on.

JD how the hell did your ancestors survive without central heating, cars, and hundreds of pounds of disposable income?

You accuse didge of hating the poor - it is actually you who treat us with hate by your insistence we cannot possibly cope or manage unless the big rich people do it for us. The insistence that the poor cannot cope on their own just saps any pride and ability to cope they do have.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:20 pm

Sphinx..and the others who label the unemployed in general as workshy...

Years back Sphinx, there were far more people populating this earth, so fewer jobs were needed,and those ancestors you mention had extremely tough lives and many died young as a result of the dangers of their jobs,,,

If you mean going back before civilisation, well I can't offer much on that as none of us know exactly how every family operated, though I suspect it was every man/woman for themselves ...whoever was the better hunter I guess, possibly with the best made hunting tools and steady hand..of course nobody had cars and computers back then, but that is just technology in general, times and people move with technology.

I would like to ask you a question if you will...

In YOUR opinion ,would you say that everyone on every type of benefit in this country are receiving enough to live on adequately?, let alone a decent quality of life?

Just a simple yes or no, please, no long stories, of course tou do not have to answer if you would rather not.

Yes or no?

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:26 pm

I would say that according to the rules everyone should be receiving enough to live adequately.

I would say that the rules are not always applied correctly but this is relatively rare.

I would say decent quality of life is not a financial measure - one person can have the money to live adequately and have a perfectly decent quality of life another can have double that money and have an awful quality of life.

I would ask why should benefits be expected to pay more than is necessary to live on adequately.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:33 pm

Joy Division wrote:Sphinx..and the others who label the unemployed in general as workshy...
Do we? I think that is you bringing that up as usual, the tactic of the left, tell a lie and hope people will believe it

Years back Sphinx, there were far more people populating this earth, so fewer jobs were needed,and those ancestors you mention had extremely tough lives and many died young as a result of the dangers of their jobs,,,
://?roflmao?/: What planet are you on, far more people were on the planet? And fewer jobs were needed?
://?roflmao?/: Those ancestors dealt with the situation at hand, something you are missing here, now did they spend beyond their means on things that were luxuries? No

If you mean going back before civilisation, well I can't offer much on that as none of us know exactly how every family operated, though I suspect it was every man/woman for themselves ...whoever was the better hunter I guess, possibly with the best made hunting tools and steady hand..of course nobody had cars and computers back then, but that is just technology in general, times and people move with technology.
Again what a poor perception you have, as if it was every person for themselves why did not only early humans and Neanderthals bury their dead with dignity and love?

I would like to ask you a question if you will...

In YOUR opinion ,would you say that everyone on every type of benefit in this country are receiving enough to live on adequately?, let alone a decent quality of life?
Yes, as how much money do you need to be happy? Nothing, money does not bring happiness. How much money does someone need to live happy?

Just a simple yes or no, please, no long stories, of course tou do not have to answer if you would rather not.

Yes or no?

The fact you ignore that many people can live happily on low incomes, shows you make the worst excuses for those who do not, you seek to insult them further by the fact you ignore that they are responsible for their own money and it is how they choose to seek to spend it. The problem with you lefties, is you look to blame and not look for any rational understanding. I am blaming no poor or any group, I am showing you the realism of the world, that people fall prey to wanting many things beyond their real needs

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:35 pm

..ah Dodge, not even a simple yes or no..just more blaming those ' awful lefties' as usual.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:38 pm

Joy Division wrote:..ah Dodge, not even a simple yes or no..just more blaming those ' awful lefties' as usual.

A stupid question do you not mean, when as seen you cast poor accusations on people on things they have never said and again read my answer I said yes clearly that they can manage, as seen by others that do, there will only be a few exceptions, but by and large people can.

Jesus, stop being so desperate in your counters, you rely on playing the guilt trip in people and blaming them for things they have not done, I am showing you that there is a problem today, one which you ignore, that is burying your head in the sand

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:43 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
Joy Division wrote:..ah Dodge, not even a simple yes or no..just more blaming those ' awful lefties' as usual.

A stupid question do you not mean, when as seen you cast poor accusations on people on things they have never said and again read my answer I said yes clearly that they can manage, as seen by others that do, there will only be a few exceptions, but by and large people can.

Jesus, stop being so desperate in your counters, you rely on playing the guilt trip in people and blaming them for things they have not done, I am showing you that there is a problem today, one which you ignore, that is burying your head in the sand

..I've not blamed anyone, bar this government for its OTT austerity measure, your the one blaming the poor, disabled and unemployed as usual.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:46 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
Joy Division wrote:..ah Dodge, not even a simple yes or no..just more blaming those ' awful lefties' as usual.

A stupid question do you not mean, when as seen you cast poor accusations on people on things they have never said and again read my answer I said yes clearly that they can manage, as seen by others that do, there will only be a few exceptions, but by and large people can.

Jesus, stop being so desperate in your counters, you rely on playing the guilt trip in people and blaming them for things they have not done, I am showing you that there is a problem today, one which you ignore, that is burying your head in the sand

...no,it's not a stupid question, and it's one you should be able to answer easily.

Your always spouting about the poor and unemployed borrowing money they can't pay and claiming that all unemployed and poor working folk earn or take in enough money to manage well, so you can answer it, bit I think your afraid to give a straight answer to my question,

Yer erse is wobbling laddie, be sure you can back up all the things you claim.

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:47 pm

I told you...a straight yes or no, or anything else is just another diversion...

I'm waiting Didge...

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:48 pm

How many times do I have to say yes?

3 times?

PMSL

by Guest Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:53 pm

Joy Division wrote:I told you...a straight yes or no, or anything else is just another diversion...

I'm waiting Didge...

Asking for a straight yes or no answer to those questions is like asking for a straight yes or no to the question "JD do you still beat your wife?" Yes or no answer only please.

by Sponsored content

How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds

Re: How Did You Pay For Christmas? One Quarter Needed To Borrow Money, Which? Finds