Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

nixy

New Members
  • Posts

    1,728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by nixy

  1. I read the WGC 12% reduction as by tonnage. Anybody else looked at the figures?

    I don't see any distinction needing to be made, gold is gold, and derivative contracts on gold (aka paper gold) are just that. At the end of the day only one person has the golden ticket that allows them to claim the gold.

    There is a lot of fuss and hooha, based on a whole load of nothing from paper screamers....it's a non issue.

    I'm not convinced about anything, other than a price rise that doesn't get us back to last June, let alone September 2011.

    Give me a long period of higher highs, and higher lows, and I will break out the Kitecat.

    ..._

    Just for a minute, imagine trading derivatives was made a capital offence. What would happen to the commodity price? A price rise would be evidence of fractionalisation?

    Gold is gold is obvious to all.

    What is, it seems, less obvious to many, is the effect derivatives can (and do) have on the underlying commodity.

    .......or not?

  2. A warm welcome to the Spanish people who are helping us to understand how the Spanish feel about the Eurozone crisis.

    I've moved this to the main board to allow more posters to contribute.

    So logic might suggest threads are moved in an attempt control the number viewings and therefore affect contributions? Who is to judge, and why?

    Anyway, a question I'd like to ask our posters from Spain is ......How much do the young (and older) receive from the state by way of benefits? Also housing benefits?

  3. You only have to look at the Mary Portas story on the HPC blog this morning.

    People have it in their heads to use any reason, however tenuous or superficial, to bump their asset's prices so they can get rich quick without having to do anything. Tragically, while Ponzi mentality may have subsided it hasn't died, it's just gone into the shadows, lurking beneath the surface ready to rear it's ugly face at the drop of hat.

    If the bankers can work out a new way to make the public swallow the idea of getting rich quick through another credit bubble once again (and that won't take much), becuase appealling to people's greed and ego is p1ss easy), the People will be stupid enough to buy into it all too readily.

    It's all very well the People being angry with the bankers (it's understandable that they are) but the People should also be angry with themselves that they allowed their judgement to slip, that they allowed themselves to join in the Ponzi frenzy.

    For all the anger directed at bankers, I don't see any substantive organised attempts by the People themselves in the mainstream media to warn against a repetition of the mania we saw during the boom.

    Well I am not too angry at the People per se .....more anger at their ignorance. No, the bankers MUST create inflation..... they know all too well the anxiety it engenders. People see house prices rising and fear for missing out. The bankers know this, created this....and 'capitalised' on it. The perfect system for stealing wealth from the uneducated (or in a minority of cases.....the educated).

  4. The banks are a bit like British Leyland was...inefficient and subsidised but politically could not at the time be allowed to fail.....they cannot carry on in their current format...we cannot t keep paying the salaries of failed businesses...

    Why not.....have you heard future generations complaining yet?

  5. I see the banker robbers have stolen another 100 billion off of the tax payers.

    This gets right up my nose, never before has anyone been given so much for doing so little. It's worse than that...they are being given so much after taking so much off us in the first place.

    I for one want to see the bankers stopped in their tracks, I want regulation, I want bankruptcy and I was prosecutions.

    I find myself more and more annoyed at what the politicians are doing to support the banks.

    Is it just me or are more and more people getting angry at this ?

    No No......... I heard on the Today prog on R4......the 'money' is mostly coming from Germany......by which I guess Pesto meant German people...although he didn't ask which generation of Germans, he did seem to find it all quite funny....in spite of there being little to laugh at.

    They really are quite a useless bunch at the Today prog.......guess they have their reasons.

  6. Link

    Trust the Excrete to run a property propaganda piece, pressuring young kids into a life of misery. For those who have forgotten, the Daily Excrete is owned by Richard Desmond who used to publish filth rags and now has an extensive property empire.

    There are many ways of recognizing being "grown up". The state says its when you reach 18, your biology says it's when you've gone through puberty, but Desmond's rag says the number one sign is having a mortgage.

