FTSE100 falling fast!

tomterm8

Er, last British Operating system I used was also Ubuntu, two days ago, but even if there wasn't a single British OS or internet browser it would be far from impossible for a British company to make a decent one. Operating Systems have got to the point they are very well understood; it would be MUCH harder for a british company to replace google, in fact, I don't think that is possible.

( As I remember, Ubuntu worked pretty much right off, with no more faffing around than getting a windows OS installed. )

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

tomterm8 wrote: »

Admittedly, we didn't invent the Internet. That was CERN.

Nope.

The internet was American I'm afraid, with the initial backbone, ARPANET, being an early project of DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

The world wide web, and the world's first web server, was developed by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, but even that was only a networked adaptation of earlier hyper text transfer protocols originally invented by Americans.

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nope.

The internet was American I'm afraid, with the initial backbone, ARPANET, being an early project of DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

The world wide web, and the world's first web server, was developed by Tim Berners Lee at CERN, but even that was only a networked adaptation of earlier hyper text transfer protocols originally invented by Americans.

...and the Americans got it off the Aliens at Area 51.

Loughton_Monkey

Guy_Bold wrote: »

How much higher is the gold price going to go?

It will reach $14,289.56 on the 9th November 2088, and will fall a bit after that, before climaxing at $15,112.50 on 3rd February 2089.

If you need silver prices as well, just let me know.

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

I'm not sure how it would help the British economy recover to force Britons to pay £30 for a T-Shirt made in Chester rather than £3 for one made in China.

People however don't need wardrobes full of teeshirts.

So buying 5 UK produced items instead of 20 imported ones for the same amount of money.

Wouldn't disadvantage the purchaser but would generate activity in the UK economy.

Loughton_Monkey

I struggle with the Tshirt analagy. When I buy a container load of 100,000 Tshirts I probably pay £40,000. Some shipping company is, say, £5,000 richer, and China is £35,000 richer.

This country has 'lost' £40K but 'gained' 100,000 Tshirts worth £40K. Since we tend to measure wealth in £ notes (and not in Tshirts), the UK is poorer by £40K. Where I get lost is in trying to find much 'value' from what happens next. I have 100,000 Tshirts that cost me 40 pence each. I sell them to various wholesalers at 60 pence. These sell them to various local wholesalers for £1.00. They will end up on a shop shelf, or market stall and be sold at £3.00.

This whole process has made several individuals richer by £60K, and there are 100,000 individuals out there who are collectively £100K poorer [unless you want to start measuring wealth in terms of Tshirts] but obviously these people are 'happy' since they have freely chosen to be poorer by £3 in return for a nice new Tshirt to wear.

So what we have to ask ourselves is whether or not it is worthwhile to become poorer [as a nation] by £40K, so that we can generate 'activity' that spreads the other £60K of wealth around the so-called 'economy'? Personally, I always conclude "No" unless we see an equivalent £40K of British pharmaceuticals (or whatever) sold to China in return.

Sadly, 99% of economics seems to be devoted to detailed discussion about the £60K profits on the Tshirts. Who gets a slice of the pie, how much the Government takes and what it spends it on......... This is all very interesting, and certainly 'matters' in terms of keeping UK citizens in work and allowing them to put food on the table... But I wish 99% of the effort went into working out how we could sell an extra £40K of goods to China (or anywhere) so that there existed an extra £40K to be distributed.

Until that happens, we get poorer as a nation. We fight endlessly about the distribution of that dwindling wealth. To me, it all seems like scrapping about deciding who next to throw out of the sinking balloon rather than working out how to mend the hole in the balloon!

dtaylor84

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Until that happens, we get poorer as a nation. We fight endlessly about the distribution of that dwindling wealth. To me, it all seems like scrapping about deciding who next to throw out of the sinking balloon rather than working out how to mend the hole in the balloon!

Not quite - we then borrow all the money back from China, and the government redistributes it to the nation, before reclaiming half of it in taxes, and giving it back to China, before borrowing.... I give up.

I've thought for some time that the world is a giant Ponzi scheme and economics is merely the art/science of endlessly trying to prolong the inevitable collapse until the current generation are all dead.

sabretoothtigger

Thrugelmir wrote: »

People however don't need wardrobes full of teeshirts.

So buying 5 UK produced items instead of 20 imported ones for the same amount of money.

Wouldn't disadvantage the purchaser but would generate activity in the UK economy.

Thats a slippery slope to start telling people what they want, how much it should cost and who you can buy it from as if government knows best

We should have learnt a long time ago government often does not know best especially on small things. I'll let them decide on nuclear bombs and other stuff, tshirts should be free enterprise


The main point is you dont gain from tripping up your opponents, you win the race but run slower if anything without the risk of competition. Thats not increasing value or creating wealth, its destructive if anything.
Since most real money is outside the country the idea we can close off the borders isnt going to work


This explains it in a long winded way http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
but if a country can supply you goods cheaply its not really harming your interests


The one positive in this whole mess since 2008 is so far politics has not started banning imports.
What they need to do is extend that and make sure its extremely easy to produce goods in this country.
Lower interest rates will mean higher import costs at some point so Im not sure they have done enough

Thrugelmir

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

I struggle with the Tshirt analagy.

Think of all the activity and spend that is generated by a UK Company manufacturing. The wages that will recirculate through the UK economy.

Why is the German economy remained so strong? By producing high quality goods that people want to buy.

Loughton_Monkey

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Think of all the activity and spend that is generated by a UK Company manufacturing. The wages that will recirculate through the UK economy.

Why is the German economy remained so strong? By producing high quality goods that people want to buy.

The German economy is strong because the export more than they import, so we are in agreement.

But we must dicriminate between true wealth creation (for the nation) and 'activity'. Economic 'activity' alone is never 'bad' but it simply creates no extra wealth. If you don't believe me, then simply create huge extra financial 'activity' by knitting your next door neighbour's jumpers while he makes your sandwiches. Economic activity is much enhanced by this 'trade' but not a single person is more wealthy or enriched.