Banks stealing our savings

gadgetmind

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

of course not. they have ppl to do that for them.

Hardly.

People who have been taught respect for others, and respect for the property of others, are better placed to do well in this world that those with a chip on their shoulder and a petrol bomb in their hand.

Those involved in both the UK and Swedish riots are mindless thugs, pure and simple. There are more deprived areas than London and Stockholm, so this isn't about equality or deprivation but criminality.

Glen_Clark

gadgetmind wrote: »

Hardly.

People who have been taught respect for others, and respect for the property of others, are better placed to do well in this world that those with a chip on their shoulder and a petrol bomb in their hand.

Those involved in both the UK and Swedish riots are mindless thugs, pure and simple. There are more deprived areas than London and Stockholm, so this isn't about equality or deprivation but criminality.

Criminality is whatever the politicians say it is.
Hitler did nothing illegal under German Law.

Warren_Buffet wrote:

“there is class warfare, all right, But it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

jamesd

jabba42 wrote: »

I really do not trust the any financial or governmental institution now. They will not be able to help themselves when D day arrives. Anyone with over 85K in their bank accounts is any easy target for state sponsored theft.

You can trust:

1. That in a major financial crisis governments and central bankers will lie to all of us if that seems expedient, notably if it seems like a least bad way to prevent runs on banks or failures. They did in 2008 and you can be certain that they will do so again.

2. That at least in the UK there will be honest attempts by central bankers and the government to minimise the harm from whatever nasty event is happening. Maybe misguided or rushed or mistaken or ideology-based wrongheadedness, but it's very likely indeed that any mistakes won't be deliberate.

There have been substantial changes since 2008 that reduce both the chance and potential severity of major disruption but there's still more work to do and markets are still free to refuse to extend credit if they wish, forcing central banks and governments to provide funding or accept failure of systemically important banks if it is long and severe enough.

Glen_Clark

gadgetmind wrote: »

We haven't (yet) had money printing as the gilts that have been purchased haven't been monetised, we haven't (yet) had high inflation, and inflation isn't a tax.

Other than that, spot on.

The Government creates/prints £375 billion without creating any real wealth, it has to dilute the currency by that amount. Where else can it come from? So its a tax in all but name. And it falls mostly on the poor because they have no assets to benefit from the rise in asset prices.

Glen_Clark

jamesd wrote: »

You can trust:
2. That at least in the UK there will be honest attempts by central bankers and the government to minimise the harm from whatever nasty event is happening. Maybe misguided or rushed or mistaken or ideology-based wrongheadedness, but it's very likely indeed that any mistakes won't be deliberate.

Where does Osborne's interest free loans on £600k sub prime mortgages fit into there :eek:

jimjames

jabba42 wrote: »

I am really surprised there has been no revenge attacks on the decision makers in Cyprus to be honest. Are the Russians turning into a bunch of softies?

Or they had sufficient warning and got their money out so there is no longer an issue for the ones that matter.

grey_gym_sock

gadgetmind wrote: »

People who have been taught respect for others, and respect for the property of others, are better placed to do well in this world that those with a chip on their shoulder and a petrol bomb in their hand.

i can't see any clear correlation (positive or negative) between respect for others and wealth.

the ways in which ppl behave badly (when they do) certainly vary depending on how much or how little power they have.

Those involved in both the UK and Swedish riots are mindless thugs, pure and simple. There are more deprived areas than London and Stockholm, so this isn't about equality or deprivation but criminality.

"criminality" is not an explanation; it's a refusal to consider explanations.

there were injustices without which the riots wouldn't have happened. there were also ppl taking part who who weren't motivated by that at all.

talexuser

gadgetmind wrote: »

(and Ireland got away with it but it came back to haunt them)

Can you explain this please?

Glen_Clark

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

compensating the depositors, without getting anything back in return, would surely have been more expensive than what HMG actually did.

I wasn't suggesting the Government should only take over the liabilities, not the assets.
Whether that would have been more expensive than what they have done is debatable, because its impossible to put a figure on the cost of what the Government has done. The Government has guaranteed Bankers debts many years into the future. One of the hidden costs of that is the cost of maintaining high property prices to avoid people getting into negative equity and defaulting on their mortgages.
Even the Building Societies credit ratings have faced severe downgrades of late because the ratings agencies are aware that a correction in house prices could leave them with assets worth less than their debts to depositors. The house price bubble has to be kept inflated to keep them all solvent - at an incalculable cost to the rest of the economy.
A vibrant economy needs capital and labour to be mobile. But in Britain most people's capital is tied up in their house, and they can't afford to move to where the better jobs are.

Glen_Clark

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

"criminality" is not an explanation; it's a refusal to consider explanations.

Absolutely.
(Just like the word 'Terrorist'
One man's 'Terrorist' is another man's hero.)