It's BAD, it's STILL very bad REPRISE thread (13 months on)
Discussion
Digga said:
turbobloke said:
BRITAIN’S DEBT: THE UNTOLD STORY
The Independent
Sean O'Grady, Economics Editor
Wednesday 14 July 2010
The true scale of Britain's national indebtedness was laid bare by the Office for National Statistics yesterday: almost £4 trillion, or £4,000bn, about four times higher than previously acknowledged.
It quantifies the burden that will be placed on future generations, and it is the ONS's first attempt to draw together the "off-balance-sheet" liabilities that have been accumulated by the state. The figures imply a huge "intergenerational transfer" – broadly in favour of today's "baby boomer" generation at the expense of younger people and future generations.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brit...
At last! The elephant we've alll spotted in the room, is being (slowly) brought to the attention of the masses. Sadly, by the time the masses truly grasp the issue, it'll be way too late.The Independent
Sean O'Grady, Economics Editor
Wednesday 14 July 2010
The true scale of Britain's national indebtedness was laid bare by the Office for National Statistics yesterday: almost £4 trillion, or £4,000bn, about four times higher than previously acknowledged.
It quantifies the burden that will be placed on future generations, and it is the ONS's first attempt to draw together the "off-balance-sheet" liabilities that have been accumulated by the state. The figures imply a huge "intergenerational transfer" – broadly in favour of today's "baby boomer" generation at the expense of younger people and future generations.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brit...
turbobloke said:
Digga said:
turbobloke said:
BRITAIN’S DEBT: THE UNTOLD STORY
The Independent
Sean O'Grady, Economics Editor
Wednesday 14 July 2010
The true scale of Britain's national indebtedness was laid bare by the Office for National Statistics yesterday: almost £4 trillion, or £4,000bn, about four times higher than previously acknowledged.
It quantifies the burden that will be placed on future generations, and it is the ONS's first attempt to draw together the "off-balance-sheet" liabilities that have been accumulated by the state. The figures imply a huge "intergenerational transfer" – broadly in favour of today's "baby boomer" generation at the expense of younger people and future generations.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brit...
At last! The elephant we've alll spotted in the room, is being (slowly) brought to the attention of the masses. Sadly, by the time the masses truly grasp the issue, it'll be way too late.The Independent
Sean O'Grady, Economics Editor
Wednesday 14 July 2010
The true scale of Britain's national indebtedness was laid bare by the Office for National Statistics yesterday: almost £4 trillion, or £4,000bn, about four times higher than previously acknowledged.
It quantifies the burden that will be placed on future generations, and it is the ONS's first attempt to draw together the "off-balance-sheet" liabilities that have been accumulated by the state. The figures imply a huge "intergenerational transfer" – broadly in favour of today's "baby boomer" generation at the expense of younger people and future generations.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brit...
- Future payments for the state old age pension: £1.1trn to £1.4trn
- Unfunded public sector pensions for teachers, NHS staff and civil servants: £770bn to £1.2trn
- Payments under private finance initiative contracts: £200bn
- Contingent liabilities (eg bank deposit guarantees): £500bn
- Nuclear power plant decommissioning: £45bn
Now hang on a sec, whenever anyone says "We spent all the money bailing out the banks", tonks and co jump up and say "It was a loan and the taxpayer will actually make a profit on the deal.
So either the PH banking cheer leaders have been fibbing or £1.5trn can be knocked off the debt total.
I'd like to see an explanation of the 'guarantees' element and whether 'interventions' include any more guarantees rather than loans per se.
If guarantees haven't been called in, the actual handout total may be less than implied but the liability remains and so adds to the total?
If guarantees haven't been called in, the actual handout total may be less than implied but the liability remains and so adds to the total?
Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 14th July 18:42
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I dont.Everyone I know my age (28) who isnt on the ladder is:
- renting and spunking the rest on Ikea, nights out and holidays
- living at home with mum and dad paying minimal digs and spunking the rest on leased Focus ST/RSs, nights out and holidays
Only way most would be in a position to buy would be tapping mum and dad up for their deposit, which could easily be a problem if mum and dads portfolio value has slipped and theres no equity release to be realised.
