USA Debt Crisis

[counter_violent]

Not long my schlong tho.

 

[Pazienza]

Not long my schlong tho.

Was (were) his ban(s) permanent, or is he returning like a Lazarus who just can't get enough?

 

[Doomberg]

Was (were) his ban(s) permanent, or is he returning like a Lazarus who just can't get enough?

Where is he, i want his schlong

 

[counter_violent]

Was (were) his ban(s) permanent, or is he returning like a Lazarus who just can't get enough?

I think the last one was permanent. Not as if he didn't get enough rope is it.

Anyway back on topic.

 

[Pazienza]

I think the last one was permanent. Not as if he didn't get enough rope is it.

Anyway back on topic.

True, he got enough rope to rig HMS Victory.

On topic:

The disturbing thing is Atilla's views are probably very common in Whitehall, and in local councils across the land. Be very afraid.

 

[iota]

Can't argue causes, but I can sure see the consequences. *whistles* look at those markets bomb.

 

[Atilla]

What I'm beating up is a bunch of local councils whose cash flow management was so bad that they were forced to offload a sh*tload of housing stock to plug revenue holes and to form sketchy quangos that brush liabilities right off of the balance sheet.
Instead of debating points you're once again reverting to spouting off ideals and trying to pigeon hole people into your silly black/white groups based on a few opinions when, as with all things in the real world, the reality is shades of grey.

For clarity's sake please tell me why you think the country will benefit from from increased welfare hand outs?

So let me get this clear. You are stating the cause and continuing issues we have are due to social services?


To answer your question; on both sides of the pond the US and the UK are trying to get

1. demand in the economy moving &
2. get banks lending to business again as before

Based on all the trillions of billions pumped in either via bailout or QE this hasn't materialised in the last 3-4 years. Has it?


Why do you think that is the case?

Because as per the BoE QE explanation outlined (as per link posted by NT) the transmission mechanism isn't taking a year or two. Not even three.

Reason is based on common sense.

A. Economic activity leads to increased frequency of transactions exchanged and thus increase in money supply.

B. Any freaking twit who thinks by increasing the supply of money via loose monetary policy one can get economic activity ie frequency of economic transactions going is well deluded to say the best. You can pull a string but pushing it is a whole different kettle of fish. You capiche?

I've been trying to figure out the transmission mechanism and other than a few wishy washy statements about replacing paper assets with liquid cash - will get big corporates to spend more money is a load of ********.

If there is no demand and stagnating economic activity why should business invest in expanding output capacity or produce more? You get the picture? Why should banks lend if the books don't add up?

The whole economics is screwed up and makes no freaking sense. All you so called experts and well reasoned and seasoned clever cloggs can obviously see what's right and what's wrong but I don't?


So when you give money to people who already have it they squander it on holidays and expensive purchase items like cars and boats more often than not made abroad so the Balance of Payments deteriates.

When you give money to nurses and dustmen and the low end of the society they spend it on essential items and what they need.

On balance if you want more demand you distribute money to those who don't have it so they can spend.

You give it to well endowed people in the hope they'll do something clever and invest - is just hoping on an ideal outcome which will not happen any time soon. When it does it will be because rest of global economy will finally pull out and we will follow.


Reason why Europe doing better than UK is because their labour and social policies prevent the mass unemployment and firing of staff for short term corporate gain. This is precisely why Germany, France and Italy are doing better than the UK.

Don't forget after Greece, UK is 2nd debtor nation in terms of GDP.

Now there is no socialism here just pure common sense. Cameron said he will keep front line services and better manage civil service without labours quangos.

What we are seeing is the reduction in front line services and having not renewed quangos contracts and after some redundancies news is out the Tory party have hired 3 times the number released.

So go figure the sums.

I'm getting tired of all you bright monkies - I've made my point. Time will tell and show the outcome of these short sighted, biased and skewed policies.


Life is a beach and then one drowns.

Enjoy the swim whilst it lasts.

 

[Pazienza]

I love this idea of just giving money to people who need it. In the first place they don't "need" it - most of the public sector is overpaid as it is. We know that because the country can't afford its wage bill, to say nothing of the vast other expenses involved in employing these people and the ridiculous and unfunded cost of their retirement provision.

Second, what happens if you do? You just get sh1ttier and sh1ttier services for a higher and higher cost. There is no market discipline in the public sector, which is why it's such a f***ing shambles.

