Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

24gray24

Members
  • Posts

    2,708
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 24gray24

  1. 19 hours ago, scepticus said:

    Yes but how does the public sector later de-leverage once everything is hunky-dory in the private sector? 

    There are two standard scenarios:

    1. A depression
    2. Private sector invents its own 'safe assets' to replace those withdrawn by de-leveraging public sector. MBS, CDO etc (or whatever comes next, cryptocoin ponzis etc)

    What happened to reduce the bureaucracy  and activities of government?

    And why would you get a depression when the private sector has de-leverage? 

  2. 4 hours ago, yelims said:

    Ah more of this one nation (ein reich, ein Volk, ein fuhrer) nonsense. Btw Ireland had to fight and suffer for decades to leave this abusive Union something there wasn’t an article50 we know full well how democratic membership of the United Kingdom is

     

    anyways deep down you realise that you lost rights and are getting angry at being viewed as a third country person from our POV, a european (small e, part of a small number of periphery states viewed as Russians etc are viewed) not an EUropean 

     

    well done for voting away your rights and opportunities to pursue a vision of a future where not a single positive can be named by people who don’t even bother hiding their disdain at the plebs 

    Reducing immigration is a positive thing for Brexiters.  

    And getting rid of the right of southern irish people to live and work in england would be another step forward. 

    It's already increasing wages noticeably. 

    But I suppose better wages isn't viewed as a positive thing. 

    Freedom of movement is really about arbitraging cheap labour after all. 

  3. 5 hours ago, dugsbody said:

    No, I don't accept it as a long term problem because I fundamentally believe it is right and good for societies for humans to "be allowed" (*) to move around. We do it in the UK as I already said for goodness sake. I trust you're not out campaigning for removal of that right because it creates brain drain in county Durham?

    Those countries you are concerned about who have joined the EU are prospering and will continue to prosper. Everyone made the same argument about Poland ("brain drain, oh poor Poland, I don't want Polish people living near me because I'm so worried about Poland"). Poland's wages have risen significantly and will continue to rise and the migration will not continue. Same will happen in other countries.

    (*) Allowed = you want to box more people into their tiny geography and pretend it is because you care about them so much.

    There are about 10 billion people in the world. At least 6 billion of them would be better off living in Europe.  

    And most of those 6 billion wouldn't have any time for your beliefs or values. 

    So how is your "fundamental belief that it is right and good" supposed to work?

  4. 3 hours ago, Sheer Heart Attack said:

    1) I don't oppose bright people coming to the UK. In my previous posts, I mentioned that we should try to attract the best of the best from around the world to benefit the country.

    In the case of movement of population in the UK, they are already citizens of the country and they are already counted into the figures.

    The population of the UK has not massively increased in the last 15 years from people moving to one part of the UK to another part of the UK.

    I respectfully suggest that you read my previous posts because you'll understand better my point of view because it seems like you're disagreeing with me just for the sake of it.

    2) Again, it is their money and they should do with it what they please. I have just ordered some tech from aliexpress.com.

    This is the problem with Remoaners who are triggered by any talk of the disadvantages of immigration.

    The red mist of righteous disgust descends and they think that, if you disagree with them, you want a fortress Britain, huge import tariffs, exchange controls, zero immigration, and so on. That's just not the case.

    Anyway, bringing up the Phillipines is an interesting point.

    According to Wikipedia... 

    "The Philippines is the largest exporter of nurses in the world supplying 25% of all overseas nurses. An Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development study reported that one of every six foreign-born nurses in the OECD countries is from the Philippines. Of all employed Filipino RNs, roughly 85% are working overseas."

    Nursing work in the Phillipines is not great with "low wages, poor benefit packages (and) fewer jobs available". The government there seem to be making a rod for their own back and it's obviously not our fault that compensation is so low and opportunities so scarse.

    But "(a)ccording to many Filipinos working in hospitals, the most educated and skilled nurses are the first to go abroad...it is clear that there is a short supply of the most skilled nurses who go abroad.

    "As a result, operating rooms are often staffed by novice nurses, and nurses with more experience work extremely long hours. As skilled nurses decline in the urban areas, nurses from rural areas migrate to hospitals in the cities for better pay. As a result, rural communities experience a drain of health resources. 