[I'll openly admit my parents topped up my £10k savings to help me out with buy a place 2.5 years ago]
Yes, the leased cars could go back and the lifestyle could tone it down. But would it?
Fittster said:
So either the PH banking cheer leaders have been fibbing or £1.5trn can be knocked off the debt total.
Agree for a fair comparison the £1.5trn, an a few other bits can be knocked off .. but that still leaves the liabilities at just under £2.5trn - higher than any other previous estimate. I guess there are hidden PFI nasties all over the place. Damn, jags has beat me to it.Edited by fido on Thursday 15th July 10:47
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I agree with that. That is why the majority of people who bleat that they cannot afford to buy because prices are high still wouldn't be able to afford to buy if prices halved.They've made a lifestyle choice and it is one that means they will probably never own a home or possibly even have a pension. Their best option is to die at about 50 unless they really like the idea of living in a piss stained council tennancy living on £20 a week.
Having said that, there are plenty of youngster who are doing the right thing and not buying cars, not renting a flash pad and out all night partying. It is they who will benefit from the market correction as they will have the deposit to buy in.
The key thing is that this is no different from at any previous point in history. The real difference is a cultural one where for the last 15 years we have moved from a socirty that would wisely point out to the kid lobbing all his money away yet bleating that he can't afford a home that he was an idiot and would die in his own urine on the 20th floor to a society which goes, oh my God, we must help these poor people, we must give them welfare and support groups and spend millions researching why they are in this situation.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Spot on. When I was contemplating buying my first flat in 1984 for £13,500 I first had to decide whether I had a flat or a car. I couldn't afford to run both and sadly I sold my beloved Alfaspud TI and travelled by bus, train or on my brothers motorbike. Eventually, after about three years, I bought a knackered Mini Traveller for £30 off a mate. It had three weeks MOT and two months tax. After the Uncle Max had expired, I sold it for scrap and got a tenner, but while I was at the breakers I spotted a nice orange Austin Maxi with a month's rent and MOT left on it... mine for fifty quid. After that I had an FSO Polonez, a Hillman Hunter and a Marina van. All utter s
tboxes but i suppose they kept me moving until I proudly took possession of my first company car in 1987, a brand new Austin Maestro City (with hindsight, I preferred the other cars 
).I'd like to say these were happy days, but to a lifelong petrolhead being carless was an utter misery, yet unavoidable if I was to have my own place to live. Several of my mates did similar things to get on the property ladder. Maybe I'm just getting old but I don't see many younger people sacrificing luxuries like cars, holidays, Glasto, Iphones and such stuff these days.
It got even worse mate. A job change in 1988 saw me in a six month old Zinobar red BMW 518i. To this day it remains the worst car I've ever had, worse even than the Polonez. Horrid beyond words, I think I hated it so because it was such an old codger's car being driven by a 25year old yuppie with gelled hair and red braces!
The young folk today don't know they're born!
The young folk today don't know they're born!
Edited by Andy Zarse on Thursday 15th July 13:47
You were lucky. After a beating from my father and getting up before I went to bed I had to own a succession of 406 non turbo deisels to allow me to pay my first mortgage.
I got them cheap from a friend of my father's who ran a fleet of them for his salesmen and when they hit 100K miles would be sold at auction. They were very cheap to buy and cheap to run and had been looked after very well but I never got used to the fact that whenever you stopped at a set of lights someone would try and climb in the back and demand to be driven somewhere or just leap out in front of you to flag you down. Not forgetting the number of times that I was literally driven off the road by black taxis.
I did enjoy the reverse Knight Industries turbo boost button. This was used when you wanted to reach vmax of 85mph on the M1. Basically, you had to turn off the aircon to get the last 7mph out of them
Still, only had to fill up once a month.
