"Citizens will soon turn their rage to central bankers"

[spyguy]

https://www.ft.com/content/972e11a0-45dc-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996

'Bank of England figures published on Wednesday showed the outstanding amount borrowed on credit cards hit £68.1bn in April, an increase of 9.7 per cent on the previous year and the fastest rate of credit card borrowing growth since February 2006.'

Remind me. What happened in 2007?

Oh dear.

If QE and ZIRP stood any chance of working the BoE should have gone around and shutdown highly leveraged debtors.

Instead they turned into the Brown of England. I remember in the earl 2000s seeing debtgrwoing at ~10% but the economy only grwoing ~2/3%.

Its nuts. Todays nuts. Unsecured debt grwoign at 10% whilst real wages fall.

Fcktards.

 

[maverick73]

36 minutes ago, spyguy said:

https://www.ft.com/content/972e11a0-45dc-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996

'Bank of England figures published on Wednesday showed the outstanding amount borrowed on credit cards hit £68.1bn in April, an increase of 9.7 per cent on the previous year and the fastest rate of credit card borrowing growth since February 2006.'

Remind me. What happened in 2007?

Oh dear.

If QE and ZIRP stood any chance of working the BoE should have gone around and shutdown highly leveraged debtors.

Instead they turned into the Brown of England. I remember in the earl 2000s seeing debtgrwoing at ~10% but the economy only grwoing ~2/3%.

Its nuts. Todays nuts. Unsecured debt grwoign at 10% whilst real wages fall.

Fcktards.

 

More QE  in the process kills the pound 

[thisisthisitmaybe]

At 69 billion, UK credit card debt is still eclipsed by our ever growing friend, student debt, now standing at more than 100 billion. And if you took out a student loan after 2012, you are now saddled with Interest Rates of 6 percent or more. 

https://www.ft.com/content/19c436f0-57e7-11e7-9fed-c19e2700005f

The top student from my old school has decided to avoid university altogether and been taken on as an apprentice by Rolls Royce. 

[billybong]

The zerohedge article concludes.

Quote

 

There is much more, bust the gist is clear: it is only a matter of time before the general population realizes that it is not politics, but monetary policy. But how long? The simple answer: as long as stocks keep rising, all shalle be well: "no one cares when the party is still raging and investors, drunk with the liquor of loose money, are blind to the inevitable catastrophe that lies ahead." Which is also why the Fed will do everything in its power to keep the market ascent - and its existence - continue for as long as possible. And then, as a last diversion, they will blame Trump.

In other words, by the time all of this happens, the angry natives may have no choice but to rent their pitchforks...

 

"Only a matter of time" 

"In other words, by the time all of this happens, the angry natives may have no choice but to rent their pitchforks..."

Yet the article is titled

Albert Edwards: "Citizens Will Soon Turn Their Rage Towards Central Bankers"

On the one hand he says "soon" and on the other hand he says when "the angry natives may have no choice but to rent their pitchforks..." so not that soon and in fact despite everything that still sounds a long way off.

Apart from pitchforks he's another one who offers no advice on what revolutionary mechanism/action is necessary for people to turn their rage towards central bankers but he seems to admit that voting Brexit and Trump does express the rage but it's just a symptom and will likely prove ineffective in rage being turned on central bankers. 

With central bankers being right outside of the so called democratic process what exactly is Edwards expecting, what exactly does he think will happen for it to be seen as rage actually being turned towards central bankers and for it to be successful in changing things - for example does he think something like the Threadneedle Street and Eccles Street headquarters being burnt to the ground might succeed as I just don't see anything like that happening.  

With the likes of May typically being central bank employees in the past and her husband also being a banker along with the banking system of rewarding politicians for political compliance (sinecure banking jobs etc etc) that seems to make any change even more unlikely.

Edited June 25, 2017 by billybong

[Si1]

25 minutes ago, billybong said:

The zerohedge article concludes.

