Taxpayers' £200bn to insure banks' losses

harryhound

brummybloke wrote: »

you GIVE your money to the government?

i think you may find they TAKE it.

Taxation by inflation is fraud/stealing ?.

setmefree2 wrote: »

I fear most people would have just spent the money on houses, ramping house prices up even further.
.

We can agree on this one, and the same thing applies to investing in "Chelsea Tractors".
It is a bit of a long story, but I found myself at a champagne reception thrown by the Evening News "Luxury Home of the Year"
winner (they were buying I was selling) - As I wandered through a "kitchen" with 16' high ceilings, probably big enough to contain half of "houndhovel"; I thought: this is a waste of the country's and the world's resources akin to building pyramids.
Not only was it likely to prove financially unsustainable, it was also ecologically unsustainable as a single family home.

setmefree2

Hi Harryhound,

We do agree about Iraq. Bringing the troops home would not only be right imho but also save us a packet. The Americans would save 100 billion a year by just pulling the troops of Iraq, though I think the Obama administration intends to relocate some troops to Afghanistan.

More money in people's pockets would have gone on inflating houses, more Chinese imports of "tat" (for want of a better word) and cars from Germany & Japan (nobody wants American cars anymore it would seem) imho.

More money for the banks in reduced CT rates would have just been spent on more toxic financial assets:rolleyes:.

Too many of the UKs best brains have headed for the city imho. Maybe some of our best brains will go to other industries now and create something better than the latest new all-singing-all-dancing financial instrument. We can hope.