The looney left
Discussion
BlackLabel said:
If it gets privatised, who will provide funding for comedians that nobody is actually willing to pay to hear? 
Gargamel said:
That's what I said....
You cannot print your way out of trouble forever.
w
king your supposed intellect in public and assuming others are ignorant, is an "interesting" posting style.
And well done for reading "serious" studies. I only ever read the ones with pictures.
Typical rude response on here. You used hyperinflation examples which aren't remotely relevant to domestic spending/public debts. For there to be hyperinflation there has to be a combination of all the factors I previously mentioned (foreign debt payment, currency depreciation, & money creation). You cannot print your way out of trouble forever.
w
king your supposed intellect in public and assuming others are ignorant, is an "interesting" posting style. And well done for reading "serious" studies. I only ever read the ones with pictures.
Public debt isn't a major issue especially compared to private debt. The end.
Jimbo0912 said:
Jesus Christ, you lot know next to nothing about economics.
Whenever I hear politicians talk about paying down the national debt or equating countries to households, I know instantly that they're f**king clueless.
Government debt is largely illusory. Firstly, Governments don't need to balance their budgets with tax revenue because if they have a central bank it can simply print more money. Governments don't even have to pay interest on money their central banks create. Furthermore, if you look at the secondary markets, Treasury borrowing costs are now the lowest in history. For your information, no government in history has ever paid off its public debt.
The vast majority of debt created by Governments currently in the western world is to bail out their private masters i.e. the banks.
Private debt is far more pernicious and worrying than public debt will ever be.
Re read what you posted first. Whenever I hear politicians talk about paying down the national debt or equating countries to households, I know instantly that they're f**king clueless.
Government debt is largely illusory. Firstly, Governments don't need to balance their budgets with tax revenue because if they have a central bank it can simply print more money. Governments don't even have to pay interest on money their central banks create. Furthermore, if you look at the secondary markets, Treasury borrowing costs are now the lowest in history. For your information, no government in history has ever paid off its public debt.
The vast majority of debt created by Governments currently in the western world is to bail out their private masters i.e. the banks.
Private debt is far more pernicious and worrying than public debt will ever be.
You specifically state, "can simply print more money". That is why I consider hyperinflation to be relevant. If you debauch you currency by printing more of it, the value falls, prices rise, so you print more. Obvs
As for the rude response, again see your first post....
Jimbo0912 said:
No, it's not. If you had any grasp of basic economics you'd know what I was saying is true.
The 2007/2008 Banking Crisis had absolutely nothing to do with Government debt and everything to do with private debt. If you follow the news even slightly, you'll know that it was triggered in the US by large declines in house prices, leading to mortgage delinquencies/foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities (MBS) & (CDO). Trillions of dollars were used to bail out Banks in that period (TARP was just one of the programs used). The next crisis in the western world will more of the same.
bThe 2007/2008 Banking Crisis had absolutely nothing to do with Government debt and everything to do with private debt. If you follow the news even slightly, you'll know that it was triggered in the US by large declines in house prices, leading to mortgage delinquencies/foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities (MBS) & (CDO). Trillions of dollars were used to bail out Banks in that period (TARP was just one of the programs used). The next crisis in the western world will more of the same.
ks!How much of the UK's current (balance sheet debt of circa £1.4 trillion) are you claiming is due to bailing out banks...??
sidicks said:
Jimbo0912 said:
No, it's not. If you had any grasp of basic economics you'd know what I was saying is true.
The 2007/2008 Banking Crisis had absolutely nothing to do with Government debt and everything to do with private debt. If you follow the news even slightly, you'll know that it was triggered in the US by large declines in house prices, leading to mortgage delinquencies/foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities (MBS) & (CDO). Trillions of dollars were used to bail out Banks in that period (TARP was just one of the programs used). The next crisis in the western world will more of the same.
bThe 2007/2008 Banking Crisis had absolutely nothing to do with Government debt and everything to do with private debt. If you follow the news even slightly, you'll know that it was triggered in the US by large declines in house prices, leading to mortgage delinquencies/foreclosures and the devaluation of housing-related securities (MBS) & (CDO). Trillions of dollars were used to bail out Banks in that period (TARP was just one of the programs used). The next crisis in the western world will more of the same.
ks!How much of the UK's current (balance sheet debt of circa £1.4 trillion) are you claiming is due to bailing out banks...??
ks' in future, try to have some knowledge on the subject. Since 2008, the Federal Reserve has doled out in excess of $30 trillion in order to stabilise banks in the US. This information is extremely easy to verify. Bank Bailouts in the UK have cost close to £1.2 trillion according to the National Audit Office - backs up what I've been saying. Again, easy to verify.