    "Stories and studies alike demonstrate that a treatable emergency in the provinces may be fatal because there are no medical professionals to help treat them. In fact, "the number of Filipinos dying without medical attention has been steadily increasing for the last decade."

    Anyone pretending that attracting, for example, skilled and trained medical staff from poorer countries overseas does not have a negative effect on the country they're leaving is in denial or deluded whether or not the original country "brought it on themselves".

    The Phillipines government charges a large amount for an export permit for those nurses heading abroad. 

     

  5. On 21/06/2021 at 14:42, Locke said:

    If this is the "Austrian perspective", then it is wrong.

    If I ask you to keep my gold in your house and you have to give it all back to me regardless what happens in 10 years time, how much would you pay me for that privilege? 

    Rational answer: you would charge me; in effect a "negative" interest rate.

    And yet people still keep stuff in safe deposit boxes and pay a handsome fee therefore.

    Not if you're lending it out at interest for those 10 years to other people. .

    It would be the negative charge to look after it plus the smallest cut of the profits from those other people that competition will allow. 

    Takes you back up to a small interest rate far lower than borrowers pay. 

  6. 13 hours ago, yelims said:

    UKs budget for 2021 for foreign aid is 10 billion GBP
    Irelands is 868 million EUR ( 0.75 billion GBP)

    Our population is 13.5-14x smaller than UK so our foreign aid budget is in same range if not larger now

    as added bonus our foreign aid goes to develop our standing in world and soft power, not to further Tory corruption

    Isn't foreign aid just a wicked scam? 

    First you bomb them, then you steal all their raw materials. Then you give them food aid. 

    And you take a fat wedge in Admin first. 

    And then they come over here because...we bombed their country flat. 

    Why are we even pretending it's virtuous? 

  7. 13 hours ago, winkie said:

    Whatever the benefits might one day be, most of us will not be benefiting from it, now or in the next 50 years and beyond.......sold down the river......unless anyone knows differently please feel free to let everyone know, only truth and honesty need apply.;)

    The people who voted brexit are happy and watching football. 

    They think we've left, we've taken back control, and life will be getting better. 

    It may all be mistaken, but their mood is positively upbeat. 

    You'd never know it from this thread!

  8. 4 hours ago, pig said:

    I take your point, but they're blind to something more positive than that -a grand opportunity for mutually enriched lives.

    Not that 'mitigation' and 'enriched lives' are unconnected. I remember when I did a lot of hill walking some of the gear worship used to do my head in. However I did often consider that if people were geeking out over comfort, then safety (normally!) took care of itself.

    The difficulty for Brexiters is that they are forced to work backwards from an ill-conceived a priori position, including from arguments they hadn't even considered before, hence a lot of the nonsense. The beginning of this debate was much more basic.

    Then again (and here theres a twist with the hill-walking anecdote)  while Its relatively easy for remainers to rationally argue from a priori principles of international collaboration and cooperation, as we've seen its  even easier to stoke irrational fears. 

    Aren't you assuming the truth of what you're trying to prove? 

    Viz that the EU is "a grand opportunity for mutually enriched lives."

  9. 1 hour ago, Flat Bear said:

    Latest Fed forecast is just 2 rate rises by 2023. The "spike" is only transitory and temporary and inflation will get back to normal within...... a few years. 3 TO 4% inflation can easily be tolerated. Exactly as you say

    BUT

    Biden has announced massive “stimulus" programme

    There is a shortage of labour throughout the US. People are not returning back to work.

    There are price rises across all sectors

    There are shortages with demand far exceeding supply 

    Current interest payment is 378billion with 10 year bonds at 2.2%

    So do you think it is possible they are right? Do you really believe they are in control? Do you think, just maybe, they are way behind the curve and have their heads stuck in the sand?

    Genuine question. If you think so I will take it on board, I am often wrong.

     

    No, I think they've made a political decision to erode debts through inflation for a while. 

    they've chosen inflation (collapse )rather than deflationary (collapse). 

    For a while. 

