LOL!! This is brilliant

System

N1AK wrote: »

Congratulations you're operating on the level of your average 'speak your brains' BBC commentard. Highest rated currently:

Put it so much better than I could. As a general rule of thumb, the comments section of anything is full of idiots, as long as you hold the opposite view to those people you are probably right.

System

Generali wrote: »

I reckon that at least 99% of the population, me included, are incapable of concluding whether or not Mr Carney has been a success once he completes his contract. My guess is that many of the 99%, the OP included, will decide that an inflation rate of higher than 2.01% for more than a couple of months will mean he's failed.

Especially if he didn't look at tuition "fee's" increasing recently and adjust something else to "balance it out".

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

I reckon that at least 99% of the population, me included, are incapable of concluding whether or not Mr Carney has been a success once he completes his contract. My guess is that many of the 99%, the OP included, will decide that an inflation rate of higher than 2.01% for more than a couple of months will mean he's failed.

Sorry to interrupt the onanism, please continue Gentlemen.

You are becoming quite insulting of late Generali.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You are becoming quite insulting of late Generali.

Which bit do you find insulting?

chewmylegoff

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

I will be the first to admit that the lefties will resent anyone who earns more than a junior social worker, or more than them, and their view of things like this is generally not worth considering.

But there is an issue here as to whether this character is worth the huge package that he is being given out of public money. Osborne would no doubt say that he was by far the best candidate, was reluctant to come, and that's what it took to get him. We can debate it for yonks but we won't know the answer until he's been in the job for at least a couple of years.

I would say this is of far less concern than the package given to Entwhistle when he was sacked as BBC DG. This was a clear reward for failure, which can only be explained by Patten trying to give himself an easier life and which has now been roundly attacked by a committee of MPs. Whereas Carney's is at least a reward for anticipated success.

Re: Public money

My understanding is that the BOE is funded thus:

All the banks are required to place money on deposit at the BOE. The BOE pays them base rate interest and invests the money in other stuff which provides a higher return. The profit it makes covers its costs.

I think it does also charge HMT for "services provided" but it also pays half of its profits back to HMT and I think that it is a net contributor to the treasury, not 100% sure though.

Generali

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Re: Public money

My understanding is that the BOE is funded thus:

All the banks are required to place money on deposit at the BOE. The BOE pays them base rate interest and invests the money in other stuff which provides a higher return. The profit it makes covers its costs.

I think it does also charge HMT for "services provided" but it also pays half of its profits back to HMT and I think that it is a net contributor to the treasury, not 100% sure though.

AIUI the BoE must pay a minimum of 25% of profit out as a dividend. As the British Government is the sole shareholder since Nationalisation in 1948(?) it's clear where the money goes, even that earned by BOEN.

grizzly1911

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Re: Public money

My understanding is that the BOE is funded thus:

All the banks are required to place money on deposit at the BOE. The BOE pays them base rate interest and invests the money in other stuff which provides a higher return. The profit it makes covers its costs.

I think it does also charge HMT for "services provided" but it also pays half of its profits back to HMT and I think that it is a net contributor to the treasury, not 100% sure though.

Is that any differnt from HMRC. Collects taxes that people, by law, have to pay and transfers the surplus to HMT? I appreciate that there will be a myriad of departments in between transfer charging and providing services, but it comes out of the same pot.

GeorgeHowell

Generali wrote: »

I reckon that at least 99% of the population, me included, are incapable of concluding whether or not Mr Carney has been a success once he completes his contract. My guess is that many of the 99%, the OP included, will decide that an inflation rate of higher than 2.01% for more than a couple of months will mean he's failed.

Sorry to interrupt the onanism, please continue Gentlemen.

I would not say that it's 99%. Many, with Ed Balls as their standard bearer, would like to see much higher inflation coupled with debt-fuelled growth. This would be predominantly the debtors and the profligate.

eelsoup

Oh well. Looks like house prices will be the least of peoples worries. Mark Carney will herald an era of Hyperinflation to support asset prices, including houses.

Homeowners may well do well out of this on paper, however everyone will suffer when they end up paying £5 for a loaf of bread or £100 to fill a small family car.

Moby

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

I will be the first to admit that the lefties will resent anyone who earns more than a junior social worker, or more than them, and their view of things like this is generally not worth considering.

But there is an issue here as to whether this character is worth the huge package that he is being given out of public money. Osborne would no doubt say that he was by far the best candidate, was reluctant to come, and that's what it took to get him. We can debate it for yonks but we won't know the answer until he's been in the job for at least a couple of years.

I would say this is of far less concern than the package given to Entwhistle when he was sacked as BBC DG. This was a clear reward for failure, which can only be explained by Patten trying to give himself an easier life and which has now been roundly attacked by a committee of MPs. Whereas Carney's is at least a reward for anticipated success.

Good point. This guy has been rewarded before he's done the job. His previous track record can't be used because the environment/culture here is going to be totally different.