    I would contend the number one sign of being grown up you are a strong and independent individual, leading your own life having developed your own wisdom and making your own decisions - and not having them made for you by ex-pornographers.

    Having a mortgage isn't a sign of success, it's often a sign of failure. It's a sign that you have accepted received wisdom, that you have surrendered to social conformity. It's a sign that you are too poor to buy your own property without borrowing. It's a sign that you don't have the where-with-all to get rich first. It's a sign that you've thrown away the chance to become the very best person that you can possibly be, that your self-esteem is so low you've thrown in the towel and you've accepted your lot in life. That's what a mortgage is.

    Desmond got to own his property empire because he exploited desperate, naive young women into sacrificing their dignity. He's now doing the same to his readers. He's the archetypal sociopath and sees most other people as nothing more than useful idiots to exploit for his own advantage. What an absolute b4st4rd.

    There is nothing amazing about having a mortgage. There is not one person in history, not one, who is remembered because they had a mortgage. In fact, if you look at lists of famous people, you'll notice they all have one thing in common - they acheived greatness inspite of not having a mortgage and probably because so. Think of Albert Einstein, Richard Branson, Bill Gates and the like.

    Here a list of the top 100 Britons. Which of these achieved greatness because they had a mortgage? Which of them achieved greatness because they didn't?

    Top 100 Britons.

    The guy is clearly an 4rse. Most get mortgages these days, for fear of 'being left behind'. Nothing whatever to do with adulthood.

    Clear reasoned independent thinking is probably a better indicator of 'being grownup' .........Fear of being left behind (left out) is more the act of children (gangs etc.)

    Mind you...if I was in the property scam, I too would use might use such tactics to keep the whole racket going.

  7. Putting aside that we don't get to create from the ground up, we only get to influence the direction of travel for the moment:

    I actually favour any legal framework being as short as possible. A short document, maybe 20 pages. I actually want the vast majority no actually all tort law to be derived from case law as it suits my libertarian principles. It would evolve and be decided by the people, 12 at a time. There is no need for the state to decided murder is illegal, case law can do that perfectly well, and derive the nuances better.

    My framework would cover the limitations on tax collection and coercion. Essentially requiring all spending to budgeted at elections and voted on.

    This is the key bit, how do you keep a state small?

    My legal framework would demand that all taxes and government spend to be expressly voted on. Also all taxation/spending must be decided regionally, I would envisage the UK being split into maybe 30 different regions.

    In each region the people would have to vote on each area of government separately, and their budgets.

    So lets say you lived in East Wessex (my 30 regions derive from the old Saxon regions- this area of my theory can be improved later) and you elect a governor for your region with the power to propose government functions. Your governor decided that his people may want a Health Sheriff so he calls for elections to the post.

    Several candidates come forward to take up the Health job, each is legally required to explain what they would do and present a budget for doing so. So Mr Smith campaigns on his manifesto and presents a budget that says he needs £xbn to deliver this service over the next 5 years, and that will cost taxpayer East Wessex 0.85% of their land value each year. Mr Jones delivers his manifesto and budget, saying it will require taxpayers 1.15% of land value to implement.

    Elections are every ...say 5 years... or when their budget gets used up, You can't borrow, you can't go over budget without triggering a fresh election for the role.

    Some points:

    Only Taxpayer get a vote.

    Taxes are always done on land value.

    Each individual would have a decent allowance, meaning taxes fall mainly on southern landowners (or whatever land is expensive, and whoever hordes land).

    Elections are done on the French presidential style, whatever you call that. Where the top 2 go final round.

    If there is not at least 50% turnout at an election the election is considered non-quorum and the role is never created.

    The governor can only propose sheriff roles that need creating...Health, Roads, Crime, Fire etc, anything else needs referendum.

