I1L2T3 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 It might work ... but what would happen if those accountants (and the people who employ them) decided to take their ball (or their other toys) and go and play elsewhere? What would happen? We'd still have banks. In fact we'd still have a huge banking sector but it would be more aligned to the needs of the wider economy. The tail would no longer be wagging the dog. Seriously let them go. And let's rebuild a solid and ethically profitable banking sector without the chancers, fraudsters, mavericks and gamblers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
57Varieties 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. Pity you didnt buy the bike, your gonna lose £12k if you leave it in the bank! Oh well the new currency system (not based on debt) will be much better after we clean all the trash out of PAR LIAR MENT(for lying to your mind). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studentbob Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 It might work ... but what would happen if those accountants (and the people who employ them) decided to take their ball (or their other toys) and go and play elsewhere? Where did Dyson take his ball (along with all the jobs)? (I must admit, I'm surprised that the ball vacuum was such a success ... it's a bit too vigorous for me. ) Where does 'Boots the Chemist' have its accountancy department? Where do 'British Steel' (or whatever they are called nowadays) make most of their product? My reply to Cyclone was kept as brief as possible just to show how people could be stopped from hoarding away private wealth. It may require the imposition of country by country reporting (or whatever it's called) which I know many economists have been calling for, and many multinationals are lobbying against. Some argue it will never happen, but I think it will be inevitable, one day. The argument of industrialists etc moving abroad is somewhat irrelevant - if a gap in the market appears then someone will fill it. We would have an attractive low tax economy where entrepreneurs or the highly paid could still save around £25k per annum - I think that's a pretty good incentive. The main basis of my argument is to stop the upward/outward flow of capital. Our currency would be more stable as most of it would just circulate in the real economy. It may sound protectionist but so what - nobody forced this country to become a big player in international finance - the only reason we are in this position is because various institutions backed by every government of the last 250 years or so has seen it as way of making profits for themselves. But as their intentions are more and more discredited so the opportunity presents itself for a sustainable alternative. Look at the developing countries of Africa and the Asian sub continent, they are being savaged by multinationals who have the weight of the IMF, WTO and World Bank behind them. We would be free to use our resources in a sustainable way. And with regards to the debt; I suppose we would be fined massively by the IMF and their friends - we could just hyper inflate. So we may have to forgo our foreign holidays for a few years, I could live with that. It's not for everyone, I know, but I think it would be better than what we got now. And if we become a more harmonious society because of it, then maybe others will follow. It's still capitalism, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Do you honestly believe you are not being lied to by our government? I believe it's being vastly over egged so those in power can sell of services and implement their wet dream of austerity. If everyone was spending, all over the world there'd be money moving around and changing hands. What possible benefit is there to panic and austerity? Yes, we're being lied to. The situation is much worse than they're letting on. That's according to some ex banker bloke they had on 'Question time' last night. Austerity means people don't have enough money to spend on goods. Now if the government were to give everyone say, £1,000 to spend on goods, on the proviso that they must spend and not save it, instead of giving bailouts to the bank, that might get things moving again. And it's not such a daft idea, it's what they did in Australia a couple of years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 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. I can remember when 'the hoarding of wealth' was called saving for a rainy day, and was seen as a good thing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Yes, we're being lied to. The situation is much worse than they're letting on. That's according to some ex banker bloke they had on 'Question time' last night. Austerity means people don't have enough money to spend on goods. Now if the government were to give everyone say, £1,000 to spend on goods, on the proviso that they must spend and not save it, instead of giving bailouts to the bank, that might get things moving again. And it's not such a daft idea, it's what they did in Australia a couple of years ago. The only thing that is surely going to make things much worse is to keep repeating, "things are going to get much worse and this may never end". How did the uk get out of the last 3 recessions? Increased spending and investment. The Tories won't do it, they have too much of a hard on for cuts, unemployment, slashing the public sector and keeping the working class down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I do understand what you mean. Confidence is everything in banking. But unfortunately Pandora's box has been opened, and there's no getting the genie back in the bottle. Soon it will be every man for himself.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 That depends on whether the spending is driven by income or by debt. The economy has always been driven by credit. One person's debt is another's income. If nobody takes on any debt, there's much less money around to be spent, so there's less money for people to earn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shef_Fitness Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Isn't it just that the form of interviewing is much more aggressive? I love watching politicians squirm on tv but I don't think the old ones would fair any better than the new ones. They're just less respected. And tv viewing figures are increased by confrontation. Their only job is make decisions and defend those decisions so it's quite funny when they fail so spectacularly. Maybe they should change the selection process to include having a backbone and being able to respond in interviews. What is frightening is how out of depth the modern minister is, and this applys to all 3 of the main partys. On Question Time about 6 weeks ago was John Prescott, we all know what happened during his time, but was is most frightening was if he was an unknown MP (ie, up and coming) then he would be credible. He sounded like a labour man, was able to put forward arguments that would appeal to a working person and I reckon would easily take apart any of the conservative front bench. In times of crisis, do we not need the best? if you were to put your modern conseravtive in a debate against conservatives from the 1980s, ie, Tebbit, Heseltine and of course Margaret Thatcher, your modern conservative would not stand a chance against these people in a debate. Watching jeremy kyle browbeat a druggie every morning is quite entertaining, watching elected MPs get torn apart on TV is utterly frightening. These are our leaders and they simply do not have a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 It may sound protectionist but so what - nobody forced this country to become a big player in international finance - the only reason we are in this position is because various institutions backed by every government of the last 250 years or so has seen it as way of making profits for themselves. But as their intentions are more and more discredited so the opportunity presents itself for a sustainable alternative. Most banks and large companies make money for the share holders and the share holders are ordinary people, everyone can own part of the bank or PLC. If they don't make money they won't employ people and pensions funds will fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.