Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Blue Peter

Members
  • Posts

    2,266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Blue Peter

  1. If you look at what businesses say are their major problems (e.g. Quarterly Survey, see esp. p. 11, then finance is low down the list. The major problem is the down-turn. And why would you want credit in a recession if you couyld avoid it? Peter.
  2. This piece by Richard Murphy (sorry cheeznbread), would suggets that you are right, Peter.
  3. Surely the banks would, if Mystic Merv wasn't printing them up oodles of it for free? Peter.
  4. Someone was having fun. I wonder if they now have a new job, Peter.
  5. And the people employed in those other parts of the economy, which could no longer be afforded due to the high price of food, losing their jobs. Peter.
  6. Next step? See "rent, imputed" currently making up over 8% of GDP, Peter.
  7. Would your costs not include the cost of putting you up somewhere? Peter.
  8. I think metaphors matter, because they tend to funnel thought. I suspect that "primitive" economies are organic and grow, but at some point, regarding them as constructions which we build rather than grow is a good way of thinking about them. It's an interesting thought, what would happen if we said that we needed to "build the economy more"? Would we find ourselves thinking about foundations more? or would we just off-shore the whole thing? Peter.
  9. The link seems to refer to employment legislation in Australia, Peter.
  10. FWIW, here's a Homes and Communities document on HelpToBuy, which includes the following: (p. 5) Peter. Edit: for link.
  11. My understanding (hazy recollection of a post by FreeTrader yonks ago) was that this was used to make GDPs comparable between countries which do a lot of renting and countries which do a lot of home-ownership. But surely the rents in one country are real, whilst they aren't in another country. And, in the country in which they're not real, the money which would have been spent as rent in the renting country is actually spent elsewhere in the owning country and so gets counted twice. Or, I've totally misunderstood things, Peter.
  12. Can you really see Hulk applying for planning permission at his local authority? Peter.
  13. Either he doesn't understand and he's bought the bankers' lies, or, he's thinking about his post 2015 prospects? P.
  14. It's important to note that you can chuck that capital at your customers just as much as you can chuck that borrowed money(the alternative) at customers. The advantage of capital is that it doesn't have to be paid back, so it can cover losses. The other advantage is that it will mean less bank profits going in bonuses, because the owners of the capital like to have their share, Peter.
  15. Over the weekend, I believe that wind was generating more electricity than gas; See this thread, page 2, Peter.
  16. Agreed. Just look at the OFGEM lecture I linked at the beginning of the thread. We have got ourselves into a terrible mess. We may have done well with the maturities of government debt, but the maturities of our energy system are all falling now, and we aren't rich enough to issue a new system, Peter.
  17. For me, it's because nuclear is a rich man's technology, we (the world) are set to become a lot poorer over the coming centuries (closer to the dark ages than the Jetsons). It's not just to leave those people with this sort of mess, Peter.
  18. Yes, I saw that. There's a lot of variability, but with our CO2 and CH4, we're putting an extra blanket on the earth, which, all other things being equal, will mean we're hotter than we would otherwise have bee, Peter.
  19. I'm not quite sure I understand your point. We're not past 2030 yet (God, I'm not still here waiting for an HPC and it's 2035 or something, am I?). If anything, the official predictions for Arctic melting have been too conservative. The graphs show a steady fall in ice since 2007. If that rate of fall continues (a big if), then we'll have an ice free day in less than 5 years time. That was not being predicted, Peter.
  20. We've never done it before, so unless we are totally pony and trap at it, presumably not, Peter.
  21. Essentially, it all boils down to net energy. When a gallon of oil gives you the equivalent of thousands of man hours (how many people and for how long would it require to push a one ton lump of metal however far a gallon of petrol can take your car?), there's a lot of surplus to play with. But as the amount of net energy (net man hours) goes down, and the amount of net man hours required to keep going whatever infrastructure you have built up increases, at some point you reach the situation where you can't expand any more, and indeed where you can't even maintain what you have, let alone expand. That's where we are now, Peter.
×
×
  • 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.