Share this page:
Stay connected:
Welcome to the Citywire Money Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

Economic Growth-Are lunatics running the economy?
Recently Redundant and Retired
Posted: 19 February 2014 20:56:38(UTC)

Joined: 08/03/2011(UTC)
Posts: 302

Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 140 time(s) in 71 post(s)
One (of many) politician I cannot abide is Jack Straw, he blighted many a young life with his "zero tolerance" meaning young people had to carry the burden of innocuous police cautions into adult life as a criminal record. Straw was caught with his hand in the till and brushed it away as an error, not even the decency to resign.
Those young adults still carry the stigma thrust on them by Straw while Jack fiddles his expenses.
A truly evil hypocrite.
uphill swimmer
Posted: 19 February 2014 21:18:27(UTC)

Joined: 10/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 259

Thanks: 55 times
Was thanked: 119 time(s) in 77 post(s)
r r and r , agree fully on straw, milliband and balls cut fromsame cloth. Cameron , osborne alexander more interested in taking practical steps than self promotion , call me green but they seem decent human beings doing a thankless job competently, time will tell.
sandid3
Posted: 20 February 2014 09:52:29(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."

The above Ronald Reagan quote was one of the stock claims in Mitt Romney’s campaign against Obama in 2012. But Romney’s chances were finally sunk when Hurricane Sandy hit New Jersey and the rightwing governor Chris Christie had to ask Obama for government help. Obama won by a landslide.

It’s not much of a jump to see the UK floods and the culpability and incompetence of Cameron et al as sinking any chance of a Tory win in 2015. It was always whistling in the dark to hope voters would re-elect a government they didn’t vote for in the first place. But, next time, voters will want a government that protects their interests rather than one intent on dismantling all protection. Just wait until the scandal of insurance companies not paying for flood damage hits the headlines. Cameron’s is now a lame duck government (no pun intended).

So, after all the bullying over the currency, Scots can happily vote Yes in September, safe in the knowledge they won’t be negotiating with Cameron and Osborne just a few months later.

(And yes, IMHO Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Iain Duncan Smith should all be behind bars for their behaviour over Iraq and much that has happened since).
Clive B
Posted: 20 February 2014 14:42:54(UTC)

Joined: 25/11/2010(UTC)
Posts: 508

Thanks: 225 times
Was thanked: 172 time(s) in 100 post(s)
@ sandid3

Doesn't matter which party is in power, there's no way the remaining UK (rUK, the UK minus Scotland) will agree to stand behind Scottish debt. Why would rUK agree to a one-way deal, where rUK is big enough to guarantee Scottish debt, but the reverse isn't true.

(As to Cameron/Osbourne being in power. With the - more left leaning - Scottish votes gone, the Conservatives would gain an advantage in a rUK election. Suspect those on the right in the rUK would think Scotland leaving was Christmas come early).

Back to the debt, what cards does Scotland have to play? All I've heard is their threat to walk away from their share of the current UK national debt, but
a) the UK have already said they guarantee the whole amount.
b) how much is it ? I've heard a figure of £45bn mentioned. If so, that's only about 6 months of UK debt, hardly a reason to guarantee Scottish debt for decades to come.
c) be interesting to see how Scotland would fare with their "we'll walk away from our debt" response when trying to issue their own government bonds.

I'm in favour of countries being in control of their own destiny, so I support the idea of a Scottish referendum. However, if they want to be independent (and I say "best of luck", genuinely), that's what they'll be - independent.

Of course, they can always use sterling, or some currency at a fixed exchange rate to sterling, without the BoE guarantee. Many countries do that. Sometimes works, sometimes doesn't
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 20 February 2014 21:05:50(UTC)

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,294

Thanks: 85 times
Was thanked: 213 time(s) in 128 post(s)
Recently redundant and retired

You don't get the job of Home Secretary without being an evil fascist lunatic. The Tories and their mirror images in New Labour learned that lesson from Roy Jenkins, the last halfway decent human being to hold that office.

On the subject of Scottish independence, Cameron intervened precisely to encourage a yes vote. The average Scot loathes the Tories as much as I do. If Cameron came out against eating babies, we would wonder what were the hidden moral advantages to so doing.
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 20 February 2014 21:15:46(UTC)

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,294

Thanks: 85 times
Was thanked: 213 time(s) in 128 post(s)
Uphill Swimmer

Forcing people to work as slave labourers doubtless appeals to those who believe that the state (i.e. all taxpayers) should subsidise business to enable the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. Are you a Daily Mail reader?
Arbeit Macht Frei

uphill swimmer
Posted: 20 February 2014 22:11:35(UTC)

Joined: 10/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 259

Thanks: 55 times
Was thanked: 119 time(s) in 77 post(s)
jeremy, very perceptive. does it show? the majority of people in this world are in truth slave labourers and always have been. its better than the alternative of life of dependancy,in all its forms. its something a priviliged , educated hypocritical few will never experience,appreiciate or admit to.its easy to sneer on the the sidelines while picking up the rewards for other peoples sweat.your views on cameron echo peter hitchens , areyou sure your not a fellow devotee?
sandid3
Posted: 21 February 2014 10:39:43(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
Clive B;23266 wrote:
I'm in favour of countries being in control of their own destiny, so I support the idea of a Scottish referendum. However, if they want to be independent (and I say "best of luck", genuinely), that's what they'll be - independent.

