The biggest "bubble" ever?
Discussion
The Dotcom bubble. The fever was so rampant that you could buy the domain EpsomSoil.com with the idea of selling buckets of soil from Epsom over the net and you'd get loads of investors hoping to buy shares in the company. You then spend the entire investment on marketing and watch the share price rocket; sell your shares and retire a multi-millionaire.
I wouldn't call the welfare state a bubble as such - otherwise, we would have to assume that recipients of welfare offer some kind of value to the government ie they are providing a service but getting too much for the service.
I wouldn't call the welfare state a bubble as such - otherwise, we would have to assume that recipients of welfare offer some kind of value to the government ie they are providing a service but getting too much for the service.
The answer to the 'welfare bubble' is simple - get those on long term benefits to work for the country. Cheap labour = low prices = competitive exports if in manufacturing. If they are doing jobs synonymous with those done by councils etc, then it keeps the wage bill down.
Even some people on disability benefit yearn to work.
Even some people on disability benefit yearn to work.
Puggit said:
The answer to the 'welfare bubble' is simple - get those on long term benefits to work for the country. Cheap labour = low prices = competitive exports if in manufacturing. If they are doing jobs synonymous with those done by councils etc, then it keeps the wage bill down.
Even some people on disability benefit yearn to work.
Sadly it will never happen as the only way would be to bring in hostels for single mums and the work house for the others..and non of the spinless mupets that selfserve there time in office have the guts or any reason to realy change anything.. a little fiddle round the edges is the best you will get ...Even some people on disability benefit yearn to work.
Edited by powerstroke on Monday 25th July 08:29
powerstroke said:
Sadly it will never happen as the only way would be to bring in hostels for single mums and the work house for the others..and non of the spinless mupets that selfserve there time in office have the guts or any reason to realy change anything.. a little fiddle round the edges is the best you will get ...
Sadly, very true. And I'm a BIG fan of the idea of workhouses and hostels for single mums. That way lies progress.
Oli.
davepoth said:
It's gold. One day there are going to be two humans left, one will have some water, and one will have gold. And I know which one will be worth more.
That is a fascinating aspect of the current economic situation, especially when you think that Gordon Brown sold half the UK's gold reserves - that's about 400 tons sold off - for around $275 an ounce.Price today - $1,600 an ounce.
Arithmetic loss of $1,325 an ounce. 400 tons = 12,800,000 ounces.
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
Ozzie Osmond said:
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
That's still only a miniscule 1/10th of the annual Education Budget, another legacy ala Winky. So basically, if we extended the summer holidays for another 6 weeks or so, we could consign the Brown gold thing to history. I doubt it would affect the 'output quality' much either.Nice work Gordon!
Ozzie Osmond said:
davepoth said:
It's gold. One day there are going to be two humans left, one will have some water, and one will have gold. And I know which one will be worth more.
That is a fascinating aspect of the current economic situation, especially when you think that Gordon Brown sold half the UK's gold reserves - that's about 400 tons sold off - for around $275 an ounce.Price today - $1,600 an ounce.
Arithmetic loss of $1,325 an ounce. 400 tons = 12,800,000 ounces.
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
did.....he should be swinging from a lamp post.madala said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
davepoth said:
It's gold. One day there are going to be two humans left, one will have some water, and one will have gold. And I know which one will be worth more.
That is a fascinating aspect of the current economic situation, especially when you think that Gordon Brown sold half the UK's gold reserves - that's about 400 tons sold off - for around $275 an ounce.Price today - $1,600 an ounce.
Arithmetic loss of $1,325 an ounce. 400 tons = 12,800,000 ounces.
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
did.....he should be swinging from a lamp post.Ozzie Osmond said:
That is a fascinating aspect of the current economic situation, especially when you think that Gordon Brown sold half the UK's gold reserves - that's about 400 tons sold off - for around $275 an ounce.
Price today - $1,600 an ounce.
Arithmetic loss of $1,325 an ounce. 400 tons = 12,800,000 ounces.
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
I didn't realise it was so little.Price today - $1,600 an ounce.
Arithmetic loss of $1,325 an ounce. 400 tons = 12,800,000 ounces.
Cash loss = 12.8m x 1,325 = $16,960,000,000
Nice work Gordon!
10 billion quid. Big s
t!I can't believe we have been going on about it for all this time.
I have despised the bloke for years for that decision, and now that I realise that it is so irrelevant I am going to think about something more important!
blindswelledrat said:
I have despised the bloke for years for that decision, and now that I realise that it is so irrelevant I am going to think about something more important!
Ok, so the value isn't that much (and was even less when he made the decision) - but the fact stands that he told the markets he was going to sell all our gold before he sold it, therefore depressing the price.For that alone, he should have been removed as chancellor.
Puggit said:
Ok, so the value isn't that much (and was even less when he made the decision) - but the fact stands that he told the markets he was going to sell all our gold before he sold it, therefore depressing the price.
For that alone, he should have been removed as chancellor.
For that alone, he should have been removed as chancellor.
Puggit said:
Ok, so the value isn't that much (and was even less when he made the decision) - but the fact stands that he told the markets he was going to sell all our gold before he sold it, therefore depressing the price.
For that alone, he should have been removed as chancellor.
Maybe, I don't know the ins and outs, but the only thing I know as fact is that hte amounts in question are so tiny that it is so irrelevant and not even worth discussing and certainly not, as PH seem to think, part responsible for the recession.For that alone, he should have been removed as chancellor.
From my fag-packet maths I would estimate that he 'lost' the UK approximately £1 billion or so in that deal. It is such a tiny tiny tiny amount as to be embarrassing to discuss!
Im ashamed of my own ignorance for hating him so much for such a nothing decision
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff