Meanwhile... The Real Scandal Mps Ignore: As Murdoch Grilling Turns Into Farce, Bankers Get £14Bn Bonuses And Imf Warns Of Euro Meltdown

[interestrateripoff]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016645/REAL-scandal-MPs-ignore-As-Murdoch-grilling-turns-farce-bankers-14bn-bonuses-IMF-warns-euro-meltdown.html

While Westminster fiddled over the phone-hacking frenzy, the European economy was burning last night.

World financial watchdogs issued an extraordinary warning of a global economic ‘earthquake’ triggered by the failure of many countries to get to grips with massive debts.

To add insult to injury, it emerged yesterday that those largely responsible for bringing Britain’s economy to its knees – bankers and finance workers – have scooped bonuses totalling £14billion this year.

An interesting headline from the wail today.

[papag]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016645/REAL-scandal-MPs-ignore-As-Murdoch-grilling-turns-farce-bankers-14bn-bonuses-IMF-warns-euro-meltdown.html

An interesting headline from the wail today.

Sickening, but they can do as they wish as the owners of the UK no one else can stop their greed

[MrFlibble]

This hacking scandal is nothing more than a distraction, nobody will go to prison and nothing will change, yet another dog & pony show to give the masses something to watch other than real news.

The real story 'out there' is the fact the entire global financial system is on its knees praying to be saved, meanwhile the banksters continue to empty its pockets without any come-back.

Even the Sheeple are going to cotton on before long, the fraud has become too brazen...

Edited July 20, 2011 by MrFlibble

[SarahBell]

They were just talking on the news to someone who pointed out that they have ignored some pretty major news because of phone hacking and she basically replied "yes but do you think phone hacking isn't serious?"

I think a meltdown of the world's financial systems is a bit more serious.

Phone hacking

1. It wasn't really news.

2. I don't give a crap about poiliticians/celebs right to privacy at all. They are paid with our money so we should know what they are up to.

3. Just change your blinking pin on your voice mail.

4. Stop letting people leave info on your voice mail.

[inflating]

They were just talking on the news to someone who pointed out that they have ignored some pretty major news because of phone hacking and she basically replied "yes but do you think phone hacking isn't serious?"

I think a meltdown of the world's financial systems is a bit more serious.

Phone hacking

1. It wasn't really news.

2. I don't give a crap about poiliticians/celebs right to privacy at all. They are paid with our money so we should know what they are up to.

3. Just change your blinking pin on your voice mail.

4. Stop letting people leave info on your voice mail.

+1

[Arbitrage]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016645/REAL-scandal-MPs-ignore-As-Murdoch-grilling-turns-farce-bankers-14bn-bonuses-IMF-warns-euro-meltdown.html

An interesting headline from the wail today.

Luxury champagne sales up 16% this year.

We're all in it together

[tomandlu]

They were just talking on the news to someone who pointed out that they have ignored some pretty major news because of phone hacking and she basically replied "yes but do you think phone hacking isn't serious?"

I think a meltdown of the world's financial systems is a bit more serious.

Phone hacking

1. It wasn't really news.

2. I don't give a crap about poiliticians/celebs right to privacy at all. They are paid with our money so we should know what they are up to.

3. Just change your blinking pin on your voice mail.

4. Stop letting people leave info on your voice mail.

I think it is news for two reasons:

1. It wasn't just celebs (and well done, Joe Public, for not giving a damn when it seemed that it was)

2. It has started to expose the corrupt relationship between the press and the police and the press and the politicians

On the last point, doesn't anyone find it jaw-dropping and rather depressing that, in one year, Cameron met NI people 26 times in 15 months? It would be fun to draw up a list of how many times he met people of more significance to the job of, you know, running a country.

FFS we have ended up with a political system that is 99%* obsessed with image rather than good governance (another thing to thank Tony Blair for IMHO, may he rot in hell).

As for the bankers... I've really tried to think of another solution, but I'm afraid we're just going to have to shoot them.

* pre-TB I'd say that it was 50/50

[The Spaniard]

As for the bankers... I've really tried to think of another solution, but I'm afraid we're just going to have to shoot them.

There is a logical, sane and viable solution - money reform.

If a profit-motivated commercial cartel acquires the exclusive power to lend to the economy its essential means of exchange at interest then inevitably over time political power will gravitate towards that cartel. Nothing can trump the stranglehold of those who control both the quantity and the initial allocation of money.

Fix the system with an adequate, publicly isssued, persistently circulating, debt-free money supply and bankers will have to make a living like everyone else - by providing valuable services that others are willing to pay for.

http://positivemoney.org.uk

[The Spaniard]

Bonuses are affordable.

... to those who control the expansion, contraction and allocation of the money supply.

[SleepyHead]

Sadly, our politicians have been captured by the press and the bankers. Total corruption.

[Reck B]

IMO the uk's economy is fubarred regardless of what happens in the eurozone.

