Darth Vader Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 On reading a comment on a newspaper article, I came across the link below. It proposes that we stop allowing the banks to effectively dictate the finances of our country. It is founded by a group of lawyers, engineers, business people, former civil servants, university academics, etc and is not allied to a particular political party or stance. I found it very interesting. Could this be the answer to the UK's problems? What is stopping us? - Is it just those who have the power and vested interests? Have people come across this before? What do you think? http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hughes Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 How much would it cost the country to change to this system though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 the whole basis of their argument is flawed in that banks don't actually create money they just move around the money they do have very efficiently fundamentally, they are talking about almost total state control of the banking system and the wider economy which may or may not be a good thing depending on your viewpoint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share Posted October 22, 2010 the whole basis of their argument is flawed in that banks don't actually create money they just move around the money they do have very efficiently fundamentally, they are talking about almost total state control of the banking system and the wider economy which may or may not be a good thing depending on your viewpoint The first point you make, is the whole point. Banks don't create money, do they? They charge huge amounts of interest on what money there is. The proposal would ensure that banks were part in creating money, by investing in production. The proposal involves a separation of powers regarding control of the bank. It would ensure that money is invested fairly back in to the system, instead of the government, in effect, subsidising the banks by a 100 billion pounds annually, which is distributed amongst the banking sector. It is you and me who are paying for this subsidy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 State control of industries was proven a total disaster in the 1970s. (Actually, it was fairly obviously a disaster long before then, but the political will to do anything about it never appeared until after they had brought the country to complete bankruptcy and the IMF forced us to do something.) How soon people forget. Now they want to impose state control on an industry and they think it will help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share Posted October 22, 2010 State control of industries was proven a total disaster in the 1970s. (Actually, it was fairly obviously a disaster long before then, but the political will to do anything about it never appeared until after they had brought the country to complete bankruptcy and the IMF forced us to do something.) How soon people forget. Now they want to impose state control on an industry and they think it will help. Have you read the proposal in the link as solution to the problems we have at the moment? What do you think of it? Do you think a working family, struggling to pay the bills, never mind about afford a school trip or holiday, should be picking up the bill for a 100 billion pounds annual subsidy for the sole puropse of the banking sector, for them to dish up between them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 The first point you make, is the whole point. Banks don't create money, do they? They charge huge amounts of interest on what money there is. The proposal would ensure that banks were part in creating money, by investing in production. charging interest doesn't create money as that would mean the person paying the interest was the person actually creating it. if the average person was caught creating money from nothing then he'd get a long holiday for forgery The proposal involves a separation of powers regarding control of the bank. It would ensure that money is invested fairly back in to the system, instead of the government, in effect, subsidising the banks by a 100 billion pounds annually, which is distributed amongst the banking sector. It is you and me who are paying for this subsidy! the site makes this claim about the subsidy, but I can't find where he actually identifies where it comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 I think the idea of two bank account types is a good one. Plenty of people would be happy to pay a modest fee for their money to be held in a client account by banks rather than thrown into the banks own account and liable to loss as is the case now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 I really am interested to read that people are seriously looking for ways to produce more sustainable and fairer banking systems. My main issue with it is this statement (taken from http://www.bankofenglandact.co.uk/)- restore the right to create the nation’s money to a public agency of the state (the Bank of England under the direction of the Monetary Policy Committee, all under strict controls, transparency and separation of powers) The issue I see with it is that their experiment has already succeeded- banks became very profitable under the present system. We all know well from the recent elite antics that ethical behaviour and rule books (even beneficial and important ones) get thrown out of the window as soon as a/our country goes to war. If we did implement these rules I think that sooner or later they would get disregarded in the name of greed. I think it's time for a new human/ resource-based ideology rather than corporation/ consumer-led capitalist system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.