The crisis had differential impact based on the age and income of the people. There was an overall negative cash flow that led to detriment of the situation. The most impact that the people felt was the insecurity of the cash flow. The people felt that the banking crisis would eventually cause them to lose their employment. Added to this, the public sector had been in pressure to cut spending. This invariably led to the less employment opportunities (Buiter, 2007). The salary package that was offered to the people was also less. There was a state retrenchment act that was found to be in place after the autumn of 2008. It was evident that the British taxpayers were to pay for the bailout. Every one of the public services was found to be in a state of insecurity and this decreased spending led to cut back of the services. There were higher taxes for the people, resulting in the lower disposable income. There was a general cut back in spending. The increased anxiety and concern was evident.
The British citizens were the ones who were affected most in this process. Some of the households might have been affected marginally and others were found to be affected. There was institutional resilience. This was found to be echoed in all the actions of the people. The number of people who were unemployed was found to be higher . The impact of this recession was found to be more profound than that of the Great Depression. There was a pervasive negative impact that the banking crisis had caused to the people.
In this system, there was a loss in the revenue of the people. To compensate for the loss, the people started to take additional work as the employee. The number of working hours’ changes and the people seemed to have no prospects。