You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Effects of Austerity Cuts part 58
March 29 2024 1.47pm

Effects of Austerity Cuts part 58

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 19 of 25 < 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 >

 

derben Flag 11 Jun 15 8.08am


I had quite a lot of money in Icesave but got it all back thanks to Gordon Brown. Not sure that would have been the case under the Tories. Before that I had it in Northern Rock but took it out a couple of weeks before their crash; was very smug about it and then put it in Icesave!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 11 Jun 15 8.11am

Quote Johnny Eagles at 11 Jun 2015 8.08am

Quote nickgusset at 10 Jun 2015 10.59pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 10 Jun 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 10 Jun 2015 7.15pm

Quote nickgusset at 16 May 2013 5.30pm

Most would agree that we are in the proverbial because of the banking crisis and the fact that we, the taxpayer bailed them out.

Not so in Iceland. Rather than bailing the banks out, they arrested those responsible. Iceland invested in infrastructure and now happen to be doing rather well. No austerity there.

Obama reigned in his austerity measures and invested. The States are now turning the corner.

Was shouted down for posting the above 2 years ago...


[Link]

Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2015 7.16pm)


Iceland only has about 300,000 people. Hardly a useful comparison.

Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham have got about the same population. Not much austerity there, either.


Are you saying they should have bailed out the banks then and not sent people to prison?

I'm not defending bankers.

I was responding to yet another classic Gusset oversimplification.

You said:

"Not so in Iceland. Rather than bailing the banks out, they arrested those responsible. Iceland invested in infrastructure and now happen to be doing rather well. No austerity there."

You're implying that if Britain followed Iceland's approach, we'd solve our deficit problem.

1. You make a comparison between Iceland (300 thousand people) and the UK (ca. 70m people). It is not a useful comparison.

2. The Icelandic government recapitalised the banks to the tune of 30% of national GDP. They increased Icelandic public debt by about 20%. How is that not a bail-out?

3. Iceland imposed capital controls. In a small economy like theirs they can get away with stuff like that. Capital controls would cripple Britain.

4. Where is your evidence that "Iceland invested in infrastructure"? What big projects does a small volcanic island with less than half a million people need? High speed rail?

5. What makes you say Iceland is "doing rather well"?

It's doing better than before but that's not difficult.

In 'the Economist' they said, "whether this strong performance will last is not clear. Household debt is still high, and the IMF worries about the effect of removing capital controls too fast. Some people also fret about a house-price bubble. Iceland is not out of the woods yet."

It seems to me you've skim-read a blog (presumably a left-wing one containing quotes from, let me guess, Joseph Stiglitz?) and copied and pasted it on here and tried to pass it off as an "argument" against austerity.


The independent is a blog now?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Johnny Eagles's Profile Johnny Eagles Flag berlin 11 Jun 15 8.24am Send a Private Message to Johnny Eagles Add Johnny Eagles as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 11 Jun 2015 8.11am

Quote Johnny Eagles at 11 Jun 2015 8.08am

Quote nickgusset at 10 Jun 2015 10.59pm

Quote Johnny Eagles at 10 Jun 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 10 Jun 2015 7.15pm

Quote nickgusset at 16 May 2013 5.30pm

Most would agree that we are in the proverbial because of the banking crisis and the fact that we, the taxpayer bailed them out.

Not so in Iceland. Rather than bailing the banks out, they arrested those responsible. Iceland invested in infrastructure and now happen to be doing rather well. No austerity there.

Obama reigned in his austerity measures and invested. The States are now turning the corner.

Was shouted down for posting the above 2 years ago...


[Link]

Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2015 7.16pm)


Iceland only has about 300,000 people. Hardly a useful comparison.

Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham have got about the same population. Not much austerity there, either.


Are you saying they should have bailed out the banks then and not sent people to prison?

I'm not defending bankers.

I was responding to yet another classic Gusset oversimplification.

You said:

"Not so in Iceland. Rather than bailing the banks out, they arrested those responsible. Iceland invested in infrastructure and now happen to be doing rather well. No austerity there."

You're implying that if Britain followed Iceland's approach, we'd solve our deficit problem.

1. You make a comparison between Iceland (300 thousand people) and the UK (ca. 70m people). It is not a useful comparison.

2. The Icelandic government recapitalised the banks to the tune of 30% of national GDP. They increased Icelandic public debt by about 20%. How is that not a bail-out?

3. Iceland imposed capital controls. In a small economy like theirs they can get away with stuff like that. Capital controls would cripple Britain.

4. Where is your evidence that "Iceland invested in infrastructure"? What big projects does a small volcanic island with less than half a million people need? High speed rail?

5. What makes you say Iceland is "doing rather well"?

It's doing better than before but that's not difficult.

In 'the Economist' they said, "whether this strong performance will last is not clear. Household debt is still high, and the IMF worries about the effect of removing capital controls too fast. Some people also fret about a house-price bubble. Iceland is not out of the woods yet."

It seems to me you've skim-read a blog (presumably a left-wing one containing quotes from, let me guess, Joseph Stiglitz?) and copied and pasted it on here and tried to pass it off as an "argument" against austerity.


The independent is a blog now?

Dealing with the substance as ever. Bravo.

 


...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View We are goin up!'s Profile We are goin up! Flag Coulsdon 11 Jun 15 8.52am Send a Private Message to We are goin up! Add We are goin up! as a friend

That awkward moment when nickgusset tries to talk about basic economics, a subject on which he clearly has no clue.

 


The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Kermit8's Profile Kermit8 Flag Hevon 11 Jun 15 9.29am Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Working families tax credits about to take another massive hit. A household earning 29k a year or more won't be eligible. Used to be 35k under Labour then dropped to 32k under the coalition.

It wouldn't be so bad if rents and the cost of buying a house were not so high. Those take up so much more of income than in the past. Add other bills and the fact that schools are asking parents to pay for way more things now that used to be subsidised and it's easy to see the outcome.

A lot of families will be losing a very important part of their monthly budget and will find it much harder or impossible to make ends meet.

Still, those families are in it all together.

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
derben Flag 11 Jun 15 9.33am

Quote Kermit8 at 11 Jun 2015 9.29am

Working families tax credits about to take another massive hit. A household earning 29k a year or more won't be eligible. Used to be 35k under Labour then dropped to 32k under the coalition.

It wouldn't be so bad if rents and the cost of buying a house were not so high. Those take up so much more of income than in the past. Add other bills and the fact that schools are asking parents to pay for way more things now that used to be subsidised and it's easy to see the outcome.

A lot of families will be losing a very important part of their monthly budget and will find it much harder or impossible to make ends meet.

Still, those families are in it all together.

If we didn't have 300,000+ net immigration every year house prices and rents would not be so high, wages would be higher and there would be more jobs to go around. Still, the entire population of the EU can come here if they want and be in it together with us.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View We are goin up!'s Profile We are goin up! Flag Coulsdon 11 Jun 15 11.19am Send a Private Message to We are goin up! Add We are goin up! as a friend

Quote derben at 11 Jun 2015 9.33am

Quote Kermit8 at 11 Jun 2015 9.29am

Working families tax credits about to take another massive hit. A household earning 29k a year or more won't be eligible. Used to be 35k under Labour then dropped to 32k under the coalition.

It wouldn't be so bad if rents and the cost of buying a house were not so high. Those take up so much more of income than in the past. Add other bills and the fact that schools are asking parents to pay for way more things now that used to be subsidised and it's easy to see the outcome.

A lot of families will be losing a very important part of their monthly budget and will find it much harder or impossible to make ends meet.

Still, those families are in it all together.

If we didn't have 300,000+ net immigration every year house prices and rents would not be so high, wages would be higher and there would be more jobs to go around. Still, the entire population of the EU can come here if they want and be in it together with us.


Someone will call you a racist in a minute.

 


The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnno42000's Profile johnno42000 Flag 11 Jun 15 12.17pm Send a Private Message to johnno42000 Add johnno42000 as a friend

Gordon Brown selling off gold cost the UK around £5 billion. [Link]

George Osborne selling off RBS costs UK £7 billion. [Link]

Why aren't the Tories complaining about such wastefulness?

As someone who is not a financial genius I do find it strange that Osborne seems to be getting rid of any assets the UK may have for whatever price he can get, a bit like a boot sale.

Edited by johnno42000 (11 Jun 2015 12.18pm)

 


'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnfirewall's Profile johnfirewall Flag 11 Jun 15 12.30pm Send a Private Message to johnfirewall Add johnfirewall as a friend

Not sure why RBS isn't being sold in tranches.

Royal Mail was supposedly too cheap but prices are 20% up now the rest of it is being sold.

Edited by johnfirewall (11 Jun 2015 12.31pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 11 Jun 15 1.19pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Quote johnno42000 at 11 Jun 2015 12.17pm

Gordon Brown selling off gold cost the UK around £5 billion. [Link]

George Osborne selling off RBS costs UK £7 billion. [Link]

Why aren't the Tories complaining about such wastefulness?

As someone who is not a financial genius I do find it strange that Osborne seems to be getting rid of any assets the UK may have for whatever price he can get, a bit like a boot sale.

Edited by johnno42000 (11 Jun 2015 12.18pm)

Darling estimated we'd lose £30-50bn when he bailed out the guy they knighted.

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnno42000's Profile johnno42000 Flag 11 Jun 15 1.31pm Send a Private Message to johnno42000 Add johnno42000 as a friend

Quote Stuk at 11 Jun 2015 1.19pm

Quote johnno42000 at 11 Jun 2015 12.17pm

Gordon Brown selling off gold cost the UK around £5 billion. [Link]

George Osborne selling off RBS costs UK £7 billion. [Link]

Why aren't the Tories complaining about such wastefulness?

As someone who is not a financial genius I do find it strange that Osborne seems to be getting rid of any assets the UK may have for whatever price he can get, a bit like a boot sale.

Edited by johnno42000 (11 Jun 2015 12.18pm)

Darling estimated we'd lose £30-50bn when he bailed out the guy they knighted.

Doesn't really excuse Osborne though. It seems people are very quick to attack Brown for selling things that makes the UK a loss, less so Osborne which, to me, is unfair.

 


'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 11 Jun 15 1.46pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Quote johnno42000 at 11 Jun 2015 1.31pm

Quote Stuk at 11 Jun 2015 1.19pm

Quote johnno42000 at 11 Jun 2015 12.17pm

Gordon Brown selling off gold cost the UK around £5 billion. [Link]

George Osborne selling off RBS costs UK £7 billion. [Link]

Why aren't the Tories complaining about such wastefulness?

As someone who is not a financial genius I do find it strange that Osborne seems to be getting rid of any assets the UK may have for whatever price he can get, a bit like a boot sale.

Edited by johnno42000 (11 Jun 2015 12.18pm)

Darling estimated we'd lose £30-50bn when he bailed out the guy they knighted.

Doesn't really excuse Osborne though. It seems people are very quick to attack Brown for selling things that makes the UK a loss, less so Osborne which, to me, is unfair.


Overall it's a £14bn profit.

A review from Rothschild investment bank said that, despite this price gap, taxpayers can expect to make £14bn more than it paid out in bank bailouts if the sale of bank assets and fees already received are taken into account.

RBS has already paid back about £5bn in fees and repayments for insurance systems set up by the government as part of the bailout.

Brown sold gold reserves at the lowest price for 20 years and reinvested some of it in f***ing Euros. He sold it at about a quarter of the value it was worth, in 1980, and it then went on quintuple in price over the next decade.

If RBS shares are trading at nearly £19 per share in 10 years it'll be a miracle.

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 19 of 25 < 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Effects of Austerity Cuts part 58