Jimbo0912 said:
Gargamel said:
That's what I said....
You cannot print your way out of trouble forever.
wking your supposed intellect in public and assuming others are ignorant, is an "interesting" posting style.
And well done for reading "serious" studies. I only ever read the ones with pictures.
Typical rude response on here. You used hyperinflation examples which aren't remotely relevant to domestic spending/public debts. For there to be hyperinflation there has to be a combination of all the factors I previously mentioned (foreign debt payment, currency depreciation, & money creation). You cannot print your way out of trouble forever.
w
king your supposed intellect in public and assuming others are ignorant, is an "interesting" posting style. And well done for reading "serious" studies. I only ever read the ones with pictures.
Public debt isn't a major issue especially compared to private debt. The end.
Jimbo0912 said:
For all the Clarkson bum chums on here...
Jimbo0912 said:
Seriously though, your response is actually the most idiotic I've seen in this 250+page thread which is a winning achievement! Well done.
Jimbo0912 said:
You pretty much intimated that the BBC were at fault for what happened which is absolutely and completely retarded.
Jimbo0912 said:
Deary me. You're a pedantic, hysterical winner who can't spell or even write a semi-coherent sentence. I feel sorry for you.
Jimbo0912 said:
...you're a brain dead retard for even suggesting it...
Jimbo0912 said:
To be brutally honest though, I've neither the time nor the inclination to respond to any of your idiotic posts in future.
Jimbo0912 said:
This thread and some of the idiots posting on here can be summarised as follows
@Chlamydia - That's obviously taken you a bit of time. ;-)
Have you actually been on that Clarkson thread? Rife with people making excuses for Clarkson's abhorrent behaviour, many saying that workplace violence is a normal occurrence, blaming Tymon for being punched in the face, blaming the BBC for Clarkson's reckless choices...the list of retarded, inane posts was truly endless.
Have you actually been on that Clarkson thread? Rife with people making excuses for Clarkson's abhorrent behaviour, many saying that workplace violence is a normal occurrence, blaming Tymon for being punched in the face, blaming the BBC for Clarkson's reckless choices...the list of retarded, inane posts was truly endless.
Jimbo0912 said:
Bank bailouts world wide amounted to tens of trillions of dollars so before saying 'bks' in future, try to have some knowledge on the subject. Since 2008, the Federal Reserve has doled out in excess of $30 trillion in order to stabilise banks in the US. This information is extremely easy to verify.
Bank Bailouts in the UK have cost close to £1.2 trillion according to the National Audit Office - backs up what I've been saying. Again, easy to verify.
And that paragraph just demonstrates how little you really understand!ks' in future, try to have some knowledge on the subject. Since 2008, the Federal Reserve has doled out in excess of $30 trillion in order to stabilise banks in the US. This information is extremely easy to verify. Bank Bailouts in the UK have cost close to £1.2 trillion according to the National Audit Office - backs up what I've been saying. Again, easy to verify.
You honestly believe that of our £1.4trn debt, £1.2trn is due to bank bailouts!!
It seems you don't understand the difference between costs, liabilities and guarantees.
Please come back once you've understood the basics!!
sidicks said:
And thst just demonstrates how little you understand!
You honestly believe that of our £1.4trn debt, £1.2trn is due to bank bailouts!!
It seems you don't understand the difference between costs, liabilities and guarantees.
Please come back once you've understood the basics!!
Did I say specifically say that?! You're putting words into my mouth. You honestly believe that of our £1.4trn debt, £1.2trn is due to bank bailouts!!
