Reckless lending got us into this and more will get us out?

SGE1

beingjdc wrote: »

Agreed - and most medicines taken to excess are poisons. But if someone comes to hospital having overdosed massively, you gradually reduce the amount of the poison in their system, you don't pump more and more in!

Our debt, the poison, is still growing. It is growing less quickly than before, but growing all the same. We need it to fall. We may be able to make the next year seem better by drugging ourselves some more, but only at the cost of worse withdrawal symptoms later.

When you say medicine to excess is poison, you're right - but then you say we shouldn't pump more poison into the system - right again - but by your own admission, medicine - lending - is only poisonous if taken to excess. Yet what's being argued here is the return of some lending - ie medicine - but not to the extend that it would be excess/poison again. See where I'm getting at?

At the end of the day, the issue was just as much lending to those wouldn't couldn't afford it - the affordability issues is just as significant as the size of the lending taking place. If moderate lending occurs, and lending to the right risks, then the context is very different to the one we're in now.

lostinrates

SGE1 wrote: »

Er, no, the analogy with medicine works because of the similar "good in small doses" attribute. Unless you're arguing that alcohol is healthy, I'm afraid you've missed the point.

I'm strictly of the opinion that a regular glass of red wine MIGHT save my life...

I'm very confused now I have to choose between surviving heart desease while drinking or not contracting cancer by abstention. Its a tough life.

itsnever2lateisit?

ad44downey wrote: »

It's absolute nonsense. Clown will bankrupt our once great nation and let future generations pick up the tab for it.

When was our nation great? We seem to look back with rose-tinted glasses at the Victorian Era, workshop of the world, great strides in transport, the building of sewers and other infrastructure, blah blah. And yet that was also the period of "The Great Depression" from 1873-1896

ad9898_3

SGE1 wrote: »

Er, no, the analogy with medicine works because of the similar "good in small doses" attribute.

Lets stick with the analogy then, at what point were we fed small doses of the medicine (read debt) ??, because I thought we were fed quite large amounts of it, and we are now being asked to take more.( a hell of a lot more )

So I ask again, what is small about any of this debt ??

adr0ck

Wookster wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/feb/24/banks-toxic-assets-insurance

Does Crash ever learn? I'll wager that ultimately the taxpayer ends up carrying the can for this.

i agree that the government needs to do something to ensure that the banks they have supported also support small to medium sized business - as the banks are not doing so at the moment

however i now wish we had just let the banks go to the wall

unfortunately its now to late for that

adr0ck

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm strictly of the opinion that a regular glass of red wine MIGHT save my life...

I'm very confused now I have to choose between surviving heart desease while drinking or not contracting cancer by abstention. Its a tough life.

drink your regular glass of red wine then some green tea

SGE1

ad9898 wrote: »

Lets stick with the analogy then, at what point were we fed small doses of the medicine (read debt) ??, because I thought we were fed quite large amounts of it, and we are now being asked to take more.( a hell of a lot more )

So I ask again, what is small about any of this debt ??

That's the point, the large debt is the problem (lending = medicine, too much lending = too much medicine, too much medicine = poisonous), and you need small/reasonable doses of medicine (= reasonable levels of lending) to cure the poison!

I wish I'd never started this :mad:

SGE1

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm strictly of the opinion that a regular glass of red wine MIGHT save my life...

I'm very confused now I have to choose between surviving heart desease while drinking or not contracting cancer by abstention. Its a tough life.

Everything is moderation (apart from maybe heroin) is probably ok. You'll get both 'mild' heart disease and localised stage 1 cancer, but you'll live.

ad9898_3

SGE1 wrote: »

I wish I'd never started this :mad:

I bet you do, the whole argument is oh so basic, you don't fix having too much of something by having more of it, ask a smoker, an alcoholic, a junkie etc, etc.... and the amounts of debt being force fed on the public ( the joke VAT cut that's going to cost £12 billion etc..etc..), will cripple the country for decades, yet upto now as achieved absolutely zero.

ad44downey

itsnever2lateisit? wrote: »

When was our nation great? We seem to look back with rose-tinted glasses at the Victorian Era, workshop of the world, great strides in transport, the building of sewers and other infrastructure, blah blah. And yet that was also the period of "The Great Depression" from 1873-1896

When this mad borrowing binge is over we'll never have had a national debt anywhere near as big in our entire history. And you, me, and everyone else is going to have to try to pay it all back!