metaphoria Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 "Avoid a double-dip recession". Eh? It is arguable that we are already in it, or haven't yet got out the first, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 "Avoid a double-dip recession". Eh? It is arguable that we are already in it, or haven't yet got out the first, no? It's funny that Mervyn King talks about us facing the biggest crisis ever and we might have a..........recession . Merv, last time we had a comparable crisis we had a depression for near on seven years with unemployment hitting 25% in some industrial areas and even approaching 15% in the SE. We only came out of it with massive government deficit spending on a policy of mass re-armament in response to German aggression. Merv, the master of understatement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Belle* Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 It's funny that Mervyn King talks about us facing the biggest crisis ever and we might have a..........recession . Merv, last time we had a comparable crisis we had a depression for near on seven years with unemployment hitting 25% in some industrial areas and even approaching 15% in the SE. We only came out of it with massive government deficit spending on a policy of mass re-armament in response to German aggression. Merv, the master of understatement. When Harold Wilson took over the reigns in 1964, he inherited a deficit from the outgoing Tories, of £800m. Using the 'per capita gdp' on the Measuring Worth website, this equates to £30bn today. Three years later, he devalued the £ to help boost exports. Quantitive easing, whilst devaluing the pound, unfortunately does not have altogether the same effect, as we have to pay interest on the cash (or bonds) that are issued in this procedure. These bonds and /or newly printed money are issued by the Bank of England, which then charges interest to the government via the private company 'Bank of England Nominees Ltd', whose shareholders are a well kept secret and the company has exemption from any of the disclosure requirements of other limited companies. To answer the question of whether Osborne is wrong or not, firstly we would have to know what his agenda is. Maybe he knows exactly what he is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 When Harold Wilson took over the reigns in 1964, he inherited a deficit from the outgoing Tories, of £800m. Using the 'per capita gdp' on the Measuring Worth website, this equates to £30bn today. Three years later, he devalued the £ to help boost exports. Quantitive easing, whilst devaluing the pound, unfortunately does not have altogether the same effect, as we have to pay interest on the cash (or bonds) that are issued in this procedure. These bonds and /or newly printed money are issued by the Bank of England, which then charges interest to the government via the private company 'Bank of England Nominees Ltd', whose shareholders are a well kept secret and the company has exemption from any of the disclosure requirements of other limited companies. To answer the question of whether Osborne is wrong or not, firstly we would have to know what his agenda is. Maybe he knows exactly what he is doing. That is written as if it is a quotation. And it looks as if it is. Please explain, in engineers terms what it means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Quantitive easing, whilst devaluing the pound, unfortunately does not have altogether the same effect, as we have to pay interest on the cash (or bonds) that are issued in this procedure. no bonds are issued by this procedure, the bank of england creates money and uses it to buy bonds, the earlier bouts bought only government bonds but the next bout may buy other bonds. the idea is that doing this drives up the cost of the bonds on the debt markets which reduces the profit available from trading them and so encourages insitutions to do something more profitable like investing in the wider economy. anyway, government bonds are managed by the treasury not the bank of england. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Says the person quoting mail and telegraph articles Do I? Proof please. Once again you are proven to be all mouth and no trousers Mecky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Once again you are proven to be all mouth and no trousers Mecky hahhahahaaa go away little person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 hahhahahaaa go away little person I see you're still incapable of sensible discussion and when called to prove your claims you resort to ignoring the requests and then flinging insults. What plonker you are, tell me, were your parents related by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 If all the European countries are in debt, who are they in debt to? Who is America in debt to? Who is lending all this money to bail out countries like Greece? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 If all the European countries are in debt, who are they in debt to? Who is America in debt to? Who is lending all this money to bail out countries like Greece? It’s a tad complicated but what they do is travel into the future and borrow it off our grandchildren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.