"Only a matter of time" 

"In other words, by the time all of this happens, the angry natives may have no choice but to rent their pitchforks..."

Yet the article is titled

Albert Edwards: "Citizens Will Soon Turn Their Rage Towards Central Bankers"

On the one hand he says "soon" and on the other hand he says when "the angry natives may have no choice but to rent their pitchforks..." so not that soon and in fact despite everything that still sounds a long way off.

Apart from pitchforks he's another one who offers no advice on what revolutionary mechanism/action is necessary for people to turn their rage towards central bankers but he seems to admit that voting Brexit and Trump does express the rage but it's just a symptom and will likely prove ineffective in rage being turned on central bankers. 

With central bankers being right outside of the so called democratic process what exactly is Edwards expecting, what exactly does he think will happen for it to be seen as rage actually being turned towards central bankers and for it to be successful in changing things - for example does he think something like Threadneedle Street and Eccles Street headquarters being burnt to the ground might succeed as I just don't see anything like that happening.  

With the likes of May typically being central bank employees in the past and her husband also being a banker along with the banking system of rewarding politicians for political compliance (sinecure banking jobs etc etc) that seems to make any change even more unlikely.

I am becoming more amenable to Jeremy Corbyn by the day. I won't vote for him but perhaps he the clean break we need.

[Si1]

Carney has become the same hate figure for me as Gordon Brown and Hector Sants

[Si1]

1 minute ago, fru-gal said:

What are Corbyn's innovative and radical housing policies? - Continuation of HTB. 

Council housing, national infrastructure, unionisation to promote wage inflation that would push up interest rates, in addition to the significant fall in the pound that would do the same. Unintended consequences admittedly.

[Si1]

2 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

I don't know if he is organised enough to build millions of council houses and even if he does, the only people that will get them will be those in "need" and new migrants that he has opened the doors to. I doubt most normal people on normal wages will get a look in on anything vaguely decent (we work so we can afford to pay our own rent/mortgage is the thinking as though working is some sort of privilege). I also think there would be constant strikes because the unions would be emboldened. I would also imagine that the benefits bill would rise hugely and a lot of people who are currently working really shit jobs would just pack it in if Corbyn makes benefits even more attractive. Corbyn's ideas are great in theory, not sure if they would live up to the idealism though.

That would reek havoc on the previous Tory slow steady as she goes low interest rate policy. Year zero may be a useful step on the path.

[BorrowToLeech]

2 hours ago, fru-gal said:

I don't know if he is organised enough to build millions of council houses and even if he does, the only people that will get them will be those in "need" and new migrants that he has opened the doors to. I doubt most normal people on normal wages will get a look in on anything vaguely decent (we work so we can afford to pay our own rent/mortgage is the thinking as though working is some sort of privilege). I also think there would be constant strikes because the unions would be emboldened. I would also imagine that the benefits bill would rise hugely and a lot of people who are currently working really shit jobs would just pack it in if Corbyn makes benefits even more attractive. Corbyn's ideas are great in theory, not sure if they would live up to the idealism though.

The threat of revolution is a powerful motivating force.  

Fix the housing crisis or get Corbyn.  That is the point of Corbyn.

Ditch Blair's army of little landlords, or risk losing the entire people farm.

 

 

[Millaise]

4 hours ago, thisisthisitmaybe said:

The top student from my old school has decided to avoid university altogether and been taken on as an apprentice by Rolls-Royce. 

The 6% interest rates are hard to stomach; the good news is that most student loans won't be paid back, and the government, underwriting it all, will end up paying for the education, as it would have done all along. A university education is rarely needed unless you want to be an academic. Even in technical subjects like engineering, those who have learnt on the job often end up being more competent, and they can be useful with just a bit of tuition . Some software skills can be learned in just a couple of weeks. The real value of a degree is that it acts as a differentiator between job applicants, which is why some people now use their acceptance letter to a university as a means of getting a job, even though they didn't actually attend and saddle themselves with debt.

Edited June 25, 2017 by Millaise

[Sawitcoming]

5 hours ago, fru-gal said:

What are Corbyn's innovative and radical housing policies? - Continuation of HTB. 

 Jeremy Corbin understand very well the actual factors affecting the housing crisis. I don't hear him speak much of them recently because like us he knows it is pointless and you will be labeled as mad. For now he is toeing the line and speaks of supply and demand issues. I suspect that once he is in power he will quietly do what is right. Land value tax is a particular favourite

Edited June 25, 2017 by Sawitcoming

[zugzwang]

4 minutes ago, Sawitcoming said:

 Jeremy Corbin understand very well the actual factors affecting the housing crisis. I don't hear him speak much of them recently because like us he knows it is pointless and you will be labeled as mad. For now he is toeing the line and speaks of supply and demand issues. I suspect that once he is in power he will quietly do what is right. Land value tax is a particular favourite

http://www.labourland.org/

[thisisthisitmaybe]

2 hours ago, Millaise said:

The 6% interest rates are hard to stomach; the good news is that most student loans won't be paid back, and the government, underwriting it all, will end up paying for the education, as it would have done all along. A university education is rarely needed unless you want to be an academic. Even in technical subjects like engineering, those who have learnt on the job often end up being more competent, and they can be useful with just a bit of tuition . Some software skills can be learned in just a couple of weeks. The real value of a degree is that it acts as a differentiator between job applicants, which is why some people now use their acceptance letter to a university as a means of getting a job, even though they didn't actually attend and saddle themselves with debt.

Yep good points all of them. There is also another factor behind the growth of higher education: hedonism. 

Most people I knew as undergrads were at uni because it was an opportunity to have a relatively inexpensive three years of hedonistic living ("College goes Club-Med").

This was back in the late 90s and with the rise of tuition fees, it is no longer a cheap piss-up. But young people don't really calculate the long-term costs (plus the debt is structured in such a way as to pretend it isn't really debt). I thought there would be a big fall-off in UCAS applications when tuition fees went to 9k, but that didn't materialise. The parents don't object as they see the upside of better job prospects (although the data is showing us this isn't the case for many institutions and degrees).

So I think UK and US higher education still has some mileage, especially in the hedonistic age in which we live. Infact, I would argue that hedonism is a major factor behind the debt problems in the West; in a more Puritanical society, like the 1950s, people would have not taken on the debt, even if it had been offered them in terms as flexible and generous as today.

But I still think it is a bubble, and Brexit may be the pin which bursts it as so many UK universities have business models which are dependent on international students from the EU. Even if the government decides not to include international students in migration figures, it is clear that it will be more difficult for students to stay on after their studies, so they will be less inclined to come over in the first place. And UK universities will find it harder to recruit Chinese students as the Chinese higher education system expands significantly over the next 10 years. 

 

 

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by thisisthisitmaybe

[North London Rent Girl]

1 hour ago, zugzwang said:

http://www.labourland.org/

Huh, interesting to see that they are including actively farmed land in the land tax, I didn't think they would do that. I suppose they are based in Islington. I will probably vote for them anyway in the next GE in 6 months' time...

[giggler000]

10 hours ago, spyguy said:

https://www.ft.com/content/972e11a0-45dc-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996

'Bank of England figures published on Wednesday showed the outstanding amount borrowed on credit cards hit £68.1bn in April, an increase of 9.7 per cent on the previous year and the fastest rate of credit card borrowing growth since February 2006.'

Remind me. What happened in 2007?

Oh dear.

If QE and ZIRP stood any chance of working the BoE should have gone around and shutdown highly leveraged debtors.

Instead they turned into the Brown of England. I remember in the earl 2000s seeing debtgrwoing at ~10% but the economy only grwoing ~2/3%.

Its nuts. Todays nuts. Unsecured debt grwoign at 10% whilst real wages fall.

Fcktards.

