Last Hun Standing

De Villepin - Isn't he an unelected technocrat that Chirac appointed to block Sarkozy from becoming PM. The obvious objective being an attempt to spoil Sarko's springboard to the Presidency? ('Cos he would beat the corrupt feeble old cretin hands down.) A Sarkozy vs Royal election runoff will be a sight to watch. They might actually level with the French people about their need to face the future or stagnate.

In a dropping market, prices acheived at auction are by definition the market price. Those holding on for a sale at a higher price, are going to get burnt even more as the current transaction price falls away from their expectation. They then end up chasing the market down.

But a strong Euro would cut their import costs for commodities / products denominated in $. They are also a big importer of oil which is priced in $. Therefore net effect of Euro appreciation is difficult to estimate.

Are you implying that the BOE MPC are Moron Clowns glove puppets? Surely not... ROLF

Even without forcing someone into bankruptcy the banks can increase the pressure on the borrower. Banks have recently been making noises about not accepting IVA applications, pooling knowledge etc to contest excess fees charged by the friendly IVA people etc.. Banks can also get a charging order which converts unsecured debt (such as credit cards) into a secured credit against a specific asset - i.e. someones house. They cannot force sale, but can claim from any eventual disposal proceeds, with interest and fees added on top. Lovely jubbly....

Unfortunately the constituency system of representation practically guarantees that the majority of citizens will be disenfranchised. This ain't democracy. Get used to it.

Given the recent meeja reportage about allowing organ sales how about? drumroll please "the grandchildrens kidneys should just about cover it - mortgage"

ARM's are typically discount products with an extended tie in. Sorry edit "See below an illustration, not actual no's." 2004 - buy Mcmansion -option ARM, paying bank morgages variable base (4%) your option ARM lets you go -3.5% - i.e paying 0.5% You have the option of not actually paying anything of the balance and rolling some of the interest into the loan... 2005 reset to bank base -2% - ok base rates risen a little (4.5%) - paying 2.5% 2006 - reset to base - (base rate risen to 6%) - paying 6% ouch 2007 - reset to base +2% - (base rise to 7%) - you are paying 7 +2% = 9% go straight to foreclosure... Extended tie in means if you try and refinance between year 3 & 4 you get shafted for a % of the loan - usually quite high. They be absolutely fubared even without any additional base rate rises....

Pre industrial poluation of Scotland - 1755 1.2m (admit Wiki entry) Current population of scotland - over 5m - although decreasing due to ageing and deep fried mars bars http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/PO/re...urcePageId=6482 Post industrial applocalypse dieoff ratio approx 76%. England pre industrial 1801 - 8.3 = one off census per wiki 2001 - 49.1m census Post industrial applocalypse dieoff ratio approx 83% Marginally less dieoff expected in Scotland should we need to revert to historic methods due to cessation of industrial infrastructure, i.e. oil runs out, nuclear runs out, coal runs out and we all end up digging mud with horses and oxen.. Obvious caveats: numbers debatable, and ignores environmental change which would dipropostionately affect low lying bits of England being flooded by sea level rise, vs north atlantic conveyor belt shutting down due to addition of icemelt to subarctic ocean.

I realise this might be slightly off topic, but the right to become "enfranchised" i.e. get the freehold interest moved to a company and then purchase a share of the company has to be taken jointly with all the other leaseholders in a block. If I remember correctly, if its a large block, and not enough people have acquired the right to purchase, then you can't even ask for a vote. The definition of a block is a tricky area and could lead to loads of hassle. Difficulties include victorian semi's / terraces converted to flats. Do you count the whole building or just one semi? If its a block of flats in a development, is it just the block or the whole development, what if they share access and services? Etc.. basically a lawyers wet dream. Another aspect is what do you do if half the flats don't want to enfranchise, half do. People get very funny if they are in the minority and get outvoted. The old freeholder could retain say 2 of 5 shares in the freehold and make it very difficult to run the company that owns the freehold. Assuming they could muster a blocking minority, they could try underhand tactics such as loading up the repair and maintenance contracts that the feeholder would subcontract to their mates builders, that they just happen to have an indirect interest in. Then kickback to the person giving them the blocking interest. Etc.. Basically proper legal advice is neccesary at all stages, but people often neglect the personal side. Its very important to consider who will do the actual running of all of this, as usually it falls to one mug doing all the work for the whole block and then getting resentful.

Reversionary interest valuation should depend on the discount rate used, usually some variant on the BOE base rate. I.e. do it when interest rates are high, as the discount rate will be high and consequently the reversionary value low. This will be reinforced by valuation of the actual reversionary value also being lower in a high interest rate environment.

I think some of the confusion is over extra taxes vs "revenue neutral" tax changes i.e. do they cut other taxes to compensate for any increases. IMO it is understandable that politicians use the tax system to change behaviour. People's response to tax is pavlovian. Most people don't even think, if you set tthe incentives right, they will behave as directed. Therefore green taxes make sense, if you believe that government should try and extract at least some positive externality from plucking the goose. IMO local taxation should rise, to the point where it pays for all local services with corresponding cuts in central taxation. Then people would actually care about local politics and hold the corrupt b@rstewards to account. Preferably with a tar and feathers. I'm carefull not to use council tax as an example of a fair system of local taxation since far too many people manage to avoid it, but make it proportional to the value of the property or even better, purely the land. As a redistributive measure pay every English citizen a cheque for renting the land of the nation to the users. As a positive side effect it would stop Moron Clown subsidising his homeland from English taxes. The sooner they are forced to seccede the better.

I agree, the additional credit created all needs to be serviced. I think as a nation Britain has passed the credit horizon, we now take on extra debt to service debt. Does the £3bn find its way back to the real economy? I don't think so. Barring the friction (their cost of servicing capital and their peons), it gets booked as profits and is recycled back to their capital base. The increased capital base is then once again used to increase the amount they have available to lend. The point is that the cycling of the capital has done nothing for the actually productive part of the economy, i.e that which provides goods and services to people. It has merely given one select group control over a larger part of the world than before. Hence the missquote.

That's not the repayment, thats just the extra interest..... Edit - snip out unnecesary. In my opinion the extra interest flows via the credit intermediators to the credit provider. The credit provision takes place through fractional reserve banking. Re. "Only central banks can 'mint' or 'unmint' currency," Credit can be created not just at the central bank, but at credit institutions upping or lowering their propensity to take on risk, their reseve ratio. Since Basle II will allow Banks to self assess their required reserve ratio, their ability to lend will not be controlled in any meaningful way. Since the public underwrites the banks in that they are perceived to be too important to fail, there is deffinitely an inherent moral hazardin in allowing the vampires to hollow out the real economy by loading it up with too much debt. They have a heads they win, tails you lose situation... To mis?quote "People are born free, but everywhere live as slaves." The illusion of freedom is just a point of view, propagated to keep the servile in docility.

£1.25 trillion of debt, @ 0.25% increase = £3bn or thereabouts. i.e for every interest rate rise we lose £3bn extra in interest payments being sucked out fo the economy. Juicy fruit these credit morons. "Of course this won't hurt, not a bit", said the surgeon sharpening the jugular drain.