PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! However well-intentioned, for the safety of other users we ask that you refrain from seeking or offering medical advice. This includes recommendations for medicines, procedures or over-the-counter remedies. Posts or threads found to be in breach of this rule will be removed.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Preparedness for when

1349734983500350235034145

Comments

  • GreyQueen
    GreyQueen Posts: 13,008 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    :rotfl: I find I don't partularly covet things, but I do covet spaces. My dream home would have a cellar or undercroft with vaulted ceilings, a full height attic with boarded floor and windows, and pantries and larders and linen cupboards galore.

    I once rented a flat in the basement of a mid-Victorian era house, which had been a grande dame in its heyday but had been on the skids for most of the twentieth century. My flat was largely comprised of cubby holes and larders of various shapes and sizes, which was wonderful.

    The lack of heating and the hot & cold running beetles and spiders weren't so great, but if it'd been anything other than a wreck, I wouldn't have been able to afford to live there.:rotfl:
    Every increased possession loads us with a new weariness.
    John Ruskin
    Veni, vidi, eradici
    (I came, I saw, I kondo'd)
  • moneyistooshorttomention
    moneyistooshorttomention Posts: 17,940 Forumite
    edited 9 November 2015 at 7:46PM
    calicocat wrote: »
    Howdie welsh lassie now!....

    Are you seriously still doing the house up?, I bet it looks lovely.

    You may not remember, but around a year ago you were suggesting I painted my garden fence white (interior part). At the time I thought you were bonkers...lol...however, two years down the line.......i am considering it. .i am great now thanks. Had a vile time a while ago and went AWOL (Due to health) , am now back, alive and kicking...:D

    Work is still the same....i live on the edge of being sacked and telling them to shove it, so no change. That is the nhs now, even less job satisfaction than ever.


    Anyhow, i'$ rambling on a thread, goo to see you are still busy, and I am now back into a bit of prepping mode.

    X

    Oh yes to "still doing it up". The major part of house renovation has been done. The place is liveable in now imo - which it certainly wasn't to start with (though someone was living here):eek:. I've spent WELL up into 5 figures - I sorta lost count - but....errrrm....I would not be surprised if £30,000 or so has gone on it:eek::eek:. Between that and having to subsidise about 3 years worth of (very low) job pension only from my savings (ie whilst waiting for the State part of my pension to kick in at last) - its pretty much down to "Savings! What savings?" - as they've virtually been used up:(:mad::(.

    Hence - the house isn't finished/still needs a lot of money - but I've basically run out of money now - so "major" garden revamp, the new kitchen and adding a conservatory are all on the "Sometime - when I've saved up some more" list.:(

    Good to hear you're feeling well.
  • Frugalsod
    Frugalsod Posts: 2,966 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    GreyQueen wrote: »
    Frugalsod, having the currency on the gold standard doesn't mean that we would transact in gold, it means that there is a commodity behind the currency whose amount can only grow very slowly (through mining). Therefore, if you have a hard commodity locked to a tight reserve balance, money doesn't get to grow on trees. Not even for the sake of politicians.
    The significant problem is that to have a gold backed currency you need to have acceptance that growth is no longer practical without an exporting market, as global growth would be limited to the increase in supply in gold mined annually. Which would be 2% annually. Yet that would mean that some would do better and some worse and that would create flows out of nations without sufficient exports. It was the discovery of South American gold that led to the hyper inflation in Europe in the 15th century and the ultimate collapse of the Spanish Empire. A gold backed hyperinflation.

    So until we actually have a net trade surplus again we would very rapidly run out of gold. It was that simple fact that cause the US to abandon the gold standard in 1971 because they had a perpetual deficit. This is overlooked by many. In fact the French realised it in 1968 and demanded payment in Gold which the Americans promptly refused to had over and blocked gold transfers. Also we do not have a trade surplus to start with so it would mean trouble very rapidly. Secondly having a gold backed currency would be suicidal for any country now. It would not allow the exchange rate of nations to change to even out the trade imbalances. If you had a trade deficit then the value of the currency would normally fall to make imports more expensive and exports cheaper to help boost exports. With a gold backed currency you have all the problems of Greece without the ability to adjust prices without significant depressions as you have to pay your national debts with Gold.