 

I'd guess some of the new currency they created had to go some place.  I remember at the time of round 1 of QE some big wig from the BoE (read backwards as bank of queen)  saying we shouldnt worry because it wont reach the real economy

[LC1]

22 hours ago, thisisthisitmaybe said:

The top student from my old school has decided to avoid university altogether and been taken on as an apprentice by Rolls Royce. 

Proving again why he was top of the class. Very sensible.

[thisisthisitmaybe]

Just now, LC1 said:

Proving again why he was top of the class. Very sensible.

Indeed. What is also interesting is that some people from the middle of the class when I attended (long time ago, in the 1990s) are doing very well indeed, having left school with minimal qualifications but then learning a trade. One trained as a plasterer and now owns his own building company. I'd say he earns substantially more money than the students who went aimlessly off to university, other than the minority who were very focused and went into law.

 

[John51]

On 6/24/2017 at 2:14 PM, Wayward said:

revolution...? Is is England. As Orwell put it...tea bags and radio averted revolution in the 1930s, now we have Iphones and Xfactor or similar crap. We are docile and bend over to take it.

Long time since I read it, so paraphrasing but one of the first reports about Britain sent back to Rome was on the lines of the Brits being uppity and ready to complain about the slightest thing...but are ok with paying taxes.

[Wayward]

16 minutes ago, John51 said:

Long time since I read it, so paraphrasing but one of the first reports about Britain sent back to Rome was on the lines of the Brits being uppity and ready to complain about the slightest thing...but are ok with paying taxes.

Crikey - take the long view!!  Not sure we are the same people after >2000 yrs?  Anymore than the current Egyptians are the same people that built the pyramids...

[Funn3r]

22 hours ago, Millaise said:

The 6% interest rates are hard to stomach; the good news is that most student loans won't be paid back, and the government, underwriting it all, will end up paying for the education, as it would have done all along. A university education is rarely needed unless you want to be an academic. Even in technical subjects like engineering, those who have learnt on the job often end up being more competent, and they can be useful with just a bit of tuition . Some software skills can be learned in just a couple of weeks. The real value of a degree is that it acts as a differentiator between job applicants, which is why some people now use their acceptance letter to a university as a means of getting a job, even though they didn't actually attend and saddle themselves with debt.

My son just breezed through with a top degree in comp sci. He is smart and knows a lot about software but so he was anyway before he went. Most of the good stuff he knows is self-taught just because he's interested e.g. reflashing phones and fiddling with the firmware. Neither of us can see any practical learning point in spending three years "at university" but now he has the necessary qualifications to get past the HR filter.

[Si1]

37 minutes ago, Funn3r said:

My son just breezed through with a top degree in comp sci. He is smart and knows a lot about software but so he was anyway before he went. Most of the good stuff he knows is self-taught just because he's interested e.g. reflashing phones and fiddling with the firmware. Neither of us can see any practical learning point in spending three years "at university" but now he has the necessary qualifications to get past the HR filter.

It's true enough that a technical IT or similar degree is required just to get anywhere in the IT field, even if you knew what you're doing anyway. Same goes for other fields like planning and environment. 

 

I think it's part of being an indentured wage slave. They need to know you have shown some hard commitment to the role, beyond just ability, before risking letting you loose with responsibility.

[billybong]

2 hours ago, John51 said:

Long time since I read it, so paraphrasing but one of the first reports about Britain sent back to Rome was on the lines of the Brits being uppity and ready to complain about the slightest thing...but are ok with paying taxes.

and ok living in tiny, expensive and fire prone homes?

The Romans never really left did they?

Edited June 26, 2017 by billybong

[jonb2]

1 hour ago, billybong said:

The Romans never really left did they?

More Pizza places than ever these days

[StAlex]

After reading some articles on line,  noting what might happen to government debt if interest rates were to rise- if the central bank turns interest rates negative, what would happen to government debt? http://www.pgpf.org/analysis/2016/12/higher-interest-rates-will-raise-interest-costs-on-the-national-debt