This is starting to get a little scary Page 369

  • Page

    of 383 First / Last

  • mcmonkeyplc 14 Feb 2013 11:48:33 39,387 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I don't get it, what's the issue? I don't understand the first sentence of the quote though.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • LeoliansBro 14 Feb 2013 11:53:09 43,229 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Banks employ a higher debt to equity ratio on their balance sheets than most businesses. One of the reasons given is that equity is a waste as the bank could meet its funding requirements more flexibly, easily and cheaply with debt instead. There's also the suggestion that equity is an 'inert' asset, which I think here is tied into capital ratios and the fact banks are required to keep some aside to cushion against losses, and that given it can't be used for anything else it sits there earning nothing as an often useless buffer.

    Edit: the article is saying this is wrong and is 'bad economics'. I want to understand why.

    Edited by LeoliansBro at 11:53:52 14-02-2013

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Psychotext 14 Feb 2013 12:00:20 53,846 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I didn't understand a word you just said. But the text looks pretty on my screen at least.
  • mcmonkeyplc 14 Feb 2013 13:05:18 39,387 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    The buffer isn't bad economics I thought it was pretty well accepted that it's required and it's even been increased.

    I can understand why banks want to make that liquid, means they can make more money but it also increases the chances that a bank may not have enough at one time to handle withdrawls. I'm guessing you know that so I'm just talking at you now.

    So I don't understand why it's bad economics either. :)

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Khanivor 14 Feb 2013 13:28:35 40,399 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Surely having lots of value sitting around not creating more value is the waste? Of course, on the other hand the quirky gives value to the debt; without it people would not be willing to take on as much from banks.
  • Bremenacht 14 Feb 2013 23:45:32 17,613 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Conversely, I don't get the concept of debt having value. That's just an assumption. It has no value until it is repaid, with interest.

    What's the most valuable of the following items:

    A lottery ticket.
    A betting slip.
    An unsecured debt.
    A pound coin.
    ?

    I'd say a pound coin. A liquidator would definitely say a pound coin. A shareholder would probably say a pound coin. An investment banker wouldn't, because it offers no return (other than one pound) unless you convert it into a debt.

    How debt can still be regarded as desirable given the past 5 years absolutely beats me.
  • Khanivor 15 Feb 2013 02:12:42 40,399 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Leverage debt into a bonus. I can see the attraction for some.
  • Tom_Servo 22 Feb 2013 22:13:59 17,330 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Britain's credit rating cut by Moody's

    Not sure what this means, really.
  • dsmx 22 Feb 2013 22:39:04 7,563 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Self fulfilling prophesy really, cut a nations credit rating, borrowing costs more so they are less able to repay the debt so the credit rating gets lowered again and so on.

    "If we hit that bullseye the rest of the dominoes will fall like a a house of cards, checkmate." Zapp Brannigan

  • Inertia 22 Feb 2013 22:45:10 676 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    @Tom_Servo

    http://www.timescolonist.com/business/moody-s-dips-5-pct-as-justice-investigation-of-rival-and-outlook-overshadow-strong-quarter-1.70002

    It hasn't hurt the US particularly so it shouldn't mean too much.
  • BabyJesus 22 Feb 2013 22:48:31 4,412 posts
    Seen 9 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I like how his response is basically 'just because it doesn't work, it doesn't mean I'm changing my mind! WE NEED MORE AUSTERITY' & then throws out some excuses and scare tactics. Stay classy tories.
  • senso-ji 22 Feb 2013 23:15:22 5,795 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Is their a country that hasn't been downgraded by Moody's? Seems pointless if many countries get their credit rating lowered; who will be left to borrow from?
  • Tom_Servo 22 Feb 2013 23:23:42 17,330 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    "The strategy is now in ruins"

    Not good when the Telegraph's saying that, really.
  • superdelphinus 22 Feb 2013 23:35:30 8,035 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Heh I've got a meeting at the treasury on Monday. Should be fun :(
  • Clive_Dunn 22 Feb 2013 23:44:30 4,775 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    If you can convince them to actually have an economic strategy it might help ?
  • dsmx 23 Feb 2013 00:44:40 7,563 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Well it would be a shit load easier having a economic strategy if the previous government hadn't of borrowed every penny it could and sell off a lot of the gold. Not that I'm taking sides, the current lot aren't very good either.

    "If we hit that bullseye the rest of the dominoes will fall like a a house of cards, checkmate." Zapp Brannigan

  • Bremenacht 23 Feb 2013 00:55:08 17,613 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Don't worry - house builders, financial service people and tax cuts for tax dodgers will save the country. And dollops of more austerity! If it doesn't work at first, try, try again.
  • X201 23 Feb 2013 06:22:36 15,138 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    dsmx wrote:
    Well it would be a shit load easier having a economic strategy if the previous government hadn't of borrowed every penny it could and sell off a lot of the gold.
    Do you know why the gold was sold and who came up with the idea?
    The banks screwed up a nice little earner they had with gold sales and Brown was faced with a collapse of the banks even earlier than the sub-prime problem. Goldman Sachs came up with the idea.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/thomaspascoe/100018367/revealed-why-gordon-brown-sold-britains-gold-at-a-knock-down-price/
  • dsmx 23 Feb 2013 08:19:24 7,563 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Wow I didn't know brown brown screwed us over twice over the gold.

    "If we hit that bullseye the rest of the dominoes will fall like a a house of cards, checkmate." Zapp Brannigan

  • Moot_Point 23 Feb 2013 09:42:51 3,917 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Those institutions that operate outside the law are prone to corruption. This is why nobody should be immune from prosecution. This is why politicians and bankers get away with criminal acts freely, I am sure there are others, but in this economic crisis they are the main people causing the problems in the world.