So let me get this clear. You are stating the cause and continuing issues we have are due to social services?


To answer your question; on both sides of the pond the US and the UK are trying to get

1. demand in the economy moving &
2. get banks lending to business again as before

Based on all the trillions of billions pumped in either via bailout or QE this hasn't materialised in the last 3-4 years. Has it?


Why do you think that is the case?

Because as per the BoE QE explanation outlined (as per link posted by NT) the transmission mechanism isn't taking a year or two. Not even three.

Reason is based on common sense.

A. Economic activity leads to increased frequency of transactions exchanged and thus increase in money supply.

B. Any freaking twit who thinks by increasing the supply of money via loose monetary policy one can get economic activity ie frequency of economic transactions going is well deluded to say the best. You can pull a string but pushing it is a whole different kettle of fish. You capiche?

I've been trying to figure out the transmission mechanism and other than a few wishy washy statements about replacing paper assets with liquid cash - will get big corporates to spend more money is a load of ********.

If there is no demand and stagnating economic activity why should business invest in expanding output capacity or produce more? You get the picture? Why should banks lend if the books don't add up?

The whole economics is screwed up and makes no freaking sense. All you so called experts and well reasoned and seasoned clever cloggs can obviously see what's right and what's wrong but I don't?


So when you give money to people who already have it they squander it on holidays and expensive purchase items like cars and boats more often than not made abroad so the Balance of Payments deteriates.

When you give money to nurses and dustmen and the low end of the society they spend it on essential items and what they need.

On balance if you want more demand you distribute money to those who don't have it so they can spend.

You give it to well endowed people in the hope they'll do something clever and invest - is just hoping on an ideal outcome which will not happen any time soon. When it does it will be because rest of global economy will finally pull out and we will follow.


Reason why Europe doing better than UK is because their labour and social policies prevent the mass unemployment and firing of staff for short term corporate gain. This is precisely why Germany, France and Italy are doing better than the UK.

Don't forget after Greece, UK is 2nd debtor nation in terms of GDP.

Now there is no socialism here just pure common sense. Cameron said he will keep front line services and better manage civil service without labours quangos.

What we are seeing is the reduction in front line services and having not renewed quangos contracts and after some redundancies news is out the Tory party have hired 3 times the number released.

So go figure the sums.

I'm getting tired of all you bright monkies - I've made my point. Time will tell and show the outcome of these short sighted, biased and skewed policies.


Life is a beach and then one drowns.

Enjoy the swim whilst it lasts.

 

[Liquid validity]

This economic recovery will be slower and more difficult because both nations and (some) consumers are overladen with debt," Louise Cooper, market analyst at BGC Partners, said.

Repaying the loans will take longer and be more painful than we had previously anticipated. We are in a catch 22 situation, we desperately need growth to pay off the debt, but we cannot grow because of the amount of debt we owe.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/08/04/uk-markets-britain-stocks-idUKTRE7731WG20110804

Pretty much sums it up

 

[counter_violent]

Govt employees should be about 15% of the work force and the rest should be in the private sector doing something useful. As for the unemployables, they really ought to be doing something for their handout...there seems to be a line of thinking now that they would be a liability in the workplace, so better leave them be at home The easy option seems to be to get migrant workers in to do the jobs that aren't being covered. So essentially the govt cops out of the problem of dealing with the long term workshy unemployable. Quite how this is proper and affordable spending of my money by a succession of govt's who I didn't vote for is simply beyond me !

 

[Pazienza]

Govt employees should be about 15% of the work force and the rest should be in the private sector doing something useful. As for the unemployables, they really ought to be doing something for their handout...there seems to be a line of thinking now that they would be a liability in the workplace, so better leave them be at home The easy option seems to be to get migrant workers in to do the jobs that aren't being covered. So essentially the govt cops out of the problem of dealing with the long term workshy unemployable. Quite how this is proper and affordable spending of my money by a succession of govt's who I didn't vote for is simply beyond me !

 

[scose-no-doubt]

So let me get this clear. You are stating the cause and continuing issues we have are due to social services?
No I stated that is one of the problems, not the cause

To answer your question; on both sides of the pond the US and the UK are trying to get

1. demand in the economy moving &
To what level? previous demand was largely down to borrowing and reduced saving stemming from the old safe as houses they'll never lose value mentality that you're so fond of. How's that going down in the US?
We're in a new place atm where deleveraging and reducing gearing is the priority.
2. get banks lending to business again as before
Give me some figures showing that banks lending isn't meeting demand? Not that lending has slowed, that demand for isn't being met. I'm not saying it isn't but
doesn't look like companies are having any trouble raising capital to me

Based on all the trillions of billions pumped in either via bailout or QE this hasn't materialised in the last 3-4 years. Has it?
Sorry, can I just see your figures for how things would have been if QE didn't occur please.

Why do you think that is the case?

Because as per the BoE QE explanation outlined (as per link posted by NT) the transmission mechanism isn't taking a year or two. Not even three.

Reason is based on common sense.

A. Economic activity leads to increased frequency of transactions exchanged and thus increase in money supply.
Yes because people on welfare tend not to spend their disposable income on illicit goods (e.g. pirate movies as cinema is tres expensive) or on drugs or similar which don't find their way into the real economy. Anything "proper" that is bought is likely cheap and so will have been made abroad

B. Any freaking twit who thinks by increasing the supply of money via loose monetary policy one can get economic activity ie frequency of economic transactions going is well deluded to say the best. You can pull a string but pushing it is a whole different kettle of fish. You capiche?
What about giving the markets confidence? Isn't that what gets economic activity going? Knowing your bank isn't going to go bust with all your cash on deposit or not having to worry about your letters of credit being worth a piece of p*ss?

I've been trying to figure out the transmission mechanism and other than a few wishy washy statements about replacing paper assets with liquid cash - will get big corporates to spend more money is a load of ********.

If there is no demand and stagnating economic activity why should business invest in expanding output capacity or produce more? You get the picture? Why should banks lend if the books don't add up?
Maybe because a large part of recent corporate strategy is penetrating EM growth markets? Banks shouldn't lend if the books don't add up. Isn't that what everyone, most of all you, wants?

The whole economics is screwed up and makes no freaking sense. All you so called experts and well reasoned and seasoned clever cloggs can obviously see what's right and what's wrong but I don't?

So when you give money to people who already have it they squander it on holidays and expensive purchase items like cars and boats more often than not made abroad so the Balance of Payments deteriates.
When did any of us say this was a good things?

When you give money to nurses and dustmen and the low end of the society they spend it on essential items and what they need.
So is this what you meant when you say benefits? Nurses and dustmen? You should be clearer in future because I was under the impression that you were talking about people on benefits, not workers. I agree with tax breaks for working people but not increased benefits for scroungers. Some of the reasons are outlined above.

On balance if you want more demand you distribute money to those who don't have it so they can spend.
That depends what kind of demand you want. Do you want demand at the street level so that Ahmeds corner shop can start charging £1.50 for a pint of milk and £3.50 for a loaf of bread because everyone's splurging their new tax break money and increased bum benefits. But if that happens we can just introduce price controls right?

You give it to well endowed people in the hope they'll do something clever and invest - is just hoping on an ideal outcome which will not happen any time soon. When it does it will be because rest of global economy will finally pull out and we will follow.


Reason why Europe doing better than UK is because their labour and social policies prevent the mass unemployment and firing of staff for short term corporate gain. This is precisely why Germany, France and Italy are doing better than the UK.
What like the PIIGS are doing better? France is in just as much sh*t as the UK once corporate pensions explode or do you want a return to 10:1 fixed salary 10%p/a promises too with a bit of union action thrown in for good measure? Germany does well because it makes quality products for which there is massive global demand.

Don't forget after Greece, UK is 2nd debtor nation in terms of GDP.
Why do you continually spout nonsense headline grabbers like this? If that was all that mattered UK yields would be blowing up like the PIIGS wouldn't they?

Now there is no socialism here just pure common sense. Cameron said he will keep front line services and better manage civil service without labours quangos.

What we are seeing is the reduction in front line services and having not renewed quangos contracts and after some redundancies news is out the Tory party have hired 3 times the number released.
Who's backing Cameron and his cronies? I think anyone here would agree that *insert MP* is as crooked a moron as any other f*cker anywhere across the world :S

So go figure the sums.

I'm getting tired of all you bright monkies - I've made my point. Time will tell and show the outcome of these short sighted, biased and skewed policies.
What exactly is your point? Agree with your world view or be lumped in with the Cheney's of the world? Or is it that you feel everyone must subscribe wholly to one of the economic ideologies hat you've laid out?

Life is a beach and then one drowns.

