Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

The Cost Of Doing Nothing Would Be Far Greater - Darling

Recommended Posts

Darling just on BBC Parliament now, repeated the line that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater.

Considering what these idiots are doing I contend that doing nothing would be a far more cost effective method of doing something.

Discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well according to PatPrimer anything is better then the "Do Nothing Party"

I disagree, by doing nothing, we'd only be half in the shite!!

I hope he replies, I'm going to count how many "Do Nothing Party" mantras will be in his post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well according to PatPrimer anything is better then the "Do Nothing Party"

I disagree, by doing nothing, we'd only be half in the shite!!

I hope he replies, I'm going to count how many "Do Nothing Party" mantras will be in his post.

Hasa anybody seen Pat the Prat recently? It seems to have all gone a bit quiet over there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
********

Bale out depositors and let the rest burn. 12 months of chaos and at least we've got a chance of starting over.

We haven't even begun to see the true cost of this madness yet.

Would it even be chaos? We survived Lehman's demise. Presumably RBS and HBoS would go. I guess that Barclays and HSBC would be strengthened with increased deposits, the ability to cherry-pick the former two's assets, and less competition in the future.

Whether it would work, who knows.

Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is rubbish that this is to help banks lend again. The bailout is to stop them going bust and yes, the cost of doing nothing would be much greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darling just on BBC Parliament now, repeated the line that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater.

Considering what these idiots are doing I contend that doing nothing would be a far more cost effective method of doing something.

Discuss.

I think he's referring to the cost to the Labour party (and their bosses - the banks) rather than their hard working subjects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
Darling just on BBC Parliament now, repeated the line that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater.

Considering what these idiots are doing I contend that doing nothing would be a far more cost effective method of doing something.

Discuss.

The cost of doing nothing will indeed be far greater in the short term

In the long term, the consequences of Darling's current actions are the destruction of our economy for generations to come

Edited by Steve Cook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is rubbish that this is to help banks lend again. The bailout is to stop them going bust and yes, the cost of doing nothing would be much greater.

I think the idea is less about providing more credit to companies and more about 1) allowing companies to refinance current debts that are coming up for renewal and 2) to provide nearterm cash to pay bills/suppliers.

As it is, the machine has ground to a halt and without some measures, it will stay this way which is good for no-one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
I think the idea is less about providing more credit to companies and more about 1) allowing companies to refinance current debts that are coming up for renewal and 2) to provide nearterm cash to pay bills/suppliers.

As it is, the machine has ground to a halt and without some measures, it will stay this way which is good for no-one.

We shouldn't be keeping the machine going

It's already dead

We need to leave it to collapse completely, live with the consequences and rebuild from the ashes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The cost of doing nothing will indeed be far greater in the short term

In the long term, the consequences of Darling's current actions are the destruction of our economy for generations to come

Well unless they find some way to cancel/inflate the debt away, all this borrowing will suppress the UK's economy for decades. Very few tax payers will be able to afford the increases, unless we have some large wage increases and a slowing in the increase in the cost of living.

I can't see either happening myself. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the idea is less about providing more credit to companies and more about 1) allowing companies to refinance current debts that are coming up for renewal and 2) to provide nearterm cash to pay bills/suppliers.

As it is, the machine has ground to a halt and without some measures, it will stay this way which is good for no-one.

What will happen if the banks aren't in the way is that people will do something else, and the banking system will become irrelevent.

Market says NO.

It's being saying NO for generations. Time is up for the ponzi scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the idea is less about providing more credit to companies and more about 1) allowing companies to refinance current debts that are coming up for renewal and 2) to provide nearterm cash to pay bills/suppliers.

I think you may be right.

That is certainly how I have read the mortgage side of things.

Personally, I think Brown is spinning this as even bigger than it is, because he has misjudged the mood of the country and thinks the people want to see action with lots of big sums. Maybe I'm wrong, and they do, but few of those who can be bothered commenting do. (and I don't just mean here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well unless they find some way to cancel/inflate the debt away, all this borrowing will suppress the UK's economy for decades. Very few tax payers will be able to afford the increases, unless we have some large wage increases and a slowing in the increase in the cost of living.

I can't see either happening myself. :angry:

Where's the money going to come from for wage increases? I mean the actual, physical cash. It'll have to be borrowed into existence from somewhere and what are the chances of that happening?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We shouldn't be keeping the machine going

It's already dead

We need to leave it to collapse completely, live with the consequences and rebuild from the ashes

The machine comprises of the wider economy: transport of our food, provision of services and the like. To keep these going, an orderly collapse is in order. That orderly collapse will occur through re-allocation of capital over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you may be right.

That is certainly how I have read the mortgage side of things.

Personally, I think Brown is spinning this as even bigger than it is, because he has misjudged the mood of the country and thinks the people want to see action with lots of big sums. Maybe I'm wrong, and they do, but few of those who can be bothered commenting do. (and I don't just mean here).

Quite.

These are politicians. They have TO BE SEEN to be doing something. Anything. They have no idea what will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here goes ...

Darlings answer to too much unsustainable borrowing is more unsustainable borrowing? Eh?

So the answer to too much debt is more debt.

And the answer to not saving enough is to spend money that we don't have.

I'm clearly missing the point here. Could somebody please explain??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here goes ...

Darlings answer to too much unsustainable borrowing is more unsustainable borrowing? Eh?

So the answer to too much debt is more debt.

And the answer to not saving enough is to spend money that we don't have.

I'm clearly missing the point here. Could somebody please explain??

By transferring the debt to the state they have more power to extract it, making it "safer."

Of course this means regulating everything into oblivion, inflating the currency into worthlessness and taxing us all until we riot but they'll have thought of that, don't you worry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cable and Osbourne have torn Darling's statement to shreds. Wonder if this will make it to the BBC main news.

that qunt cable called for nationalisation of banks, they just dont get it. they need to let them collapse not delay the inevitable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here goes ...

Darlings answer to too much unsustainable borrowing is more unsustainable borrowing? Eh?

So the answer to too much debt is more debt.

And the answer to not saving enough is to spend money that we don't have.

I'm clearly missing the point here. Could somebody please explain??

The political message is: "We are doing something to help everyone." So everyone feels they will be saved by being able to refinance (morgages/corporate debt).

In reality, they know that if you are not credit worthy, you are going down but they cannot say this. There are only so many spaces on the life raft and it's the leanest on first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By transferring the debt to the state they have more power to extract it, making it "safer."

Of course this means regulating everything into oblivion, inflating the currency into worthlessness and taxing us all until we riot but they'll have thought of that, don't you worry.

Injin, you're making sense to me!

The banks have no power to make you pay for their ******ups. But the state does, oh, yes...... :(

Pinch me someone ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is rubbish that this is to help banks lend again. The bailout is to stop them going bust and yes, the cost of doing nothing would be much greater.

What is worse? Doing nothing or doing something however bad it is, that can even make things worse just so you can say" oh at least we are doing something..............."

Edited by Tinman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's the money going to come from for wage increases? I mean the actual, physical cash. It'll have to be borrowed into existence from somewhere and what are the chances of that happening?

Exactly. I can't see any solution to this. We need to start building a new set of industries, and innovate. Sadly, there is no chance of this happening until attitudes change, and DEFINITELY NOT with NuLabour in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.