Clive, after Scotland has voted for independence, what do you think the new UK government of 2015 will do about it? Will they try to hold Scotland enslaved to London or will they negotiate a fair deal? I think it’s pretty obvious they will have to negotiate.

There’s talk of debt sharing but what about the unfair revenue sharing of the £270bn taken by UK Treasury over the past forty years?

Take a look at the map of Scotland’s maritime area in this article from the BBC. It’s huge:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/new...tland-politics-20042070

As a retired geophysicist I can tell you the potential for Scotland is enormous.

What the London press and politicians want to suppress is the fact that an independent Scotland will be an enormous success – economically, socially and culturally. Scotland will have low borrowing costs and attract massive foreign investment.

From Scotland’s success will come demands for a federal system of regional independence in the rest of the UK - also with great potential (thanks to shale gas). The big losers here are in London. Elsewhere, everyone’s a winner.
Clive B
Posted: 21 February 2014 11:15:33(UTC)

Joined: 25/11/2010(UTC)
Posts: 508

Thanks: 225 times
Was thanked: 172 time(s) in 100 post(s)
sandid3

I expect the rUK government to negotiate a fair deal, as they see it, not as the Scots see it.

Maybe an independent Scotland will be successful, but I wouldn't expect the rUK government to sign up for currency union on that basis. The size of the economies are too unequal, plus it would be against the current UK stance - we didn't sign up for currency union with the EU (i.e the Euro), I can't see why we'd agree it with an independent Scotland. In fact, I think there's no chance of it, as it would be political suicide for any rUK party to do so.

If Scotland is going to be doing so well, one wonders why they're so keen on a currency union with the rUK guaranteeing Scottish debt.

Bit of searching the web suggests UK national debt to be £1.3 tn and the population of Scotland to be under 10% of that of the UK. Hence, if national debt was split by population percentage (rather than any other value, such as GDP), the Scottish share would be £130bn. That's only a bit more than one year's borrowing for the UK. I don't see that as much of a bargaining chip for Salmond. rUK could easily say "if not guaranteeing Scottish debt means we're responsible for the whole of the UK national debt, that's no big deal, we'll do that".
2 users thanked Clive B for this post.
Gill Pelosi on 21/02/2014(UTC), sandid3 on 22/02/2014(UTC)
sandid3
Posted: 22 February 2014 08:26:59(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
There’s no so thing as a debt with a repayment guarantee. As we saw recently, even the repayment of US government debt can come into question.

The main issue is whether a government can borrow or, more importantly, at what rate. As we’ve seen in Europe, governments with a debt problem can face having to pay an ‘unsustainable’ rate of 7%.

But the UK doesn’t have a government debt problem. If it did, the UK wouldn’t be able to roll over its debt at such low rates. The scare story about UK government debts is just a thin excuse for Tory attacks on the welfare state.

The UK, more specifically England, does have a problem with personal debt – as will become apparent when the negative equity effects start to bite after the bond market forces Carney to raise rates. Fortunately, Scotland doesn’t have a ‘property obsession’ problem to the same extent as England.

If some knuckleheaded London government in 2015 refuses a currency union, Scotland can create its own currency, the Scottish pound, and shadow the rUK pound as Ireland used to do. Of course that would take the City of London completely out of the picture.

As Greenspan said recently (when talking about Bitcoin); creating a currency is easy – even a very rich person could do it – it’s just about confidence the currency is backed by something.

Now where do you think a foreign government is going to want to diversify its foreign currency holdings into? Will it be Scottish debt backed by a stable government, society, legal and banking structure, a government surplus and trade surplus and backed by a steady stream of royalties? Or will it be London debt backed by an unstable government, an increasingly discredited financial sector, social unrest leading to increasingly draconian measures, a massive trade deficit and a collapsing property bubble? Currency union it is, then.
Clive B
Posted: 22 February 2014 10:12:51(UTC)

Joined: 25/11/2010(UTC)
Posts: 508

Thanks: 225 times
Was thanked: 172 time(s) in 100 post(s)
sandid3

Given your last paragraph, why is Salmond even contemplating currency union ? Seems like he should be saying "the more distance we have between Scotland and rUK, the better".
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 22 February 2014 16:13:04(UTC)

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,294

Thanks: 85 times
Was thanked: 213 time(s) in 128 post(s)
Uphill Swimmer

That you compare what is loosely called wage slavery with what occurred in the Nazi slave labour camps shows a complete divorce from reality. Which is no surprise in a reader of the Daily Mail, the paper that spent the 1930's proclaiming that, "What Britain needs is a Herr Hitler". Which statement it has neither apologised for, nor withdrawn in all the decades since.
uphill swimmer
Posted: 22 February 2014 18:23:40(UTC)

