Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About earth

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. I don't think Brown's capitalism is real capitalism. Avoiding downturns by borrowing money on the back of houses and spending it on holidays is what capitalism is all about now is it. That just makes the inevitable downturn bigger and badder. Anyone noticed the recent Hollywood films? Terminator Judgement - Blair is the first villan Transformers 2 - Britain enters as an old empire has-been who has 'never done anything worthwhile'. I think some retard socialists have been hoodwinked by the yanks who are now sucking up to the French after they have bankrupted us - again!!
  2. It most certainly is a scam. But it's even worse than you first point out. Although fractional reserve and quantitative easing invent money from nothing, they only invent the principle sum that is borrowed. The borrower is required to pay that back + interest. But the money to pay the interest is not created. So even if everyone gave back the money they borrowed there would be no money left to pay the interest. They only way to get the money to pay the interest is to invent more through borrowing. Which then creates more interest. So its not possible to get out! I think this mechanism
  3. Thanks for your answer. It was a dumb question, far too obvious but I didn't mind sticking my neck out. I have not seen anyone else ask. If the government paid everyone's mortgages then sure everyone would go for the biggest house they could get, that would be a mess. That would be like bailing out incompetents and frauds. It would not work and to continue doing so would require terrible regulation. Except of course they bail out banks. But then they are owned by them and run by them and move to and from employment in them... You know though, certain middle east states do just this. I
  4. Rather than give banks our tax so they can eventually lend it back to us at interest why not us that same money to pay off chunks of everyone mortgage? Anyone having purchased a property in at least the last 5 years probably paid too much due to too much credit pushing prices up. On the positive: The banks get the money they need, just the same. Their bad loans are reduced. The borrowers have smaller monthly repayments and therefore more to spend and less defaults. Some people would be back in positive equity. Those remortgaging would have better LTV. The government would be so popular
  5. earth

    New Uk Currency?

    Here you go: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...tton-Woods.html Gordon Brown suggests we return to Bretton-Woods - that's gold backed currency. Question is where is he going to get the gold after he sold it below the market value and now it costs four times as much. In the last two weeks people have been buying up gold until the mints had to work overtime to keep up with demand. I suspect gold fever will take over and people will buy like there's no tomorrow. Then it will be confiscated and given to the treasury. Gold has been on a bull run for the last 5 or so years. Infact
  6. I certainly considered that when I first understood how much $ China had. Then I thought they would probably be far more stealthy about it. Then I considered how you have these two groups waring with each other - USA and Iraq/Afghanistan with China sitting on the sidelines waiting to swoop in and claim the spoils. It looks just like WWII. As I understand it the US held back, we sold our businesses to them cheap and then took out a further loan to fund our fighting. Once WWII finished USA rose to be dominant. Back to my original idea. I think what I am really saying is sell stuff to othe
  7. I did not necessarily mean banks when I said assets in fact I did not really consider what they would be but I suppose if it were possible it would be something that did not reduce their growth further. I know that sounds like a worthless asset but you could consider gold for instance. I can see what you mean, asset was the wrong word. 'Something' would have been better I am aware of banks being bought by other countries and the interest paid to them going to those other countries. As a side note this has already started to happen for the US. I read 38% of Citygroup was purchased by a
  8. I understand what you are saying here. As people can no longer borrow debt money is not created. While they continue to pay back their existing debts debt money is destroyed. Overall the quantity of money decreases.
  9. Don't all answer at once I don't know if any of my reasoning is actually correct or if I have misunderstood all the principles touched on. If it is incorrect then please correct me.
  10. I am USA and I have some financial difficulties. Banks are not lending. If they do not lend I face a possible recession. If I lower interest rates to create more money to lend then I will create inflation. People with dollars will not be happy with their dollars depreciating. The dollars I need are out there - in places like China. If I sell assets to China I can get the dollars to put into my economy without creating inflation. I am China. I have dollars and I see the USA is in difficulty. Inflation will devalue my dollars but if I start to sell them on the open market it will put th
  11. I asked a similar question on a gold forum. One answer I remember particuarly is that over history nations have gone on conquests for gold because it was the ony way to meet their monetary needs. If money is a physical entity then there is a limited amount. If you need more for what ever reason then you must find some more - or steal someone elses. The market can also be cornered, meaning one party gets all the money. If you combine interest with fractional reserve banking then it looks to me that eventually the banks will get all the money. I seems to me that both fiat and physical mon
  12. So it did piss a lot of people off then.
  13. You mean they just took the gold that other nations had stored in their vaults for themselves? Didn't that anger a lot of people? Is there a prior agreement that they can do that if the gold is in their vaults? It would only be possible to do what I suggested for a finite period until you ran out of gold to sell. I guess this cartel you describe sold gold when it started to get valuable and then bought it back once it had dropped. Moving it about amongst each other and keeping the price under control.
  14. Been reading this thread. Got to page 5 before I had to post a question. Two things I noted from this thread. 1. Someone stated we had much larger gold reserves in the 1960's and we sold them to help out the dollar. Could someone elaborate on this or correct me if I misunderstood. 2. The $ is a reserve currency and will keep its status if the yield is greater than could be made elsewhere, such as gold investment. So it is in the interests of the USA to keep gold as a bad investment and they can do this by selling some of their reserve to force prices down. According to BullionVault th
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.