Tony Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I1L2T3 you're right. Cavegirl, how about people just cut their cloth accordingly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I1L2T3 you're right. Cavegirl, how about people just cut their cloth accordingly? You mean banks should operate with a 100% fractional reserve? I haven't seen even the most ardent anti-capitalists coming out with such a view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Eh? I think that you have replied to the wrong thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Eh? I think that you have replied to the wrong thread. Isn't it the role of leaders to lead by example? If so then your point about living with in your means would be an end to the banking system, an end to Capitalism and the magic of credit on which it relies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 4, 2011 Author Share Posted October 4, 2011 People do cut their cloth, unfortunately in a screwed-up society where rubbish wages are readily topped up with easy credit to achieve an acceptable standard of living. And a society where cutting your cloth in that way is socially acceptable. It's a bizarre collective madness. For all his talk about personal debt addiction what was in Osborne's election manifesto about dealing with it? What has he done since? In fact when has he ever mentioned it since 2010? The reason he won't is because personal debt is fuel for his banker friends. Once he takes on the problem he will damage the banks. The Tories don't want you to be debt free and under pressure from the banks the Tories even tried to withdraw funding for thousands of specialist debt advisers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Isn't it the role of leaders to lead by example? If so then your point about living with in your means would be an end to the banking system, an end to Capitalism and the magic of credit on which it relies. There is a difference between having credit available (nothing intrinsically wrong with credit in itself), using it (nothing intrinsically wrong with using credit either), and being reckless with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 You seem to have an incredibly shaky grasp on some pretty fundamental issues there Wildact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 4, 2011 Author Share Posted October 4, 2011 There is a difference between having credit available (nothing intrinsically wrong with credit in itself), using it (nothing intrinsically wrong with using credit either), and being reckless with it. The banks, hedge funds etc... are the ones that have been reckless with credit. They create it. They leverage it. They trade it. They are sitting on derivatives and various other exotic pieces of toxic rubbish worth a notional £700 trillion. Underpinning all that are 'assets' - stuff like property, your credit card debt, your mortgage, food, copper, oil. There is very little on the planet that don't lay claim to many times over. How did they get the 'money' to do all that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Errm... if I wanted easy credit how exactly is it now my fault that banks start offering it? Are you really saying banks had no ability to withstand the demands of poor people... Wasn't it the banks themselves that have repeatedly lobbied for a reduction of what fractional reserve they are required to support any loan with? The basis for your blame is obviously absurd. As for blaming Gordon Brown for reckless Govt spending, maybe you could explain why the billions of public money spent reducing Corporation Tax from 33% to 22% has not been reversed? or was that good Govt spending? and bad Govt spending is just that part of the Labour Govt.s expenditure that was directed at reducing the increasing inequality and poverty people experienced during the same period? It was the easy credit supplied by the banks that drove the economy, so Gordon miracle economy had nothing to do with him, unless the bank only lent money at low interest rates because he encouraged it. The bank of England had a remit to control inflation by increasing interest rates, guess what Gordon took the most inflationary item out the inflation figures which allowed a house bubble to inflate. The housing bubble and low interest rates according to you was nothing to do with Gordon therefore the miracle economy was nothing to do with Gordon. But we all know differently both were everything to do with Gordon and so was the crash when it came, he isn’t the only person to blame but he played a big part. If you blame the banks for the crash you will have to blame them for the good times as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Clearly, that is living beyond their means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.