    Under my ideal system people in different parts of the country can have whatever political system they so desire. If people in county A want a huge state they can have that buy electing a Governor who proposes lots of state roles, and then electing people with ambitious tax and spend plans....as long as they are happy to pay for them.

    If people in county B want to live in an anarchist county they can do so simply by refusing to participate in any election, making them non-quorum.

    The national legal fraemwork would provide that people can mover around as they wish, so like minded people can group together in a particular county to get the type of government they prefer.

    Most services I imagine would be delivered via the free market, as in most areas a standing public sector would not be viable long term, but it could happen.

    This is all the short version. I have thought about getting this down in a pamphlet sometime.

    [edit] Great, just as this thread gets interesting the mods decide to kill it. Wish I had not wasted 10 minutes on the above now, thanks for nothing mods.

    That was NOT 10 minutes wasted. More like the most useful post of the week, compared with all the others churning out the same old tired arguments.

    (I've just deleted the rest of what I was going to say .........just in case)

  8. Thanks for posting that, I was going to post something similar and you saved me the hassle.

    Minimal coercion to fund a small state that provides a legal framework is fine as far as I'm concerned. Desirable even. I don't share Traktions moralising over coercion.

    OK, What constitutes a small state, and how would it be kept small. I guess I could accept a system that would coerce 10% of 'GDP' on what is now referred to as public services. Thing is, once you get people to accept coercion is OK, that 10% would become 20% and so on.

    Coercion is a bit like pregnancy....... you can't have only part of it.

  9. You could spend hours speculating what would happen. You could suggest that certain roads would become mutually owned by those who use them, funded by subscription, much like a voluntary road fund licence. You could also suggest that without insurance, the owners would ask that you didn't drive on them.

    There are many alternatives to state coercion, including common and individual ownership, subscription models, insurance and so forth. If you remove the coercion, alternative solutions will be sought, just as they were in the past and will again be in the future.

    Yes.....well we DO spend hours here anyway.......(even PopGuns posted many thousands here).....it's just the debate seldom (never?) moves on to specifics. Which is a shame, as specifics could demonstrate practically how true freedom could work....... It won't be 'easy'.......But 'easy' is what we have had............ 'til now.......

  10. When coercion is at the heart of the problem, it's pretty inevitable that many a debate will reach a point where it is discussed, IMO.

    If you gave up on freedom in 2008, why even bother posting here? Are you interested in solutions to problems or do you just want a good moan?

    +1

    PopGun's given up. Much to the delight of the politico-bankers....

    ........Freedom!!!......long, may it not continue!

  11. Statism? If you want to do a job and another wants to pay you to do a job, only a coercive party can prevent you doing so.

    Ofc, you would probably need plenty of insurance, to prevent you losing your house and future earnings if you crashed, but that's a different issue.

    OK. so statism ends today. What would happen tomorrow (and 6 months hence)?....... apart from several (thousands) of us applying for tanker drivers work.

    The most obvious will be fuel drops to 40-50p / litre?

    Of course if statism ended I / we would be free to drive without insurance ..........which is exactly what huge number are doing now anyway (think £2000 pa car insurance for unemployed 18 year old).

  12. You don't define what disciplines 'useless' degrees are in, and I plead guilty to mocking degrees in many disciplines, even though I have an engineering degree myself. Mea culpa.

    I also feel that Blair's arbitrary target of 50% of school leavers attaining degrees is ridiculous, but mainly because there is not the demand for that many skilled people, at least in many particular disciplines.

    I agree that a degree is not necessary for many posts that specify them in the job descriptions, but this not a polar degree/ no degree issue; employers just want the best-educated employees for the money. I sometimes get declined for contracts because I have only have expertise in Do-dah Version 3.4, when the clients specifies experience in Doo-dah version 3.5. I could do the job, but someone with Doo-day 3.5 is seen as a safer bet. Such is life.

    I do not agree that there is an erosion in degree standards in any specific discipline. Newer degree subjects may only be appicable to new industries, and it is difficult to compare different disciplines. As for a 'gravy train of sponsors', if only...