  10. 4 minutes ago, Flat Bear said:

     

     

    This is an interesting thread

    Sunak seemed very calm and collected dodging all Andrew Neil’s questions last week. I have been told he is very financially savvy? so he must know something I am unaware of, mustn't he?

    I think we are asking the right questions but not necessarily coming up with the more likely conclusions.

    Firstly, Interest rates are raised to defend a currency, lowering would weaken it.

    Yes it is different this time. It is always different every time but the fundamental laws of economics physics still apply.

    There is some truth in that it is in the interest of government(s) at this time to keep borrowing as low as possible for as long as possible so it is likely we will see base rate rises lag well behind inflation rates Mortgage rates will be encouraged to be risen to try and stem debt so the banks will be in a very profitable position for a short period.

    "Whatever happens in the US will happen here 6 months later". My late father’s saying. I doubt this is always exactly true  but when it comes to financials it is invariably true give a few months either side. Interest rates are 5% in the states and likely to double to 10% by year end. The BOE interest rate has normally been a percentage point or more above the US and there is no reason to believe it will not continue.

    A good question would be how far can inflation (real) rise before the BOE has to raise the base rate? They will, I am sure, try to have some sort of 2 tier base rate, one for their QEing and one as a lender of last resort. 

    Ultimately it will not be the BOE or even the UK government who will make the decision to raise rates it will be the Federal reserve, because what ever they do we are forced to follow. It has always been so.

    Depends what you mean by inflation? Another good question. We all know the BOE have been manipulating their measure of inflation for a long time. Omitting house prices from the figures? The largest and most important purchase in most of our lifetimes, it really is ridiculous.

    But I suppose certain price rises are more important than others and deflation in some areas will offset inflation in others.

    It is like saying the definition of an alcoholic is someone who consumes a lot of alcohol. We know this is not true as you can have a very very, heavy social drinker who may consume several times more than the “recommended” intake but it does not make them an alcoholic. You can have someone who drinks very little but IS an alcoholic. The answer is in control and whether they are addicted and unable to control their intake. So inflation that is not controllable and affects the economy as a whole is more important, to the rate setters and global markets anyway.

      

     

     

     

    Hasn't the federal reserve said they're not going to raise interest rates for a while, until the unemployment has gone down? 

    So that means they're going to let inflation rip (or be temporary) for at least a year. 

    So how high is it going to go, given that inaction? 

    What are the traditional leading indicators. Commodities? What are they showing?

    And is there any indication mortgage spreads are rising (at government behest) even though base rates remain the same?

  11. 2 hours ago, dugsbody said:

    Brexit never stopped that, so it does not "allow" it.

    Divergence is cumulative. So is ever closer union. Sorry. 

    1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

    Are you going to continue down your path of promoting only anti-EU views or are you going to prove that you are balanced? Can you share the other side of this story (the headline of the article is misleading). I'll wait.

    Hypocrite? 

  12. 9 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

    Still waiting to hear what the plan to replace trade and the other advantages of being with the EU is? Been waiting for 6 years now.

     

    The plan is to continue trade with eu and gradually reduce it as a proportion  by expanding manufacturing and trade elsewhere. 

    By making it easier and cheaper to start and run a business in uk than elsewhere. Less red tape and less taxes. Just don't mention lower wages and lower employment rights. 

    Something like that. 

    Government currently overwhelmed with pandemic of course so bonfire of red tape and taxes on business not really got going yet. . 

     

  13. 59 minutes ago, pig said:

    Which I didn't.

    I started from the premise that our constitutional arrangement with the EU was worth examining and looked forward to the debate. Which unfortunately turned out to be little more than 'an expression of something inherently dark and negative' . After 5 years of asking, Brexiters have struggled to find anything else and the situation has simply got worse and worse.

    So to repeat - you cannot simply stick Mother Teresa onto 'something inherently dark and negative' and ask if it would then be acceptable.

    Put a positive version of Brexit forward first and then you can ask what if we had such and such a government with whoever PM.

    OK.  Brexit allows us to put our own house in order without being bound more than necessary by EU agenda for an ever closer union, unlimited eu immigration, the inherent problems of the euro etc. 

