Why are savings rates on the floor?

Sstripey

melbury wrote: »

I had exactly the same problem the other day with the word
s-c-a-r-e-m-o-n-g-e-r-i-n-g - totally bizarre:)

And for this one, I can only guess that the Word Police Widget reads too much into the last eleven letters and imagines "w-h-o" in front of it. Filters are fickle!

opinions4u

Can you say S!!!!horpe?

EDIT: It would appear that towns in Lincolnshire are categorised in a similar way.

Gromitt

Whats wrong with scaremongering and investments? I think they go together quite well.

Glen_Clark

gadgetmind wrote: »

Any party that goes for "tax and spend" slots into that (left wing) category for me, " and currently even the con/lib alliance is falling into that trap.

Doesn't it make a difference who they are spending it on?
They are cutting benefits to the poor, and spending up to £100 billion on more nuclear missiles - as if they don't have enough already. That doesn't sound very left wing to me.

gadgetmind

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Doesn't it make a difference who they are spending it on?

Yes, of course.

They are cutting benefits to the poor, and spending up to £100 billion on more nuclear missiles

As a shareholder in BAE Systems and Cobham, I'm pleased to see that HMG are investing in British businesses.

paso11

nilrem wrote: »

What would happen if savers started a mass withdrawal of their savings from the banks? would they tend to start increasing rates to entice savers back or would they just ask the BOE for more cash?

It's a genuine question what do others think would happen?

If they didn't resave them with other banks in the UK you would see the collapse of our fractional reserve system.

At that point the BOE would have to step in as lender of last resort. Banks without adequate collateral would suffer -keep in mind the BOE has taken a lot of this away already through QE.

antrobus

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Doesn't it make a difference who they are spending it on?
They are cutting benefits to the poor, and spending up to £100 billion on more nuclear missiles - as if they don't have enough already.

That might be why no one is suggesting buying any more. What the government is proposing to do is to spend a few billion on some new submarines from which to launch said missiles.

Glen_Clark wrote: »

That doesn't sound very left wing to me.

On the contrary. My recollection is that very left wing governments such as the Soviet Union spent a packet on nuclear missiles.

antrobus

Glen_Clark wrote: »

except that Britain does not have a left wing party any more

Don't be silly. Britain has lots of left wing parties. The one thing you can say with certainty about the British Left is that they are very good at creating parties and there has never been any shortage of them.

Granted none of them have the slightest chance of ever achieving any kind of political power, but that's a different question altogether.

antrobus

nilrem wrote: »

What would happen if savers started a mass withdrawal of their savings from the banks? would they tend to start increasing rates to entice savers back or would they just ask the BOE for more cash?

It's a genuine question what do others think would happen?

There would be some minor inconveniences caused until the withdrawals found their way back into the system. The exact nature of the inconvenience would depend on how the savings were withdrawn and what was done with it.

gadgetmind

antrobus wrote: »

the British Left is that they are very good at creating parties

Just as with minority religions, they breed by fission.