Newsnight: Quantitative Easing

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

I wrote WUM not WUN learn to read before being an idiot.:rolleyes:

Yeah I should really learn to read. Will you teach me?

And it's she, not he.

Cat695

Really2 and SGE1 the pair of you make me laugh....your both obviously intelligent people but you don't half fight like kids

Though it is amusing so I'm not asking you to stop:D

Richard_Cocks

lol at the futility of linking to a daily mail article to try and show tax is bad...

purch

No. The Banking Bill, which is why you're getting your knickers in a twist, is a Bill, not yet an Act - so it's not yet law. Nothing has been abolished yet

The Bill was first presented to Parliament in the first week of October, which hardly fits in with the scaremongering as if the idea that "they" are suddenly trying to hide something.

All of HM Gov's ideas appear to be thought up over breakfast, after reading the tabloids, so the idea that Brown has been planning anything for a few months is laughable !!!

RickyTOM

!!!!!!? wrote: »

So, forget about working, earning and saving. That concept is just for us plebs. If you're the authorities, just print the stuff up as needed. Legalised counterfeiting for politicians.

What an uneducated and misleading comment.

You seem to think that printing money always means inflation (and even hyper-inflation) is inevitable as a result.

The forces at work in the economy are enormously deflationary, and to fight them you need to try to reflate the economy with the reflationary policies, much as you need to use disinflationary policies to fight inflation. The more severe the problem (and make no mistake, this is very, very severe), the more forthright the solution needs to be.

Where was the hyperinflation in the US after their reflation of the mid-1930's? Please don't tell me it's different this time. It isn't - this is hugely deflationary and we need hugely reflationary methods to deal with it.

To say that printing money under any circumstances is inflationary is simply moronic.

shaven-monkey

amcluesent wrote: »

>a lot of useful changing to the financial system<

Maybe it does. But why does Crash Gordon now need to abolish financial reporting that's been good for 164 years?

It's either -

1) The hide the magnitude of the financial scam he's working on the middle-class savers of England, in favour of TruLabour voters in the sink-estates.
2) To hide preparations to bounce us into the Euro

Or possibly both of the above

Why is this good for the people in sink estates? They're already poor and will remain so if not poorer. It seems to me that hiding the magnitude of the scam is much more beneficial to those who are profiting from the scam... the banks, the investment bankers, the rich and powerful.
Maybe my tinfoil hat has a hole in it?
IT DOES, how else would i get my head in? Oh noes!

Spiv_2

RickyTOM wrote: »

printing money

I despise the phrase "printing money" - it is imprecise and informal - abused more than used... and, at best open to wild interpretations. Some consider it to mean government borrowing on the bond markets; some consider it to be monetary expansion by fractional reserve; some think it to be the effect of expanding the range of collateral accepted by the central bank... Personally, I think only of counterfeiting cash.

If we assume 'printing money' means the issue of sovereign debt bought only by the central bank - then spent into the economy to make up for a tax shortfall... I'd argue that this is definitely inflationary - but that inflation need not be the outcome... if there are also deflationary effects of greater magnitude.

I don't think an inflationary outcome is absurd... but I think it is absurd in the short term. I expect that there is a lot of deflation (de-leverage of investments and falling asset prices) but I do not expect that this will be allowed to continue without considerably inflationary polices from government. I don't expect the failure of first-world fiats... and, hence, expect that there will be a bottom to the market... but that the inflationary policies will then take time to wear off. When this happens, I expect inflation to take hold again... though I think there is a long way to go before we reach that stage again. For this reason, rather than to argue between inflation and deflation - given that it is blatantly obvious that we're in a broad deflationary environment right now - maybe we should be asking instead how to measure/predict when we will see the next turn from deflation to inflation. I think it is fair to say that an inflationary bias turned to a deflationary bias in 2007/2008... when, or under what circumstances do we expect this to reverse?

Really2

Cat695 wrote: »

Really2 and SGE1 the pair of you make me laugh....your both obviously intelligent people but you don't half fight like kids

Though it is amusing so I'm not asking you to stop:D

I will try to let it go, but I see it turning into "DD V !!!!!! 2":rotfl:
Flattery gets you everywere.:)

dopester

!!!!!!? wrote: »

So, forget about working, earning and saving. That concept is just for us plebs. If you're the authorities, just print the stuff up as needed. Legalised counterfeiting for politicians.

You're going OTT with this in my opinion.

Printing money - this quantitative easing.. may not be as sure fire high inflation as you believe. Quantitative easing was used by Japan in the early 2000s as well, to give banks money to lend (which also requires the demand to borrow from fair/good credit risks to actually get in to the system proper), but hasn't fully pushed back the deflationary forces there.

Do you understand how powerful the deflationary forces are in the UK and USA and elsewhere ?

At this stage, to me it is like an attempt to deflect the oncoming hurricane with a hair-dryer. I'll worry more about it when the market stresses about it.

setmefree2

Hoorah - got this one back:j:D