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • Bremenacht 23 Feb 2013 12:59:12 17,613 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    X201 wrote:
    dsmx wrote:
    Well it would be a shit load easier having a economic strategy if the previous government hadn't of borrowed every penny it could and sell off a lot of the gold.
    Do you know why the gold was sold and who came up with the idea?
    The banks screwed up a nice little earner they had with gold sales and Brown was faced with a collapse of the banks even earlier than the sub-prime problem. Goldman Sachs came up with the idea.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/thomaspascoe/100018367/revealed-why-gordon-brown-sold-britains-gold-at-a-knock-down-price/
    Yeah, I think I've read that before, or something like it. The thing that struck me was that the article says a British Chancellor was prompted to act to save an American bank. Does that sound kosher? No mention of American involvement or interest at all? A bit fishy.

    I'd like to what British banks were involved, and whether GB had any role other than rubber-stamping. They've not sold significant lots of gold since the price went sky-high, have they.
  • Mr_Sleep 23 Feb 2013 13:39:04 16,850 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    dsmx wrote:
    Well it would be a shit load easier having a economic strategy if the previous government hadn't of borrowed every penny it could and sell off a lot of the gold. Not that I'm taking sides, the current lot aren't very good either.
    While it's true that selling off the gold was a seemingly ridiculous move I am sick to death of the constant blaming of the previous government. It takes time to put new strategies into place but just using the defence of it being the previous parties fault only works for so long. See Question Time for a perfect example of this pointless rhetoric. PMQ, whenever I watch it, just seems to be this same argument over and over again.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • 4gate 23 Feb 2013 13:44:25 362 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    How long it works for is dependent, to a certain extent, on how big the problem is, which in this case was fairly big. Not to defend the Tories atall, wouldn't vote for them on a bet, but seeing Ed Balls this morning castigate the government for losing AAA, when he is one of the top 10 people responsible, out of a world population of 7 billion, for causing it, does still stick in the craw a bit.
  • Mr_Sleep 23 Feb 2013 13:56:25 16,850 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Yes, that's true too, Labour have a lot of answer for in how they acted when in government but it is not really relevant to solving the current problems. To just blame the previous government for everything is such a weak way of solving a problem, it's just a deflection and doesn't aid anything.

    Stand on a platform of a policy rather than just harping on about the inadequacies of the predecessor. Imagine if I went into a new job and then for the first two years was incompetent and my only excuse was to blame the previous employee. That wouldn't get very far.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • 4gate 23 Feb 2013 14:00:27 362 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Well you would, if you and the previous employee were the only 2 possible candidates, and the manager was so sick of hearing from both of you he largely didn't give a chuff anymore, which is pretty much how it works :)
  • mcmonkeyplc 23 Feb 2013 14:11:21 39,387 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    X201 wrote:
    dsmx wrote:
    Well it would be a shit load easier having a economic strategy if the previous government hadn't of borrowed every penny it could and sell off a lot of the gold.
    Do you know why the gold was sold and who came up with the idea?
    The banks screwed up a nice little earner they had with gold sales and Brown was faced with a collapse of the banks even earlier than the sub-prime problem. Goldman Sachs came up with the idea.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/thomaspascoe/100018367/revealed-why-gordon-brown-sold-britains-gold-at-a-knock-down-price/
    Fuck me! I had no idea about this!

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Mr_Sleep 23 Feb 2013 14:37:00 16,850 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    4gate wrote:
    Well you would, if you and the previous employee were the only 2 possible candidates, and the manager was so sick of hearing from both of you he largely didn't give a chuff anymore, which is pretty much how it works :)
    Hah, too true!

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • Bremenacht 23 Feb 2013 14:54:07 17,613 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    You can be reasonably certain that this government will reproduce all the mistakes of the previous government as they try to get out of trouble, which will make the question of who's to blame moot.

    Say this: Scrap the discredited PFI model!
    Do this: Introduce even more PFI and impose cuts elsewhere in order to fund existing, failing, PFI contracts.
    Say this: The NHS is sancrasanct. We must protect the NHS
    Do this: Impose 20B cuts. Impose a massive re-org.

    etc.

    So yes, the blame game is pointless and I'd rather see someone attempt something different as this country seems to be regressing in all areas and neither Labour nor Tories have policies that will help everyone, rather than helping their traditional interest groups. Vote for either of them at the next GE and you will have done your bit to preserve the miserable status quo.

    PS. This isn't a stealth 'Vote LD!' post, even though that was my most recent leaning. They seem to have modelled themselves on the other two parties.

    Edited by Bremenacht at 14:56:00 23-02-2013
  • dsmx 23 Feb 2013 23:18:09 7,563 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Well until labour admit and own up to the fact that this shitty position were in is entirely their own fault the conservatives need to keep repeating that this shitty position were in is entirely labours fault.

    However at the same time they also need to start making some policy decisions that are actually going to help grown the economy in the future, austerity in government budgets is all well and good but the money saved needs to be invested in things that will help the country in the long term such as infrastructure or subsides for growth industries.

    But what's happening right now with both sides arguing with each other and blaming the other side for all the problems the country is in isn't helping, on the other hand things still get voted on so at least it's not as bad as the republican situation in the US.

    "If we hit that bullseye the rest of the dominoes will fall like a a house of cards, checkmate." Zapp Brannigan

  • mcmothercruncher 24 Feb 2013 09:39:59 6,477 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Except this situation isn't entirely Labour's fault. Other than that, carry on.
  • Page

    of 383 First / Last

Log in or register to reply