Joined: 10/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 259

Thanks: 55 times
Was thanked: 119 time(s) in 77 post(s)
Jeremy,slave labour is and has never been solely confined to the Nazis, I never mentioned them. also, I only read the daily mail briefly when I drop it off daily at my 98 year old nans, she enjoys the rum goings on. I will ask her to change to the guardian. unfortunately I had to google the german slogan, a poor education, but take away the fact it was hijacked by a band of lunatics then I wholly agree with it. its difficult to take the moral high ground when you admit to making your living off the proceeds of investments in a Russian facist state, pharma companies who bribe doctors to zombify the population, financial lawyers , property companies and bookmakers, other tan that I envy your turn of phrase and writng style. lighten up Jeremy the country is on the up, put a bottle in the fridge and get ready to toast George and Daniel , the best weve had in my lifetime.
sandid3
Posted: 23 February 2014 08:13:31(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
Godwin's law states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."

The end.
3 users thanked sandid3 for this post.
uphill swimmer on 23/02/2014(UTC), Clive B on 23/02/2014(UTC), JohnW on 23/02/2014(UTC)
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 23 February 2014 14:54:06(UTC)

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,294

Thanks: 85 times
Was thanked: 213 time(s) in 128 post(s)
Sandid3

To ignore the fact that Nazi sympathisers run this country is naive in the extreme. Just look at the way the DWP treats the sick and disabled. To believe that many readers of the Daily Mail are unaware of its evil associations is also naive.

In the interests of equal opportunities: Blair is also owned by the Terrorist States of America.
sandid3
Posted: 24 February 2014 10:57:49(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
Jeremy Bosk;23314 wrote:
Just look at the way the DWP treats the sick and disabled.

For DWP read IDS (Iain Duncan Smith).

For just how nasty this individual is, look no further than his Wikipedia entry: “In November 2001, he was one of the first politicians to call for an invasion of Iraq and held talks in Washington, DC, with senior US officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz”. IDS was leader of the opposition (or cheerleader of the opposition) during the vote to invade Iraq in 2003.

There’s no doubt IDS stands for the swivel-eyed wing of the Tories. These people want to turn back the clock - as if Churchill had won the 1945 election and had taken the country back to the 1930s of a privileged elite and frightened underclass. IDS’s attack on the welfare state is a complete betrayal of the generation that won the war and created a welfare state that has served ordinary people so well.

You don’t need to use the ‘N’ word about the likes of IDS; their own behaviour condemns them.

The question is what to do about it. In my view, the London 'system' is the problem and is now irrecoverable. Ideally the rest of the UK should eject London as an independent state. But since that option won’t appear on a ballot, the only answer is to strip authority from London and hand it to the regions in a federal system.

It’s not just Scotland; the 20 million people in the North of England would be much better off with a Parliament of the North. You can see how things are going with this article from Jim O’Neill:
Could merging Liverpool and Manchester boost UK growth?
Micawber
Posted: 28 February 2014 19:19:54(UTC)

Joined: 27/01/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,797

Thanks: 796 times
Was thanked: 2688 time(s) in 1018 post(s)
"UK public debt to rise by over 100 billion pounds due to data changes" (Reuters)

I say, chaps, that's a bit steep. I hope my broker doesn't get the same idea....
sandid3
Posted: 02 March 2014 10:01:03(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
Highly recommended in the Observer today:-

Cities chief Jim O'Neill's tip for a prosperous Britain: devolve to the north
The ex-Goldman Sachs chief now heading a commission on cities says Westminster can no longer ignore the regions

- sandid3 (aka 'graphic').

Micawber
Posted: 02 March 2014 10:33:29(UTC)

Joined: 27/01/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,797

Thanks: 796 times
Was thanked: 2688 time(s) in 1018 post(s)
sandid3;23436 wrote:
Cities chief Jim O'Neill's tip for a prosperous Britain: devolve to the north
The ex-Goldman Sachs chief now heading a commission on cities says Westminster can no longer ignore the regions


I have to say that I always find Jim O'Neill long on platitude and soundbites, short on insight. In his current " great and good" role he has an obvious motive to sell regional interests, but whether Government handouts to regions will redress market shortcomings is questionable.

I agree with him on HS 2 though -a policy straight from the asylum.
sandid3
Posted: 02 March 2014 11:00:43(UTC)

Joined: 18/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 305

Thanks: 171 times
Was thanked: 384 time(s) in 156 post(s)
Hats off to Michael Heseltine, though; he started the ball rolling with his efforts under this government to have mayors for the regions. (He also has kudos up north for being the only one to help Liverpool under Thatcher). He must have come back with such a flea in his ear that the regions didn’t want some awful, northern, media-friendly version of Boris. What they wanted was independence and this is something towards it.
11 Pages«Previous page891011Next page
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets