AvidFan Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.asxx?clip...84790160&A= 10 minute video. The realy juicy bits are in the last minute and a half. Listen and be afraid, very afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no-way Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 link is broken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvidFan Posted August 3, 2009 Author Share Posted August 3, 2009 I've just clicked on it and it worked first time. It's one of the 4 featured videos on Bloomberg if someone wants to post an alternative link (right-click on the video and choose properties while it's playing, to get the URL). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no-way Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 ok didnt work with firefox ok with iexplorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry aka GOD Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 ok didnt work with firefoxok with iexplorer What is that? My connection (2G, 20 kbps awfulness) gives up now with Firefox, but, unfortunately for you lot, works fine with IE8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 May 1940, where's our Churchill! That guy started off veeery dull, but pretty juicy in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bomberbrown Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.asxx?clip...84790160&A= Well done Gordon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old_Traveller Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 (edited) Not sure I understood his rational for a case where house prices have bottomed earlier in the clip, specifically when his bottom line is that the UK financial situation may be the worst of the OCDE. Hard to sustain both arguments together methinks. Seems to me a clear case of "we will not say anything that may annoy voters" plus "the crisis is all labour's fault", in other words campaign talk. Edited August 3, 2009 by Old_Traveller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Well done Gordon. Only a true financial genius could achieve this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry aka GOD Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Only a true financial genius could achieve this. Can't get it to play, appreciate a quick summary. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punter Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Not sure I understood his rational for a case where house prices have bottomed earlier in the clip, specifically when his bottom line is that the UK financial situation may be the worst of the OCDE. Hard to sustain both arguments together methinks.Seems to me a clear case of "we will not say anything that may annoy voters" plus "the crisis is all labour's fault", in other words campaign talk. the UK gov is desperately trying to prop up the property prices - for whatever stupid reason - while it hasn't bottomed it may look like this is the case for a while, that is until their policy fails and economic law resumes again (which it will) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Can't get it to play, appreciate a quick summary. Cheers. Basically the UK is fooked. Did he say govt spending as a % of the economy was up by 13% or 30% couldn't make out what he was saying. Anyone got the link yet to the OECD report in question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry aka GOD Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Basically the UK is fooked.Did he say govt spending as a % of the economy was up by 13% or 30% couldn't make out what he was saying. Anyone got the link yet to the OECD report in question? Oh! Well, it's fooked regards people driving round in silly motors or buying huge TV's, but I'm sure the good people of the UK will still eat, have clean water etc. Hopefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threetimesdead Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 From 2010 - UK in the worst financial crisis in OECD area Uk govt fiscal position worst in OECD, worse than Ireland and similar to the crisis of 1940 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 From 2010 - UK in the worst financial crisis in OECD areaUk govt fiscal position worst in OECD, worse than Ireland and similar to the crisis of 1940 Anyone got any links for what happen in 1940? Can't seem to find anything on it at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Anyone got any links for what happen in 1940? Can't seem to find anything on it at the moment. Churchill became PM after the guy before him had sort of screwed things up. The guy in the video doesn't think Cameron is the sort of chap we need to lead us out of national crisis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry aka GOD Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Anyone got any links for what happen in 1940? Can't seem to find anything on it at the moment. Durin' the war . . . (Remember Uncle Albert?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Churchill became PM after the guy before him had sort of screwed things up. The guy in the video doesn't think Cameron is the sort of chap we need to lead us out of national crisis. Churchill was a fierce critic of Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Adolf Hitler[130] and in a speech to the House of Commons, he bluntly and prophetically stated, "You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war." But what fiscal problems did we have? Clearly the war was having an impact and was beginning to bankrupt us, undoubtedly we only remained solvent because the US was prepared to lend us the money. How bad where the finances in 1940? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economic...finance1992.pdf All agreed that, even if so augmented, tax revenues would neversuffice to cover expenditure requirements. Deficit finance would play an irreducible role. Here the term of government borrowing had to be kept as long as possible. To limit inflationary repercussions, firms and households had to be kept illiquid by making available a wider than usual variety of medium and long term government financial assets to both small and institutional investors, to take the place of the real resources and private debt which they would otherwise have sought to acquire; at the same time nongovernment borrowers were to be largely excluded from the market. Physical supply restrictions and the offer of large quantities of government debt were therefore combined with direct controls on private domestic borrowing, limiting new and bonus issues on the stock market, bank advances, and so forth, in order to limit liquidity in private hands. Exchange controls did the same for restriction of purchasing power in foreign currency. Like other prices, the rate of interest was also controlled. Since demands for goods, for domestic lending and for foreign cash were all controlled directly, the rate of interest had become redundant as a regulator either of domestic demand or of the exchange rate. Instead, interest rates were stabilized at a low level in order to cheapen deficit finance. In The Economist’s phrase (20 January, 1940), this was a “three per cent war.†Control of the money multiplier also played a part. Bond finance of the deficit kept the issue of high-powered money to a minimum. At the same time, firms and households were persuaded to hold as much high-powered money as possible in bank deposits; meanwhile, the commercial banks were both persuaded and constrained to create as little credit with it as possible. The results of the strategy were generally successful. During World War II, government spending averaged 70% of GDP, and half of it was financed out of general taxation. Of the cumulative deficit, only one third was financed by short-term borrowing, and high-powered money accounted for little more than 5% of overall deficit finance (Sayers 1956: 223). The cash stock no more than doubled; the aim of a “three per cent war†was realized, and the costs of borrowing to the Treasury were correspondingly low. Some inflation was successfully repressed but, even without price controls, the price level would have been only fractionally higher at the peak of the war effort (Friedman and Schwartz 1982: 119). However, the story would have been very different without Britain’s ability to draw upon overseas assets and Allied credits. In fact, domestic finance alone was insufficient, and in 1940-1 up to one third of the budget deficit was financed by net imports (in later years the proportion stabilized at one quarter). While precise comparisons have not been attemp So in fact we are in a far worse position as we now can't draw upon over seas assets and everyone else is running out of cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairies Wear Boots Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Not sure I understood his rational for a case where house prices have bottomed earlier in the clip, specifically when his bottom line is that the UK financial situation may be the worst of the OCDE. Hard to sustain both arguments together methinks.Seems to me a clear case of "we will not say anything that may annoy voters" plus "the crisis is all labour's fault", in other words campaign talk. I couldn't get that bit either. He said we probably hadn't hit bottom but the worst of the falls are behind us. Then went on to say whoever wins the general election will have the bigest financial mess to clean up ever. Do all these economists think we are going to be able to operate in a low interest rate environment for the forseeable future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonLady Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Sorry, I couldn't quite hear - does anyone know who he is and which organisation he is with? thanks guys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvidFan Posted August 3, 2009 Author Share Posted August 3, 2009 D'ya think we could dig up Keynes and send him to Washingston to get us another loan? Oh, hang on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spp Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 the UK gov is desperately trying to prop up the property prices - for whatever stupid reason - while it hasn't bottomed it may look like this is the case for a while, that is until their policy fails and economic law resumes again (which it will) They don't understand the word 'affordable'. They prefer to print money, because the fraudulent Fiat system knows no other way! In a ponzi, the first ones in get rich, and the last ones in (much greater in number) get shafted. The game is up... this is the end of the ponzi! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parry aka GOD Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 They don't understand the word 'affordable'.They prefer to print money, because the fraudulent Fiat system knows no other way! In a ponzi, the first ones in get rich, and the last ones in (much greater in number) get shafted. The game is up... this is the end of the ponzi! . . . and not just the last 10 years of Ponzi. The post-war Ponzi is finished. Soros is right. End of the post-war super boom in the West. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spp Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 . . . and not just the last 10 years of Ponzi. The post-war Ponzi is finished. Soros is right. End of the post-war super boom in the West. Don't like the guy that much... but I'd go with that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.