    You may find this supposed "club uni attitude" offensive, but you dismiss "useless" degrees out of hand, which could be offensive to people who have worked years to attain them only to be told by someone who does not have their knowledge that their knowledge is useless.

    If someone has a degree in a particular field, they are going to be a more attractive employee, especially as these skills may be even more relevant as an individual's career progresses with the employer. It's called competition for jobs.

    I also feel that Blair's arbitrary target of 50% of school leavers attaining degrees is ridiculous

    Sorry ....it was John Mayor who came up with this idiotic notion......... which goes to show what a shower of sh7te they all are.

  13. Which is why the state shouldn't be championed, as it is the external source of the coercion.

    I think people to group together, to protect one another, but coercion isn't needed to encourage them to do that - they will group naturally, for the reasons you outline; to gain mutual protection.

    I said a while back, I'd like to apply for a job as a fuel tanker driver. I and many others would be prepared to work for less than the £45k they are said to earn.

    I'm pretty sure I / we would not be allow to successfully tender for such a job........what 'ism' is preventing a person from offering their services at an honest market rate?

  14. Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

    The correct balance is somewhere in the middle and that varies from country to country. Extreme free market is unworkable (Afghanistan, Somalia), and neither did the communist (USSR, DPRK obviously...)

    Has a free market ever been tried anywhere??...... you can't really suggest that Afghanistan & Somalia are free though....surely? ...... well you can, of course, if you like :)

  15. Technology enabled new wealth to be created, it was socialism which enabled the masses to direct the flow of the that wealth to the masses.

    Thus from 1945 to 1980 when unions and socialism was fairly strong in the US the wages of your average worker doubled. In 1980 with Ronald Reagen the system lurched towards the right with capital becoming ascendent over labour. The unions were eviscerated, via propaganda socialism was turned into a dirty word and destroyed, and with its death the wealth arising from technology was redirected away from the masses to the plutocrats. Thus from 1980 to 2010 the wages of the average worker increased by a mere 8%. Contrast that with the prior time period when it doubled.

    Not convinced this is the whole story. I reckon the banks (together with their political mates) used socialism as a convenient tool to divert technologically produced wealth away from the masses into their own accounts. Workers win 20% more 'money' yielding 20% more real stuff, whereas without the a fore mentioned scam the worker would have won 10% more money yielding 30% more stuff.

    Imagine that the printing of money had been made a hanging offence, say 50 years ago........avg houses still valued at £400ish??

  16. Garbage.

    The GREATEST period of improvement for the masses in the west was between 1945-1975, and that was and is considered to be a socialist period in history. In the US they even have a name for it, 'the great prosperity'.

    And socialism did work, or are you saying that socialism didn't cause improvements in the lives of the masses in the latter part of the industrial revolution?? That what i posted above never happened??

    I'd suggest improvements to the lives of the masses was entirely due to advances in technology, certainly NOT socialism. Any advances were made IN SPITE of socialism, not because of it.

    ??

  17. Watched a film made in 1942 about R J MItchell, the designer of the Sptifire.

    I was in the mood for a syrupy nice bit of feelgood and this film hit the spot.

    He worked in his wooden office, far away from luxury desking, carpets and a view of the river. He was devoted to his work.

    SO I thought Id look him up.

    Now, How do you become chief designer at age 24?.......

    Growing up

    Reginald Joseph Mitchell was born on 20th May 1895 at 115 Congleton Road, Butt Lane, near Stoke-on-Trent. He was the eldest of the three sons of Herbert and Eliza Jane Mitchell (née Brain). His father, a Yorkshireman, served as headmaster successively in three Staffordshire schools and later established a printing business in the Hanley District of Stoke. Mitchell spent his childhood in Normacott, near Longton, and attended the Queensberry Road Higher Elementary School before moving to Hanley High School. This was where he first became interested in aviation; designing, making and flying model aeroplanes. His fellow students were said to comment "He's mad about aeroplanes".