    The catch of course is that while brexit may allow you to put your own house in order given good government, it won't magic one up. 

    And this one of course has been overwhelmed by a pandemic up to now. 

    The mountain that needs to be climbed is paying off the national debt, cutting taxes and getting full employment. 

    That's what it's all about. Taking back control so a good government can reach those sunny uplands. 

    Or something like that anyway. 

  14. 8 hours ago, nothernsoul said:

    As another poster mentioned, Lib dem constituencies tend to be in better off areas. I always wondered what type of person habitually voted lib dem(not tactical or protest vote)  I assume it is people with consciously liberal views but the economic status quo suits them fine. I know a couple of people like this. Both very outwardly PC, judgementally so. They are both also "accidental Landlords" who kept their old house to rent out when buying a new one. 

    If you look at lib dem policy, it reflects this too. Policies that at first glance appear to help the poor but really benefit the middle classes. The key one was in coalition, when as a concession for supporting tuition fee rises, they persuaded the tories to provide free school meals for all pupils under year 3 in primary school. Seems very progressive. But in reality low income families received free school meals anyway and were no better off, the school budget, during a time of cuts, was being given to better off families. If I remember correctly, way back when the poll tax debacle was going on, they also proposed a local income tax, which is a terrible idea in my opinion. Again seems very progressive, but ultimately benefits those who are asset rich. 

    Lawyers judges politically neutral professionals vote liberal. 

    Main problem with liberals is they aren't liberals currently. They don't stand up for free speech, or free trade and seem to support socialist tax and spend (and let's bankrupt the country) policies. 

  15. 18 hours ago, scottbeard said:

    Not sure what bankers and Vince Cable's antics post-government have got to do with the issue of tuition fees.

    In coalition the Lib Dems were able to get some - but not all - Lib Dem policies enacted.  What else could anyone have expected?

    Some moral backbone would have been nice. 

    Eg stopping the Tories siphoning money to their friends while giving austerity to the rest of us, and running up the national debt in the process. 

    Being liberal in fact, rather than the oligarchy's accomplice. 

    Or just refusing to join the government and voting on a case by case basis.

    Anything other than:  selling everyone out for a personal pay rise, and then watching the architect of this arrangement having to resign within a month for fiddling expenses. 

  16. 5 minutes ago, rollover said:

    warned in a speech on Friday that a “downward spiral” in relations could ensue if Britain continues with unilateral action.

    belfasttelegraph

    It's going to be unilateral inaction isn't it? 

    Who actually cares about enforcing eu rules? And who is doing the enforcing? 

    There's a complete disconnect between the two. 

    It's like asking a drug dealer to enforce eu standards and pay vat. 

    Won't they all be copy and pasting fictional forms and just driving through ireland?

  17. 17 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

    Runaway inflation is always a political decision. 
    The euro is the modern day equivalent of the gold standard. That did as much damage to the uk as the weimars inflation did to germany.

    much of the eurozone is simply uncompetative when hitched to germany and the netherlands. It is as simple as that.

    The uncompetitive bits go bust and depopulate until transfer payments from north to south stabilise the situation. 

    This rebuilding fund is just the first of what will become an annual transfer payment from North to south.

    Alternatively  the Euro collapses eventually. 

    Ever closer union suggests it will be the first option. 

  18. 13 hours ago, erat_forte said:

    Yes that is a sensible mature approach. Not to ramp up rhetoric, not to act unilaterally, not to break agreed treaties and commitments, but to seek for ways to act with generosity and mutual benefit within the law.

    It's the opposite of what's happening, true.

    This is the future: a game of beggar thy neighbour, with ever diminishing trade between uk and EU. 

    And the kicker seems to be that nobody cares. 

    A few obsessives spewing hate and spitting jeremiads prophesying doom, sure, but the rest of the population oblivious and getting on with their lives. 

    While the bureaucracy keeps driving in the wedge with tit for tat sanctions.  

    Is that so bad?

     

  19. 29 minutes ago, Staffsknot said:

    Lost at Call of Duty and still blame the guy in charge?

    I think from your armchair you emminently underqualified to make that assessment if you think either of those exist.

