Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
R K

Watch Mark Carney's Speech Live At Inclusive Capitalism Tonight 8Pm

Recommended Posts

"While to not have acted would have been catastrophic for all, the distributional consequences of the response to the financial crisis have been significant. Extraordinary monetary stimulus– both conventional, through low short-term interest rates, and unconventional, through large scale purchases of assets – raised a range of asset prices, benefiting their owners, and lowered yields, benefiting borrowers at the expense of savers.Central banks are not blind to these issues. Rather we recognise that decisions to redistribute wealth are rightly political, as are most policies that promote social mobility."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inclusive capitalism. Hmmm. You mean like a bail in, Mr Carnage?

When there are losses capitalism has to be "inclusive" so the successful don't lose. When capitalism produces profits then its exclusive capitalism where the majority aren't on the guest list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh... his speech is amazing! He honestly actually sounds like a reasonable human being.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/speeches/2014/speech731.pdf

What's he up to?

Most likely after the golden job at G$ or the IMF.

Felt like quite an important speech.

Social contract, social capital, relative equality, TBTF and so on.

Whether the $30trillion in the room give a sh1t is another question entirely.

Link to speech http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/speeches/2014/speech731.pdf

I will listen to that ***** when he has taken some action against the London property bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inclusive capitalism should be a tautology-if there were any truth in the tsunami of bullshite the Economics establishment have been pouring out for the last 30 years.

The fact that we see the term used here without a trace of irony says much about how far we have now traveled from that other rising tide- the one that failed to lift all boats. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's right though. Given that we have the capitalist system we do, it's up to the politicians rather than the central bankers to ensure its inclusivity. If they don't think the people who actually vote (as opposed to the younger generations much more affected by these policies) are going to be in favour of the necessary policy measures to redistribute wealth (be it directly or indirectly) then the politicians aren't going to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inclusive capitalism should be a tautology-if there were any truth in the tsunami of bullshite the Economics establishment have been pouring out for the last 30 years.

The fact that we see the term used here without a trace of irony says much about how far we have now traveled from that other rising tide- the one that failed to lift all boats. :lol:

Excellent observation. Capitalism has been depicted as inclusive and generally beneficial for all. Now we are seeing key figures of the capitalist system are saying otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent observation. Capitalism has been depicted as inclusive and generally beneficial for all. Now we are seeing key figures of the capitalist system are saying otherwise.

Bail-ins and QE are not really capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent observation. Capitalism has been depicted as inclusive and generally beneficial for all. Now we are seeing key figures of the capitalist system are saying otherwise.

only if you own many houses bought along time ago , easy if you create your own market the "modern politician"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bail-ins and QE are not really capitalism.

And since both act largely to preserve existing debt structures and reward debt-holders while further punishing creditors their impact is ultimately disinflationary - the very opposite of what's required to resolve a debt depression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to guess Lino Barber's FT splash headline tomorrow

"Marx Carney"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And since both act largely to preserve existing debt structures and reward debt-holders while further punishing creditors their impact is ultimately disinflationary - the very opposite of what's required to resolve a debt depression.

Yes; but it sure does take its time for it to reach the point we're hoping it will reach. I get what you mean. It is ultimately disinflationary.

During the transition there is even more malinvestment to endure, for years and years and years, often on the buyer side/existing asset holders, doubling down into the same asset classes.

And therefore the bust is worse, more scapegoating by the "victims" who "were right to pay any silly high price", and uncertainty from our side that when it comes, the crash, the system can survive it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actions not words, Mark.

Well, he's withdrawn FLS from regulated mortgages, (the BTL bail-in has been allowed to run - maybe even the Bank of England welcomes the right greater fool at the right time...), it's at least worth considering that it is Bank of England mood music that is concentrating minds at Lloyds and RBS with respect to lending at high Loan-To-Income into the London bubble. I see action.

It also seems to be to be a massive deal if they are getting ducks in a row on TBTF so that when banks find themselves between a rock and a hard place they are bailed in by their creditors before they get a sniff of Bank of England money - what do you think that is going to do to the spread between the policy rate and their funding costs? People might think that the current outsize spreads between bank rates and SVRs will compress and absorb the increase in the policy rate when it finally works through, but I'm not convinced. If they do largely solve TBTF with the next 18-24 months, then you could see that those spreads never compress. Policy rate at 3% by 2018-2019, SVRs at 6%-7%? Stranger things happen at sea. If you don't see any material wage inflation in the meantime (why should financial repression be more short lived than a very low bank rate?) then some of these 2013-2014 mortgages are going to be a bitch, particularly as price falls may be nibbling away at the equity from day one.

The Bank has to crash house prices - it's the only sensible move to eliminate systemic risk. Ramping house prices makes sense in a retarded way for Osborne, but for an independent body charged with maintaining financial stability, why?

It occurred to me whilst reading the speech that much as in the 1960s and 1970s in the US an activist judiciary made policy, we could be seeing something novel in the structure of our polity - empowered, activist central bank technocrats. Would you be impressed if some goon like Fred Goodwin took a shit on your lawn and left you to clear up? We live in hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   211 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.