I got them cheap from a friend of my father's who ran a fleet of them for his salesmen and when they hit 100K miles would be sold at auction. They were very cheap to buy and cheap to run and had been looked after very well but I never got used to the fact that whenever you stopped at a set of lights someone would try and climb in the back and demand to be driven somewhere or just leap out in front of you to flag you down. Not forgetting the number of times that I was literally driven off the road by black taxis.
I did enjoy the reverse Knight Industries turbo boost button. This was used when you wanted to reach vmax of 85mph on the M1. Basically, you had to turn off the aircon to get the last 7mph out of them
Still, only had to fill up once a month.
Andy Zarse said:
Maybe I'm just getting old but I don't see many younger people sacrificing luxuries like cars, holidays, Glasto, Iphones and such stuff these days.
I think you are missing the fact that the average house was ~3.5 times average earnings in 1984, but now, thanks to Winky, it is ~6-7 times. The young have been screwed.NoelWatson said:
Andy Zarse said:
Maybe I'm just getting old but I don't see many younger people sacrificing luxuries like cars, holidays, Glasto, Iphones and such stuff these days.
I think you are missing the fact that the average house was ~3.5 times average earnings in 1984, but now, thanks to Winky, it is ~6-7 times. The young have been screwed.PS Donkey Apple; Pug 406s with aircon? Luxury! We used to have 405's without even a working heater! I once asked my boss if I could have a rear washwipe fitted to the Maestro City, it was a bit dangerous without one. My boss repeated a story of his first company car in 1958, a Morris Minor that had no heater (though strangely enough it had the same A series engine as my Maestro). As he worked in North Wales, it got very cold in winter. He wrote a memo to Head Office in Edinburgh to ask if he could have a heater fitted. They wrote back telling him to wear an extra pair of socks. So he told me to keep a damp sponge in the car. No wonder I left!
You try telling that to the young folk today and they won't believe you...
Brings back a lot of memories reading the last few posts. At 19 I couldn't really afford to buy ( or insure ) the cars I really wanted so I bought a house instead . I was earning about £150 maximum in 1986 which just about got me enough for my first mortgage of £17k to buy a 4 bed semi ( ex council house) . This meant for the next couple of years only being able to afford to run around in such delights as , Cortina MkV estate , Nissan Cherry ,2 Door Cavalier ( Same shape as a Manta ) and horror of horrors Austin All-agro.
Things looked much brighter 2 yrs on when I downsized to a 2 bed and pocketed about £12k profit , along came an Astra GTE for starters followed by a rather nice Golf GTi.
Things looked much brighter 2 yrs on when I downsized to a 2 bed and pocketed about £12k profit , along came an Astra GTE for starters followed by a rather nice Golf GTi.
Andy Zarse said:
NoelWatson said:
Andy Zarse said:
Maybe I'm just getting old but I don't see many younger people sacrificing luxuries like cars, holidays, Glasto, Iphones and such stuff these days.
I think you are missing the fact that the average house was ~3.5 times average earnings in 1984, but now, thanks to Winky, it is ~6-7 times. The young have been screwed.PS Donkey Apple; Pug 406s with aircon? Luxury! We used to have 405's without even a working heater! I once asked my boss if I could have a rear washwipe fitted to the Maestro City, it was a bit dangerous without one. My boss repeated a story of his first company car in 1958, a Morris Minor that had no heater (though strangely enough it had the same A series engine as my Maestro). As he worked in North Wales, it got very cold in winter. He wrote a memo to Head Office in Edinburgh to ask if he could have a heater fitted. They wrote back telling him to wear an extra pair of socks. So he told me to keep a damp sponge in the car. No wonder I left!
You try telling that to the young folk today and they won't believe you...
DonkeyApple said:
...I'd forgotten about 405s, mine were 405s, never got as classy as a 406 (they were the large more rounded ones?). Still had heating and aircon so I must have been the envy of the minicab world.