    In truth Colonels perform roles Generals did in your Battle Comics heyday as everything's smaller and love to see you say to Col Tim Collins you're a coward or most ranks. You don't want a Patton who'll get you killed for a medal but you don't want indecision and someone who only avlcts when pushed as don't want to jeopardise the pension.

    On the picnic angle yes we'd all rather get paid for being fed and seeing far off places. But the lads with missing limbs points to that being a fallacy and a disrepectful assertion by a bit of wally. The best soldiers are well trained and drilled - because heading overseas they deskill fast not doing the drills and skills.

    If you were trying to say we want a deterrent then that only works as a bluff. 

    But thanks for the hot take and deflecting from SpyGuy's latest daft assertions on a structure he cannot comprehend with one of your own.

    I am beginning to see why some of our bods have such trouble transitioning to civilian life with these attitudes. 

    As for Ukraine - Poland, Bulgaria and the Baltic States would push for action - if you tolerate this then... that's why if Putin did it he'd be a lot more subtle than T-80s on the highway.

    You're way too boastful for my taste. 

    You can suck up and kick down all you like, but in the end you've spent your whole life sponging off the taxpayer. 

     And the less we see of your warmongering the better.  

     

  20. 7 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

    Just stop now because I'm embarrassed for you at this stage fella.

    EUROPE is not just the ******ing EU and I said Europe and You said Europe. OK that's the pedant bit covered so lets move on to part two.

    NATO is more than a budget which you and Trump can't evidently get into the head. It's not a ******ing savings club nor do you hire out forces like some cheap classic car club knock-off.

    I could run through the details but you'll try and pull some other stat out you backside to prove you're right when you have about as much idea of what is happening as the average meerkat watching a Battlegroup Ex in Kenya.

    Now repeat after me NATO doesn't buy the hardwear or manpower it comes from those nations. You just put the contributions for bloody map pins and paperclips up for the nice & dry brigade.

    Every bullet fired by a soldier comes from those nations and funded by the contributing nation - its why its a standard, its why the link of 7.62 going through a GPMG  may be German made and paid for fired by British soldier. We nicked tons on kit off the yanks and never got billed to blighty. In fact we had one of their trucks for a while as the US Marines couldn't let us sign for anything less than a pallet.

    I went to Afghanistan in NATO and you the taxpayer paid for all my costs from the craters we put in the ground to the bag of crisps on the Tristar over there. 

    But yep you're the expert, we're actually mercenaries. Or option 2 you know FA and are scrabbling to be right with stats you don't understand. You are visiting websites desperate to find anything that might prove the idea you magically had is true - reality is cruel this may have looked suitable but its made you just seem more clueless in my eyes and a bit of a Walther Mitty.

    Now look at those EU nations and their military sizes - that's your potential NATO contribution. 

    Thst thing you are sitting on is not your elbow chief. Figure that one out and give up on this please before you make an even bigger daft assertion of military knowledge. You are the tour guide who missed the orientation session.

    I was trying to avoid being sarcastic and brutally honest but here we are. You are chatting stuff without a clue. Now think are you well versed in the operation of NATO? Then are you the best placed person to comment?

     We're not having a major war. That much the G7 have agreed on.  

    And if putin the poisoner decides to take ukraine by force,  we'll need to concentrate on the long list of equipment reasons why we couldn't possibly fight anyone, and the desirability of a demarcation line where the soviets all used to go on holiday. 

    Sometimes I think you lot fail to realise that the best armies have generals that are all cowards and soldiers who only want to picnic. 

    And are cynical enough to realise things may not work out that well, so they'd better be ready to run away as their first preference.   

  21. 5 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

    Nothing there is relevant. The legal text is all that matters, not a incomplete 30s overview aimed at laymen. 

    Semantics. It's a long legal process during which time the EU is able to implement remedial measures, just like we are doing with the NIP. 

     

     

    Less and less trade with the eu over the long term may fit in well with the general trend globally. 

    There's no point buying the same washing machine 10 times over just because business likes built in redundancy and the government calls it growth. 

    There's a big rethink going on about our use of resources. Trade is bound to have to make big changes. 

    May not all be for the worse. 

×
×
  • 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.