    At the age of sixteen Mitchell began an apprenticeship with a locomotive engineering firm; Kerr, Stuart and Co. at Stoke. His training started in the engine workshop and progressed to the drawing office. He also undertook evening classes in engineering drawing, mechanics and higher mathematics.

    <br clear="all">

    Joining Supermarine

    Mitchell's interest in aviation persisted and in 1917, after completing his apprenticeship, he applied for a job as assistant to Hubert Scott-Pain, the owner and designer of The Supermarine Aviation Works, Woolston, Southampton. He was offered the position and sent for his belongings rather than travelling back to the Midlands. Within a year he was promoted to the post of assistant to the works manager. In the same year, 1918, he married Florence Dayson, headmistress of Dresden Infants' School, who he had been courting before his move to Southampton. They later had one son, Gordon, who was born in 1920.

    In 1919, aged twenty-four, Mitchell was appointed chief designer and in the following year he was then made chief engineer. His short but illustrious career was to see him design and develop 24 aeroplanes over a 20 year period. From its formation in 1912, Supermarine had specialised in flying-boat manufacture, and Mitchell built on the company's tradition. Working through designs such as the Sea Eagle, the Scarab and the Swan, he progressed to an armed military boat called the Southampton. The Swan had effectively been the prototype for this new flying-boat and the Air Ministry took the then unusual step of ordering six 'off the drawing board' in August 1924, seven months before the Southampton's maiden flight on 10 March 1925. The Southampton equipped six RAF squadrons and remained operational until 1936, establishing Britain at the forefront of marine aviation and helping to transform Supermarine into one of the most profitable enterprises in the aircraft industry. The Southampton was eventually succeeded by such aircraft as the Walrus and the Stranraer, both of which saw action in the Second World War.

    A brilliant designer and engineer

    Despite the success of his flying-boats, Mitchell is more commonly associated with the design of high-speed aircraft for the Schneider Trophy races between 1922 and 1931. The first of such aircraft, a small biplane flying-boat named Sea Lion II, won the 1922 race achieving an average speed of 145.7 m.p.h. However, Mitchell was profoundly influenced by the American Curtiss seaplanes which dominated the race in 1923. He began developing a series of float seaplanes soon afterwards and produced four streamlined float planes. The S4 (the S stood for Schneider), although unsuccessful, provided invaluable experience for the development of its successor. The S5 recaptured the Trophy in 1927, the third aircraft, the S6 retained it in 1929 while the fourth and most famous, the S6B won the Schneider Trophy outright in 1931, averaging 340 m.p.h. around the course above the Solent. This aircraft went on to set a new world speed record of 407.5 m.p.h. Mitchell was awarded the CBE in 1932 for his contribution to high-speed flight.

    The technical prowess of his flying-boats and seaplanes established Mitchell as the foremost aircraft designer in Britain. A ten-year contract, commencing in 1923, signified his indispensability to Supermarine, and a technical directorship followed in 1927. When Vickers acquired Supermarine a year later it was a condition of the purchase that Mitchell should be contractually bound to the company, without the option of terminating his service agreement, until 1933.

    ........

    In todays World, he would not have left school at 16...if he did, no-one would have employed him.

    He would have been shelf stacking, odd jobbing and generally a drop out.

    WHY?

    well, he would have needed a raft of GCSEs, then A levels, then a degree, THEN he may have been able to secure a job in a drawing office, working through a system that would have sapped him of all the enthusiasm he had in him.

    He did not have a degree....Im amazed the Spitfire ever left the ground.

    Quite right. The aircraft could not have flown without degree qualified people....

    He did not need a degree. This was a time, don't forget, when reputation mattered.

    The modern education system is the equivalent of fractional reserve banking....... it's became seriously diluted.......and consequently too expensive.

×
×
  • 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.