It seems you don't understand the difference between costs, liabilities and guarantees.
Please come back once you've understood the basics!!
It has contributed extremely significantly though and you can't deny that.
AFAIK
America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
Jimbo0912 said:
Did I say specifically say that?! You're putting words into my mouth.
It has contributed extremely significantly though and you can't deny that.
I asked you how much it had cost and you claimed that it had cost £1.2trn..It has contributed extremely significantly though and you can't deny that.
If the bailout really cost £1.2trn, please explain how this did NOT add £1.2trn to public debt...
I'll ask you again, as you clearly don't understand the data you have, how much (estimate) has the bank bailout added to the national debt??
Edited by sidicks on Monday 30th March 18:13
turbobloke said:
AFAIK
America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
Net bsilouts is now down to under £40bn I think, plus of course the banks paid a premium for the insurance received.America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
sidicks said:
Net bsilouts is now down to under £40bn I think, plus of course the banks paid a premium for the insurance received.
Thats OK then, not.Unlike the US, remind us how many of the chancers lost their jobs or were sent to gaol here?
And I don't mean the innocent who lost their jobs, I mean the big swinging dicks.
sidicks said:
turbobloke said:
AFAIK
America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
Net bsilouts is now down to under £40bn I think, plus of course the banks paid a premium for the insurance received.America
TARP was initially $700bn but this was reduced to $475bn with about $460bn promised.
Fannie and Freddie accounted for another $190bn approx.
As of now the US Treasury has received a total of nearly $670bn
This consists of refunds, dividends, interest, sale of stock warrants and sale of assets plus fees.
Net inflow is over $52bn
UK
Bank bailouts cost approx £125bn
Guarantees and indemnity 'support' are often added but represent little if any money handed over
National debt on sheet is approx £1.48tn
Private debt is approx £1.44tn
NicD said:
Thats OK then, not.
Unlike the US, remind us how many of the chancers lost their jobs or were sent to gaol here?
And I don't mean the innocent who lost their jobs, I mean the big swinging dicks.
If you want justice for those ultimately responsible, you could start by asset-stripping one William Jefferson Clinton, who pushed for mortgages to be given to those who couldn't afford them, because to lend prudently would have been "unfair".Unlike the US, remind us how many of the chancers lost their jobs or were sent to gaol here?
And I don't mean the innocent who lost their jobs, I mean the big swinging dicks.
He can also forfeit his middle name; it's an insult to the eponymous President that such a an interfering Statist bears it.
turbobloke said:
In terms of "trillions" as claimed above, the bailouts in the UK and US combined didn't reach £0.6tn in the end, of the $460bn promised stateside about $430bn was handed over. The UK's £125bn adds another $85bn giving $515bn.
Indeed - strange that jimbo0912 can be so poorly informed!!
NicD said:
Thats OK then, not.
I think you've missed the point (or at least the post to which I responded)Plus of course national debt would have been (much) more than £40bn higher if the banks had not done their 'reckless' lending in the run up to the crisis..!
NiCD said:
Unlike the US, remind us how many of the chancers lost their jobs or were sent to gaol here?
And I don't mean the innocent who lost their jobs, I mean the big swinging dicks.
What crimes were committed to justify jail sentences?And I don't mean the innocent who lost their jobs, I mean the big swinging dicks.
handpaper said:
If you want justice for those ultimately responsible, you could start by asset-stripping one William Jefferson Clinton, who pushed for mortgages to be given to those who couldn't afford them, because to lend prudently would have been "unfair".
He can also forfeit his middle name; it's an insult to the eponymous President that such a an interfering Statist bears it.
You have your own ideas about responsibility, presumably you are in some way involved in City activities but don't presume we are all in agreement or know nothing about the subject.He can also forfeit his middle name; it's an insult to the eponymous President that such a an interfering Statist bears it.
I have no interest in a long running and fruitless debate.
NicD said:
You have your own ideas about responsibility, presumably you are in some way involved in City activities but don't presume we are all in agreement or know nothing about the subject.
I have no interest in a long running and fruitless debate.
You can't just ignore recorded facts if you don't like the implications!!I have no interest in a long running and fruitless debate.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff