Last edited by Trapper; 27th March 2012 at 09:14 AM.
I keep asking this question but I'm yet to get a definitive answer: who the bloody hell do we owe all this money to? I keep hearing about the massive debt we're in but nobody seems to know who the debtor is!
This may be controversial, but with all these daft oil-grabbing wars we keep poking our noses in to, why don't we just refuse to pay them back and let them start a war with us? Of course I jest...
It really is just like a personal bank account. The govt gets taxes from its taxpayers, and spends the money. If it doesn't have enough money to meet this spend, it borrows (from other sources, countries) or issues bonds or gilts.
The hilarious part to this is that the banks just conjure money out of thin air. Don't believe me? Look up "fractional reserve banking", or if you have a spare 45 minutes or so, look up the eye-opening "Money As Debt" presentation on Youtube.
Last edited by jinnantonnixx; 27th March 2012 at 10:26 AM.
I, like DT2 usually steer well clear of politics but the whole argument drives me up the wall. Ultimately, every party is just as bad as every other party just in different ways.
The labour tolerance for spongers and wasters and their ever-spiralling borrowing to fund the 'living-off-the-social' lifestyle at the expense of anyone NOT living off the social has had a knockon effect. It is about time the level of benefit handouts is capped. But, like everything else the governements (generally) do, it will have no effect on the REAL spongers and wasters and only serve to hurt the very people it pretends to be helping.
We received a letter addressed to the previous owner of the house we bought, lacking a return address or other details, I opened it - it was a bill from a nursery for a single child for the month of December - £890!!!!!! I couldn't believe it. The cost of living in this country and the legacy of poor governance has led to a situation where no individual on low to middling income (IT supporters for example rarely break the £25k mark) can afford to pay his or her mortgage and all the bills AND support their family whilst one spouse stays at home to look after the children, but in forcing that spouse out to work, child care costs of £900 a month render the entire exercise almost pointless!!!
THEN when grandparents become involved, social services poke their pointless noses into the lives of decent, hardworking people with generous parents and start dictating that the grandparents can't look after the children. It is my opinion (and before I get flamed, note that I said it was MY opinion) that social services persecute the innocent families because they are too afraid to actually get involved in the environments and communities that really ARE perpetrating atoricities on children! That is not to say that child abuse only occurs in poor economic areas or certain community types, but I can't help but feel that it is easier to 'get the numbers up' by hassling innocent families.
A friend of mine is now 'known to social services' because her son fell over in the back garden and a teacher saw his bruise. I mean SERIOUSLY? Children will be children, they will fall over, they will scrape their knees, they will get cuts and bruises. That is part of growing up. Now we have to stop children doing anything lest social services get wind of a bruise or scrape! Parents are too afraid to take their children to the doctors in case that little graze they got riding their bike is interpreted as child abuse! It's ludicrous!
I shant bother to vote at the next election as they are all as bad as each other and we'll get shafted whichever way we look at it. The Tories and Lib Dems are screwing us into the ground, and Labour were burdening us with unsustainable debt. We can't win either way. The tories and lib dems claim to be making changes for the good of all, but so far everything they have done has caused myself and my partner, my parents (who are near to retiring), my colleagues friends and family nothing but anguish and additional expense. LeBoyfriend and I barely break even every month as it is, how am I going to afford to have children? I don't have much time left on the old bio clock so I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't...
People like to point fingers and place blame, but quite honestly there is no one single 'root cause' of any problem. It is a combination of factors and the only way to address it is to wipe out each factor at a time. But this will never be done and it is probably impossible, so we will limp on as we are with rising living costs and more and more interference from the nanny state until such time as we are either mindless drones or we snap and rebel and Nostradamus is proved right again...
Source: UK National Debt Clock - No-nonsense Guide to Britain's Debt Crisis with more at The Bond Market Explained
Which is why the talk of credit ratings matters so much - if the influential credit agencies drop our rating and say we're not as good for the money, we'll have to pay higher interest on those bonds to make up for the added risk of taking them on.
Osborne has been talking about 100 year bonds recently as well, which did make me wonder who's going to take out an investment on that long a timescale... the only answer, of course, is corporations, so I think it's safe to say that, pending the invention of the Persuadertron, we're about to be living in Syndicate. The old one, that is, not the new one. Alternatively: Snow Crash.
The tax paid on this then goes back to the Government, so it's going to take a long time (realistically a few decades) to pay it all off. When the current Government wanted to balance the books in 5 years, it's completely an unrealistic target.
Last edited by Michael; 27th March 2012 at 10:27 AM.
If governments default on their debt, the pension companies go bust and people's pensions disappear.
AMLightfoot (27th March 2012)
As I sit here in a post-operative haze, with my waking hours rising strongly on the credit side, I was looking for something to send me off to the land of the eternal buzz saw when I came across mattx’s forum post.
Having worked in journalism I wondered if I could use some of my forensic skills on behalf of the Edugeek Community to “interpret” the piece, rather as an experienced ornithologist might “correct” a tyro bird watcher who swears they have seen a South American Buzzard by Lake Windermere, when what you are in fact looking at is a great tit.
On my first read through of the article I suspected the writer of being a comedian, and I’m afraid he rather gave the game away when towards the end of the piece he admits to being a member of not one, but two “comedy writing” unions. I suspect that bundling IT Support in with blogging and vajazzling (I’ll Google that later) was intended as a comedic thrust, rather than the faux pas it resulted in. It was good to see members here jump to the barricades to protest at this outrageous slur against the fine body of men and women who keep this country ticking over. It reminded me of the way shop stewards would pounce on any slight in order to restore the good name of his or her trade union members in the eyes of the public.
Looking more thoroughly at the offending article I noticed, almost hidden away at the top, the fact that this was referred to as “Comment Is Free”; for those unaware of the subtleties perpetrated by some of the more revolutionary “rags”, “Comment” is the writer’s personal view, whilst Editorial reflects the views of the paper in question. Some papers will naturally abuse this by making sure those invited to provide a comment piece already share the editorial line. I believe the Daily Mail already has a crack team of necromancers based in the Steppes, holding a dialogue with Attila the Hun on the effect of Ken Livingstone becoming Mayor of London on house prices.
I don’t think the piece is very good, Ian Martin has written better stuff, he might have been on a tight deadline. Who knows what obstacles he had to overcome to get this piece in on time? Don’t blame the Guardian, write your own comment piece, keep it below 1000 words and be prepared to drop it to 350. Instantly.
Last edited by beeswax; 27th March 2012 at 02:25 PM.
This disgraceful budget smacks of incompetence and cowardice | Will Hutton | Comment is free | The Observer , and in particular this para,
"Nor is it true that Britain has record public debts. It did have a record annual public deficit in 2009/10 as the budget papers say. But that is not debt. Debt is an aggregate figure, the consequence of cumulative deficits over decades. Expressed as a proportion of GDP, debt has been higher than current levels for most of the last 250 years. Indeed, with the cost of servicing public debt at the lowest since the 1890s there have been very few decades since the 1760s when the cost of servicing public debt has been so low. Britain, despite the Orwellian attempt to misuse language, does not have a debt crisis."
When I was on holiday in Italy last August I recall watching BBC World News, where there was an interview with William Hague (it was his turn to hold the fort that week) and he was asked about the deficit, to which his reply was pretty much along the lines of, "Keep calm, there's nothing to see here, we can easily handle this, we've had bigger deficits"
We're paying £500+ a month for a 4 day week at Nursery for Isabel...when #2 comes along, after the first year maternity leave, we'll be paying near a grand a month on childcare. So, my wage gone instantly, effectively.
By that point, Izz will be 3 and a half, so start getting free hours...but still, eye watering.
I love all this "It's the last Labour government's fault"
Anyone remember the Tory government BEFORE that?
Now that was a walk in the park......
(as for the cuts - stop cutting the wrong things and STOP giving money (other than to charities who work in the enviroment) to countries like India who can afford their own nuclear weapons and so are hardly poor.
There are many countries that are deserving of our help. India isn't one of them IMHO
That'll save a few quid)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)