Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

The government and the banks.

Old Nov 5, 2009 | 04:59 PM
  #1  
alcazar's Avatar
alcazar
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 40,787
Likes: 30
From: Rl'yeh
Question The government and the banks.

Is it just me, or can anyone else see a difference of approach, even a completely different philosphy here?

On the one hand, we have Darling the Wrecker, and Sh*t Broon pumping BILLIONS into the banks in the hope that they will start lending again and kick start the economy.

On the other hand, we have the banks, who are holding on to every penny, lending at low rates to EACH OTHER, but at stupid rates to us, if at all, and advertising for people to "Save, save, save!!!", at every turn end.

They seem to be at entirely cross purposes, so WHY does Lying Labour keep giving them Billions with, apparently, no strings attached?
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2009 | 06:00 PM
  #2  
Trout's Avatar
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
From: UK
Default

What are you talking about?

The banks are offering very good saving rates to generate capital. Fair enough they need to grow it but they are offering tremendous returns in the current ultra-low interest rate environment.

At present Wrecker and Broon are only pumping money into one bank to stop hundreds of billions of loans collapsing. If those loans collapsed then you would see a genuine ****storm compared to the events of the last year.

And finally, although it is not fashionable to report, the High Street banks in the UK are pretty much all lending more than they did a year ago.

The lending criteria are tougher (they were very lax), interest rates are higher because of more risk in the loan book, but they are lending.

The main economic issue is that other sources of capital have upsticks and gone home and our banks are not large enough to bridge that gap no matter how much money the Government pump in.


The real question is, why do the British people believe they can run their own finances, and therefore the economy of the nation on DEBT!!

If you have to borrow to buy it you can't afford it.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2009 | 09:15 PM
  #3  
hodgy0_2's Avatar
hodgy0_2
Scooby Regular
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 22
From: K
Default

Originally Posted by Trout

If you have to borrow to buy it you can't afford it.
I have a lot of sympathy for this view – but I would just like to point out that debt per se is not a bad thing

It is how it is used – debt is a very effective financial tool (ask the Glazer’s – the Manchester United buyout was a genius use of debt and I bet they used a fraction of their own cash)

Debt for investment is fine, debt to spunk on cars and shoes is car crash finances

That’s why I don’t drive a Porsche – I would only buy one with cash, but I am pretty highly geared at the moment so have no spare

Last edited by hodgy0_2; Nov 5, 2009 at 09:19 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2009 | 09:44 PM
  #4  
Trout's Avatar
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
From: UK
Default

The funny thing is - the richest investor in the world has never borrowed a penny and he totally believes that gearing for investment is the craziest thing in the world.

For every success story (e.g. Man U) there will be sorry tales of woe in abundance.

The simple reason is that servicing debt accelerates losses faster than anything else.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2009 | 10:11 PM
  #5  
hodgy0_2's Avatar
hodgy0_2
Scooby Regular
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 22
From: K
Default

Warren Buffet presumably but I would suggest he is in a minority of one

most rich people get rich using someone elses money -- easier and less risky
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2009 | 10:42 PM
  #6  
Trout's Avatar
Trout
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
From: UK
Default

The only person I know who is seriously rich has the same philosophy as Buffet, so it must be true then

I agree with what you say techically, but it was gearing through ever more complex securitisation that got us into this mess to start with.
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2009 | 02:47 AM
  #7  
Dedrater's Avatar
Dedrater
Scooby Regular
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Default

Honestly, F**K Knows.

How is the average joe supposed to know in depth information like this without paying thousands a year for an Accountant/Risk Manager, I certainly don't have the time to keep on top of it all, if you do, then perhaps thats what separates the millionaires from the thousandaires, so to speak.

The only way I can see is to work for the man and pay into the two available ISA systems + my pension.

Hence, I am not a millionaire.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dpb
Non Scooby Related
14
Oct 3, 2015 10:37 AM
cube
Non Scooby Related
18
Nov 22, 2008 10:21 AM
GaryC
ScoobyNet General
69
Sep 6, 2001 01:56 PM
James Neill
ScoobyNet General
7
Sep 13, 2000 03:01 PM
adem
ScoobyNet General
1
Jun 26, 2000 08:40 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:50 AM.