    The Depression of 1873 (during gold backing) was far more damaging than the one of 1929 onwards. Partly because they devalued by seizing all the gold and $20 and then reissuing at $35. This is what would happen regularly if we returned to a gold backed currency.
    GreyQueen wrote: »
    Bankers cannot press a few keys and call money into existance. It limits inflation and asset price bubbles because there are hard physical limits on the amount of the commodity. When you create more fiat money, you don't create more wealth, you just devalue the spending power of the all fiat money already in existance and raise the prices of everything.
    Banks pressing buttons and creating money is how banks have become such a massive cancer on the nation. Even the Bank of England recently admitted as much as 97% of all new money was created by the banks not governments. Gold backing would not change that. In fact the Bank of England created more than 1 trillion to bail out the banks not by raising taxes and giving it to the banks but simply creating it. You would also need to significantly restricting the Bank of England's duties to solely funding the governments fiscal balancing.

    http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/the_money_multiplier_is_dead

    Making it gold backed would have little impact on this unless you change how banks worked completely. This just as true in most nations. So expect deep very painful recessions more regularly as well.
    GreyQueen wrote: »
    This falls particularly hard on those whose income isn't keeping up with galloping asset price inflation, which is just about everybody. Asset bubbles suit a small minority of people very well but are damaging to the majority interest. Just ask anyone trying to buy a house these days.
    I am not denying that but the banks are the problem not whether the currency is backed by gold silver bitcoins or even pink unicorns. Then you have to look at the calculation of inflation that is grossly understates inflation caused by property bubbles, and rents.
    GreyQueen wrote: »
    Think about the prices of things a few decades ago and the prices of things now, and mourn for poor degraded sterling.:( Even if you're not buying big things like property, your spending power and your savings are being eaten away by inflation like weevils in the biscuit tin.
    That inflation has been created by the banks and the fact that neoliberal policy has been to neuter the unions in demanding a fair share to workers has not help either. But backing it by gold would not stop the abuses of workers. They would still struggle no matter what because of factors like no unions or completely unequal negotiation power. Many people are simply banned from striking even if they had unions. All of our problems started in the early 1980's and have just grown ever since.
    GreyQueen wrote: »
    Anyway, you wouldn't have to transact in £1000 coins any more than you'd take a £50 note to buy a newspaper. For a start, the one-ounce gold coins like Britannias and krugerrands are considerably cheaper than £1k, and there are smaller gold coins like sovreigns, and there are fractional gold coins (half and quarter sovreigns, half, quarter and one-tenth krugerrands). But silver has long been the workaday money of the world and gold was for big ticket expenditures for the wealthier citizens, back when the only money was precious metal.
    Yes but I do not see gold being viable until after they have stripped everyone of their gold first. Also in a world where tax revenues collapse I doubt that they would allow any transfers in gold as that could be seen as tax dodging.
    It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.
  • Frugalsod
    Frugalsod Posts: 2,966 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Pineapple (or anyone else that knows the answer...)

    Re houses that its not possible to get flood insurance on - can they still get the rest of their household insurance (ie against fire/theft/accidental damage/legal expenses cover/etc)?
    Who is going to steal a flooded building? :j
    It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.
  • Frugalsod
    Frugalsod Posts: 2,966 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    I defy anyone to make the passcode on their phone as secure as this.

    https://twitter.com/yossy1999116/status/662880539880194048/video/1
    It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.
  • Frugalsod wrote: »
    I had a TV license inspector visit today and let the !!!!!! in.

    You may have been very lucky, and have encountered an honest one.

    Then again, he/she may not be honest. You will know for sure, in 5 to 6 months time.

    BTW. They're not "inspectors". They're commission salesmen.
  • Frugalsod wrote: »
    Yes but it was not as if I was doing anything wrong.

    Neither were these people.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/lies-of-licence-officer-1658210

    Did you sign his/her form?

    If so, did you receive a copy?
  • Frugalsod
    Frugalsod Posts: 2,966 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Bedsit_Bob wrote: »
    Neither were these people.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/lies-of-licence-officer-1658210

    Did you sign his/her form?

    If so, did you receive a copy?
    No I did not sign anything. Did not get a copy either.
    It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.
  • pineapple wrote: »
    I'm an awkward so and so - so hell would freeze over before I would let a TV licence hireling in to inspect my set up - even if I didn't legally require a licence.

    It's not a question of being an awkward so and so.

    It's a question of protecting yourself, against being fitted up, burgled, assaulted, or raped, not to mention having your privacy violated.
    I know it would make life easier - it's just the principle of it.

    How does it make life easier, to have a stranger search your home :huh:
  • Frugalsod wrote: »
    No I did not sign anything. Did not get a copy either.

    Then it's probably about 50/50, whether you will get a summons or not.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.9K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.2K Life & Family
  • 258.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.