Enjoy the swim whilst it lasts.
No arguing there

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

You chaps will enjoy this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b012wxyg/Keynes_Vs._Hayek/

Interesting how shrill the Keynesians sound.

 

[Black Swan]

Govt employees should be about 15% of the work force and the rest should be in the private sector doing something useful. As for the unemployables, they really ought to be doing something for their handout...there seems to be a line of thinking now that they would be a liability in the workplace, so better leave them be at home The easy option seems to be to get migrant workers in to do the jobs that aren't being covered. So essentially the govt cops out of the problem of dealing with the long term workshy unemployable. Quite how this is proper and affordable spending of my money by a succession of govt's who I didn't vote for is simply beyond me !

There are circa 4.85 million adults on out or work benefits in the UK and according to the ONS there are circa 400k jobs, although these are mostly churn, given that there are 21 million employed that equates to a 2% turnover...there are no jobs, even if you created full employment; ensuring that every job was taken the instant it became available, there would still be a husk of 4.4million on out of work benefits.

It is a totally insoluble problem. Work for dole? It'll simply make the problem worse as employers take advantage of it and drive wages down to third world level. Were heading full steam ahead into parity with the rest of the planet in terms of wages, they have to catch up we have to stagnate for decades until we reach equilibrium..

As for work shy scroungers they don't exist other than in the minds of Daily Hate readers, most employers in the regions blighted by systemic unemployment will tell you they have circa 200 apps per advertised position, in the USA they had 1.3 ml apps for 50k Mcdonalds jobs.. BT had 20000 apps for 300 apprenticeships, suffice to say whether it's the UK or USA folk have obligations and want to work, fraud and over payments in our system only accounts for 1% of the welfare bill, under claiming actually accounts for 4%..

Anyhow, enough, I'm off to Wemberlee on Sunday with my lads to watch your lot versus City..free tickets from Cheshire FA..

 

[Black Swan]

You chaps will enjoy this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b012wxyg/Keynes_Vs._Hayek/

Interesting how shrill the Keynesians sound.

Hayek wins hands down very time

 

[counter_violent]

There are circa 4.85 million adults on out or work benefits in the UK and according to the ONS there are circa 400k jobs, although these are mostly churn, given that there are 21 million employed that equates to a 2% turnover...there are no jobs, even if you created full employment; ensuring that every job was taken the instant it became available, there would still be a husk of 4.4million on out of work benefits.

It is a totally insoluble problem. Work for dole? It'll simply make the problem worse as employers take advantage of it and drive wages down to third world level. Were heading full steam ahead into parity with the rest of the planet in terms of wages, they have to catch up we have to stagnate for decades until we reach equilibrium..

As for work shy scroungers they don't exist other than in the minds of Daily Hate readers, most employers in the regions blighted by systemic unemployment will tell you they have circa 200 apps per advertised position, in the USA they had 1.3 ml apps for 50k Mcdonalds jobs.. BT had 20000 apps for 300 apprenticeships, suffice to say whether it's the UK or USA folk have obligations and want to work, fraud and over payments in our system only accounts for 1% of the welfare bill, under claiming actually accounts for 4%..

Anyhow, enough, I'm off to Wemberlee on Sunday with my lads to watch your lot versus City..free tickets from Cheshire FA..

OK so 400k churn jobs, 5 mill on the rock n roll...how many migrant workers...unskilled ?

 

[Black Swan]

OK so 400k churn jobs, 5 mill on the rock n roll...how many migrant workers...unskilled ?

Sorry mate, you're a lovely chap, but I'm not having this discussion with you..

 

[counter_violent]

Sorry mate, you're a lovely chap, but I'm not having this discussion with you..

It wasn't a trick question, all I want to know is why there are circa 5mill on the dole.

 

[Pazienza]

It wasn't a trick question, all I want to know is why there are circa 5mill on the dole.

And how many are, ahem, too ill to work?

40 years of government policy has created a caste of the perpetually unemployed (I use 'caste' on purpose).

I don't really think we can blame them - they make a rational choice to act as they do, and besides which if one is born into this caste it must be incredibly hard to escape it, especially now that we are several generations down.

 

[Atilla]

It wasn't a trick question, all I want to know is why there are circa 5mill on the dole.

So predictable.

1st Social Security
2nd Migrants...

I thought this was where you were going and did say in my previous posts.

You really know your economics don't you...