In addition to Noels earlier comment - 405's were substantially lighter than 406's too .Back in the world of doom n't gloom (that was generated due to having the Four Monty Python Yorkshiremen in my head due to recent posts), Mr AEP of the Telegraph joining in the big Fed money money printy printy speculation :-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/789323...
telegraph said:
The euro rocketed to a two-month high of $1.29 and sterling jumped two cents to almost $1.54 after the Fed confessed that the US economy may not recover for five or six years. Far from winding down emergency stimulus, the bank may need a fresh blast of bond purchases or quantitative easing.
...
The Fed minutes warned of "significant downside risks" and a possible slide into deflation, an admission that zero interest rates, $1.75 trillion of QE, and a fiscal deficit above 10pc of GDP have so far failed to lift the economy out of a structural slump.
...
A study by the San Francisco Fed said the interest rates need to be –4.5pc to stabilise the economy under the Fed's "rule of thumb". Since this is impossible, massive QE needs to make up the difference.
Acknowledging negative interest rates required for recovery, wow....
The Fed minutes warned of "significant downside risks" and a possible slide into deflation, an admission that zero interest rates, $1.75 trillion of QE, and a fiscal deficit above 10pc of GDP have so far failed to lift the economy out of a structural slump.
...
A study by the San Francisco Fed said the interest rates need to be –4.5pc to stabilise the economy under the Fed's "rule of thumb". Since this is impossible, massive QE needs to make up the difference.
RichardD said:
DonkeyApple said:
...I'd forgotten about 405s, mine were 405s, never got as classy as a 406 (they were the large more rounded ones?). Still had heating and aircon so I must have been the envy of the minicab world.
In addition to Noels earlier comment - 405's were substantially lighter than 406's too .Back in the world of doom n't gloom (that was generated due to having the Four Monty Python Yorkshiremen in my head due to recent posts), Mr AEP of the Telegraph joining in the big Fed money money printy printy speculation :-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/789323...
telegraph said:
The euro rocketed to a two-month high of $1.29 and sterling jumped two cents to almost $1.54 after the Fed confessed that the US economy may not recover for five or six years. Far from winding down emergency stimulus, the bank may need a fresh blast of bond purchases or quantitative easing.
...
The Fed minutes warned of "significant downside risks" and a possible slide into deflation, an admission that zero interest rates, $1.75 trillion of QE, and a fiscal deficit above 10pc of GDP have so far failed to lift the economy out of a structural slump.
...
A study by the San Francisco Fed said the interest rates need to be –4.5pc to stabilise the economy under the Fed's "rule of thumb". Since this is impossible, massive QE needs to make up the difference.
Acknowledging negative interest rates required for recovery, wow....
The Fed minutes warned of "significant downside risks" and a possible slide into deflation, an admission that zero interest rates, $1.75 trillion of QE, and a fiscal deficit above 10pc of GDP have so far failed to lift the economy out of a structural slump.
...
A study by the San Francisco Fed said the interest rates need to be –4.5pc to stabilise the economy under the Fed's "rule of thumb". Since this is impossible, massive QE needs to make up the difference.
Wonder if the UK will follow the lag on this and have to consider similar in 6/12/18 months. Cant see negative rates flying over here either so it'd be more QE (at my completely unedicated guess)
emicen said:
Negative 4 and a half percent. Crikey.
Wonder if the UK will follow the lag on this and have to consider similar in 6/12/18 months. Cant see negative rates flying over here either so it'd be more QE (at my completely unedicated guess)
QE is the only way to achieve negative rates (as far as I know), which is a currency dilution (if the natural consequence would be deflation which is more spending power for people with money not debt).Wonder if the UK will follow the lag on this and have to consider similar in 6/12/18 months. Cant see negative rates flying over here either so it'd be more QE (at my completely unedicated guess)
Lag, I'd say probably even though I should say definitely as PH'ers such as Tonker think QE is coming again because the gubbermunt doesn't have the balls to implement austerity.
Thus continueth (is that a word?) the race to the bottom.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff