Cyclone Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Why can't it be driven by savings? Many people have savings but they're too afraid to spend them because mecky keeps posting bad news from the mail I was going to buy a new bike until I read this thread. That's 12000 he's cost the economy today. Savings are income, income from that past that you haven't spent yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Ah, les guillotines. Vous avez trouvé moi tout aux yeux de rosée. well it would create jobs, free up housing and improve morale. I can't see an immediate downside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Everyone, there is only a need growth in the economy whilst the population is increasing, fewer jobs in the Uk means less people coming here, so hopefully the population will stop increasing and start decreasing. We could stay in recession indefinitely proving the population also decreases. Housing will become more affordable with fewer people wanting them, and with lower housing costs your wage will go further so no need for a pay rise. I don't completely agree. If we had growth and a stable population then our standard of living and average wealth/person would be increasing. If we balanced out recession with declining population all we'd be achieving would be a static standard of living and average wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Desirable, but not practically possible - without resorting to super tax. I think it would be easier to create a system that outlaws the hoarding of wealth. Saving is normally encouraged as it allows people to survive unexpected changes in the future without resorting to state assistance. It's also the only means of buying large ticket items apart from borrowing of course. So what is hoarding, is it having 300k in the bank, that's only enough to buy a fairly nice house in Sheffield, 500k? That's enough to buy a very nice house... More? Whatever number you choose it's entirely arbitrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Most of the money that is saved is in the form of shares so not very practical cashing it in to spend, then most of the stuff people buy comes from other countries, so the other countries will end up with more money floating around and not us. Most of the things people buy? What exactly is our trade deficit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Well said, many hundreds of years ago people that thought the earth was a sphere, were thought to be mad, they were proved to be right, for now we will just have to accept that the majority will think we are mad. Hundreds of years ago people who heard voices in their head were thought to be mad. They still are. So which are you in this analogy, a believer in a spherical earth or someone with voices in their head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 well it would create jobs, free up housing and improve morale. I can't see an immediate downside. Can't disagree with you there. It's just the mention of the word guillotine - it gets me all dewy eyed in a badly translated french sort of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Ah, les guillotines. Vous avez trouvé moi tout aux yeux de rosée.Can I have that in English instead, please? It makes no sense at all en français. EDIT It's just the mention of the word guillotine - it gets me all dewy eyed in a badly translated french sort of way.Ah, now that makes sense. Not that the idea itself makes any sense, mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 I don't completely agree. If we had growth and a stable population then our standard of living and average wealth/person would be increasing. If we balanced out recession with declining population all we'd be achieving would be a static standard of living and average wealth. Not necessarily, economic growth could be down to everything being more expensive, so the overall wealth of the population doesn’t change, it could be down to lower production costs with fewer people employed, so some would become wealthier whilst other poorer. Growth doesn’t necessarily make everyone better off. If accommodation is cheaper as result of a declining population we would have more money to spend on other things which would make us feel wealthier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted June 29, 2012 Author Share Posted June 29, 2012 I know, I shouldn't really have answered you because I knew the answer would be well beyond your ability to comprehend, I could try to simplify it for you but alas I just don’t have the capability to understand. Go and borrow some money and spend it that might make you feel better. Well, it's not just me is it? Everyone pulls you up for just about every post you make. I hope that tells you something about your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.