From our govs point of view, it's far better that the euro collapses, bringing us down with it. Than our economy melting down as a result of our ******ups.

We can blame them bloody johnny foreigners then. *shakes fist*

[TwoWolves]

Luxury champagne sales up 16% this year.

We're all in it together

I was shocked by the discounts on Cristal in my local off-license.

When I get my bonus I may splash out on a case : http://www.champagnedirect.co.uk/pd_louis_roederer_cristal_2004.cfm

Same price as I was paying 10 years ago - in GBP.

[interestrateripoff]

IMO the uk's economy is fubarred regardless of what happens in the eurozone.

From our govs point of view, it's far better that the euro collapses, bringing us down with it. Than our economy melting down as a result of our ******ups.

We can blame them bloody johnny foreigners then. *shakes fist*

I can imagine that's the govts plan. We had it all under control and then all of these foreign countries defaulted, banks collapsed it was completely out of our control, if only they had better regulation like in the UK....

[MrFlibble]

IMO the uk's economy is fubarred regardless of what happens in the eurozone.

From our govs point of view, it's far better that the euro collapses, bringing us down with it. Than our economy melting down as a result of our ******ups.

We can blame them bloody johnny foreigners then. *shakes fist*

They are certainly waiting for something. The austerity is fake, no real cuts are happening and no problems are being solved. One can only assume the are pretending just enough so we don't go down first, but go down we will. Our debts are too large to genuinely be paid off, the only question left is how best to default.

[Traktion]

There is a logical, sane and viable solution - money reform.

If a profit-motivated commercial cartel acquires the exclusive power to lend to the economy its essential means of exchange at interest then inevitably over time political power will gravitate towards that cartel. Nothing can trump the stranglehold of those who control both the quantity and the initial allocation of money.

Fix the system with an adequate, publicly isssued, persistently circulating, debt-free money supply and bankers will have to make a living like everyone else - by providing valuable services that others are willing to pay for.

http://positivemoney.org.uk

Politics and banking is entwined. Politics, the police and the corporations are entwined. Do you not see a flaw in your plan?

The only useful money reform would be to allow people to freely chose what should be used as money, rather than being forced to use government money. Trying anything else would just be pointless and naive.

P.S. Your system is little different from the current one. Governments don't have to borrow already - they choose to. Also, you can't stop people giving credit to others, as previously discussed. TBH, I wonder why you keep posting up the same thing, despite many people showing you flaws in it.

[Traktion]

I think it is news for two reasons:

1. It wasn't just celebs (and well done, Joe Public, for not giving a damn when it seemed that it was)

2. It has started to expose the corrupt relationship between the press and the police and the press and the politicians

On the last point, doesn't anyone find it jaw-dropping and rather depressing that, in one year, Cameron met NI people 26 times in 15 months? It would be fun to draw up a list of how many times he met people of more significance to the job of, you know, running a country.

FFS we have ended up with a political system that is 99%* obsessed with image rather than good governance (another thing to thank Tony Blair for IMHO, may he rot in hell).

As for the bankers... I've really tried to think of another solution, but I'm afraid we're just going to have to shoot them.

* pre-TB I'd say that it was 50/50

Is anyone here really all that surprised though? It's a wakeup call for the masses, but much of the corruption has been discussed here for years. It's very wrong, but absolute power, corrupts absolutely. Governments and their controls aren't the answer.

[Injin]

There is a logical, sane and viable solution - money reform.

If a profit-motivated commercial cartel acquires the exclusive power to lend to the economy its essential means of exchange at interest then inevitably over time political power will gravitate towards that cartel. Nothing can trump the stranglehold of those who control both the quantity and the initial allocation of money.

Fix the system with an adequate, publicly isssued, persistently circulating, debt-free money supply and bankers will have to make a living like everyone else - by providing valuable services that others are willing to pay for.

http://positivemoney.org.uk

Anyone else find it comical the spaniard advocates the same system we currently have?

[Lewis Gordon Pugh]

This hacking scandal is nothing more than a distraction, nobody will go to prison and nothing will change, yet another dog & pony show to give the masses something to watch other than real news.

The real story 'out there' is the fact the entire global financial system is on its knees praying to be saved, meanwhile the banksters continue to empty its pockets without any come-back.

Even the Sheeple are going to cotton on before long, the fraud has become too brazen...

You've made a couple of spot on posts over the last week.

[PopGun]

Any moment now, a nervous twitching Neo Lib will derail the thread by blaming every and anyone but the bankstas or their lobbyists.

[The Spaniard]

Politics and banking is entwined. Politics, the police and the corporations are entwined. Do you not see a flaw in your plan?

The only useful money reform would be to allow people to freely chose what should be used as money, rather than being forced to use government money. Trying anything else would just be pointless and naive.

P.S. Your system is little different from the current one. Governments don't have to borrow already - they choose to. Also, you can't stop people giving credit to others, as previously discussed. TBH, I wonder why you keep posting up the same thing, despite many people showing you flaws in it.

Of course I see the ever present danger of corruption. The question is: which system is more susceptible to human wickedness, the present rent-a-currency or the proposed transparent and publicly scrutinised reform?

Who said anything about forcing people to use the proposed national currency? I envisage it simply as the currency adequately issued debt-free as a utility by the state, which is good for payments back to the state. Other that that, people can use what they like, tax payments excepted.

Of course people can give credit to each other. It is the institutionalised imposition of a credit-based commercially issued currency that I oppose. With an adequate debt-free, persistently circulating money supply there will be much more direct borrowing and lending, and far less creation of credit. I doubt that credit promises would ever then develop into a general fungible currency.

TBH, I wonder why you don’t read my posts more carefully.

[The Spaniard]

Anyone else find it comical the spaniard advocates the same system we currently have?

Do you consider the present amount of (electronic) base money to be adequate?

Why do the banks keep it circulating only between themselves while the rest of us must use their expensive credit-money?

[Traktion]

Of course I see the ever present danger of corruption. The question is: which system is more susceptible to human wickedness, the present rent-a-currency or the proposed transparent and publicly scrutinised reform?

Who said anything about forcing people to use the proposed national currency? I envisage it simply as the currency adequately issued debt-free as a utility by the state, which is good for payments back to the state. Other that that, people can use what they like, tax payments excepted.

Of course people can give credit to each other. It is the institutionalised imposition of a credit-based commercially issued currency that I oppose. With an adequate debt-free, persistently circulating money supply there will be much more direct borrowing and lending, and far less creation of credit. I doubt that credit promises would ever then develop into a general fungible currency.

TBH, I wonder why you don’t read my posts more carefully.

If you only accept tax payments in said money, you are forcing people to use it.

There is already debt free* money circulating - that's what notes and coins are. The government is the single biggest abuser of the system, as it issues its own gilts/bonds (which are essentially 'money' too) in exchange for said debt free money, thus creating a debt. This is exactly the same as a company issuing a bond or an individual giving the bank credit** (ie. depositing savings).

Are you going to ban the government from issuing bonds? Are you going to bad businesses from issuing bonds? Are you going to ban individuals giving others credit?

Credit exists along side of any money (notes/coins). It is a different thing. It is a promise to pay some money. It is not money in itself. Not only is your proposed system little different from the current system, but you're trying to conflate credit with money, when they are two different things.

* Arguably, due taxes are a debt, so this isn't really true either. It's what you're arguing for though, so I'll let it lie.

** I will also leave the argument to one side about whether the individual is aware that they are doing this (or whether it is fraudulent). However, banks do not have to extend credit on their behalf either - they can just put any deposits in a safety deposit box, if the individual prefers. Said deposit boxes could even be computerised to give access to debit cards, ATMs, cheques etc. Expose the individuals to the risk of credit defaults and the demand for said services will materialise. Why isn't their demand already? Blame the government for treating credit as money and confusing well meaning people like yourself in the process!

edit: typo

Edited July 20, 2011 by Traktion

[Traktion]

Do you consider the present amount of (electronic) base money to be adequate?

Why do the banks keep it circulating only between themselves while the rest of us must use their expensive credit-money?

No one can know how much 'base money' or any other amount of money is adequate.

There are many different monies of various levels of liquidity. Anything from trade able objects, through blocks of gold, through equities, through bonds, through bank credit, through e-currency, to government fiat is all money (and only a fraction of the total) and exists in various quantities at various times. Some people will tell you that they can decide how much is the right amount of the most liquid sort (ie. government fiat and bonds), along with how quickly it should be moving, but we can see how good a job they are doing with that!

It is impossible to get a national liquidity rating, as there are simple too many components to track. Even if you could track them all (which you can't), how would you decide what to change to influence the final outcome? Do you even know what the outcome should be? Are people holding different monies for reasons beyond your comprehension? Are there forces at work within the economy which can't be written down as a mathematical equation?

I fear you are not only misunderstanding how money and credit works, but you are also grossly simplifying the process at work. The best way is to let a free market decide, as it has no political bias and will make or break anyone with equal prejudice. People need to stop trying to control what they don't understand and often have ulterior motives towards. Then we may start getting somewhere.

Edited July 20, 2011 by Traktion

[Sour Mash]

Do you consider the present amount of (electronic) base money to be adequate?

Why do the banks keep it circulating only between themselves while the rest of us must use their expensive credit-money?

I don't think there's any such thing as electronic base money - once it's inside the banking system in electronic format it is indistinguishable (and inseparable) from bank created credit.

[dissident junk]

They are certainly waiting for something. The austerity is fake, no real cuts are happening and no problems are being solved. One can only assume the are pretending just enough so we don't go down first, but go down we will. Our debts are too large to genuinely be paid off, the only question left is how best to default.

On a related note, a mate said yesterday that he wonders if the euro palaver is being dragged out so as to give them time to print the quantity of new currency notes, mint the coins, that will be required when a country/some countries pull out of the euro.