Economy shrinks by 1.6%

bluey890

mewbie wrote: »

Twenty-six.

This troll sock thing is affecting me.

Welcome to the world of off topic postings. do you have a view on this thread?

Are you still smarting from the quip about you, SirH & fellation? Lighten up mewbie.

Radiantsoul

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

I like the comment further down that article...

"The figures showed that the savings ratio surged from a negative number in the first quarter to almost 5% by the end of the year, as people put aside money for hard times.

"On the face of it this rise is good news - it means that a large portion of the necessary rebalancing of the economy away from spending and towards saving has occurred already," said George Buckley, an economist at Deutsche Bank. "


So, well done Britain, lots of us have got our heads screwed on straight - doing the sensible thing to move away from spending towards saving, for the "necessary rebalancing of the economy" - while a couple of people in 1 street, namely Downing Street still think that piling debt upon debt is the answer...

I think the point is to prevent consumption falling to the extent that it seriously damages the economy. Conceivably without lower interest rates and lower taxation on consumption the fall in consumption might have been far greater and damaged demand. Whilst savings are all well and good there needs to be enough consumption to justify investment.

I am surprised that such a sharp rise in savings has only lead to a relatively small fall in income. Probably this is a good sign.

ess0two

Cleaver wrote: »

It's a nice, sunny Friday afternoon in my neck of the woods. Stop counting my words and go for a beer. Like I'm about to do.

Does this practice involve,socialising,spending money and enjoying ones self......wait i'd better post on MSE to see if its allowed.:money:

bluey890

Generali wrote: »

Many things.

Cost of money (interest rates)
POV of the future
Immediate needs
Tax treatment of savings
Means testing

Most of these things are cumulative - economics is complicated which is why politician economics (ni Tory nor Labour) never really works. Macro economics is the amalgamation (in the UK) of 60 million people's decisions. It is almost never seen in that way but that's all it is.

If your missus decides to have a coke rather than a glass of wine when you go out for your birthday then that's a macro decision as well as a micro one.

Do you disagree? Can you come up with a better theory? These economics theories I post on here are mostly my own and I really don't claim to have some great insight that nobody else has.

Added one for ya!