|
From The Telegraph: IMF's plan to do away with debt and bankers, basically by limiting banks to only be able to lend out on secured deposits- so none of this fractional security stuff. I'm slightly financially retarded (get a parking space and everything), but would this actually fix anything? |
This is starting to get a little scary • Page 365
-
Immaterial 2,234 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 11 years ago -
Immaterial wrote:
Ohhh nooooooooo
From The Telegraph:
IMF's plan to do away with debt and bankers, basically by limiting banks to only be able to lend out on secured deposits- so none of this fractional security stuff.
I'm slightly financially retarded (get a parking space and everything), but would this actually fix anything?
the exorbitant privilege of creating money out of thin air
moggin was right all along!
Not sure that I'd trust government to manage money-supply & movement any more than I would the current market. Actually, no - I definitely wouldn't. It'd be swapping one bunch of cunts for another. "Meet the new cunts! Same as the old cunts!". I'm sure careful regulation could sort a lot of things out, partnered with significant punishment for those that breach regulations. Put cunts in jail! That'd make all the other wannabe cunts think twice.
Wonder what the effect on China's foreign reserves would be? They can't be too happy with having their pile of foreign cash devalued at the moment.
Oh anyway - nothing much is going to change. All well and good discussing it, but no-one really wants change. That's what happens when people somehow get too much money - they become obsessed with holding onto it. -
Moot_Point 5,530 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 6 years agoBremenacht wrote:
Was he the EG prophet. Or just some conspiracy loon...
Immaterial wrote:
Ohhh nooooooooo
From The Telegraph:
IMF's plan to do away with debt and bankers, basically by limiting banks to only be able to lend out on secured deposits- so none of this fractional security stuff.
I'm slightly financially retarded (get a parking space and everything), but would this actually fix anything?
the exorbitant privilege of creating money out of thin air
moggin was right all along!
-
mal 29,326 posts
Seen 1 month ago
Registered 16 years agoIs there any chance we could rename this thread to be any more ambigious? I know I marked it interesting at some point in the past, but every time there's a new page I've no idea what they fuck the topic is. -
The topic is always the end of the world. -
Immaterial wrote:
It'd probably help if governments all agreed to spend what they raise in tax or at least limit borrowings. It'll never happen. Come election time the temptation to throw billions you don't have at winning a few votes will be too much. Gordon Brown's 'golden rule' lasted until there was an election to be won.
From The Telegraph:
IMF's plan to do away with debt and bankers, basically by limiting banks to only be able to lend out on secured deposits- so none of this fractional security stuff.
I'm slightly financially retarded (get a parking space and everything), but would this actually fix anything? -
chopsen 19,993 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 13 years agoThe difference between what that article describes and what the normal "lets get rid of fractional lending" stuff I've seen floating around the interwebs is that the offset of the loan is actually government issued security, and not deposit accounts held by other bank customers.
I don't quite see this. Can some explain to me, as if I'm 5:
1. How exactly is this any different from quantitative easing to compensate for bad loans?
2. "While Washington would issue much more fiat money, this would not be redeemable. It would be an equity of the commonwealth, not debt. " What does that mean? Surely if it can't be used or liquidated in some meaningful way, then it is not collateral?
3. Surely this means that inflation rises if lots of people default their debts, as happened post 2008? A run on the banks would mean inflation rises (as the govt security is cashed to cover bank debts), meaning more people would want to get their hands on their money to invest it in something that will hold it's value, meaning inflation rises further, meaning a further run on banks, etc, etc. No?
4. This centralises wealth creation, possibly a bad thing? Election coming? Free loans for everyone! It also decentralises inflationary control, partially, because the *risk* of lending rests with banks?
Or am I completely misreading an article written by someone who admits he doesn't understand the report?
Edited by Chopsen at 09:26:51 23-10-2012 -
Reserve ratio from 10% to 100%?!
Yeah right! -
GiarcYekrub 4,732 posts
Seen 5 months ago
Registered 12 years agoMy view is they need to sort the housing market, its been overvalued by debt based morgages, it won't start growing properly until prices either fall in line with average wages or wages rise at the moment both are stagnant held at bay by a very low bank of England base rate. -
How can you get a non-debt based mortgage? -
GiarcYekrub 4,732 posts
Seen 5 months ago
Registered 12 years agoI mean the ones that people like Northern Rock were dishing out, they over inflated the housing market, it was unstainable but that bubble IMO hasn't popped -
Property price fluctuations seem to be very region specific (stating the obvious I know). Arguably in some areas they have already ‘corrected’.
Many of my wifes friends who bought in the North East in the last few years are sitting in negative equity.
Meanwhile down in Surrey we bought our flat at the supposed peak of the market in 2007 and have still sold it last month for a profit. Lucky me? Not really as the place we are buying is also more expensive.
To be honest if I was waiting to get on the property ladder I don’t think I would be pinning my hopes on any sort of crash. Prices will stagnate maybe but in the long term they are only going one way (up!). -
All mortgages are debt based. All mortgages have ever been debt based.
What you talkin' 'bout? -
He's talking about sub-prime mortgages.
Which I suppose you can say were based on fairy dust instead of debt. -
Steady on Leo, he thinks that sub-prime mortgages created a housing bubble which inflated house prices in the UK by allowing people on low income to afford housing which they couldn't before thus increasing the demand for said housing.
Nothing about low interest rates stifling wages there..gif)
-
nickthegun 73,354 posts
Seen 20 minutes ago
Registered 12 years agoAnyone who bought in the last few years and is north of the watford gap is probably sitting in negative equity.
We just sold our house and made money but my friends in a virtually identical house in Derby cant afford to move as they have lost nearly 10 large on it. -
Khanivor 43,682 posts
Seen 4 minutes ago
Registered 16 years agoI too am interested in hearing more from the Diana Vickers school of economic theory. -
One might equally say that this opened the way to England's agricultural revolution in the early 18th Century, the industrial revolution soon after, and the greatest economic and technological leap ever seen. But let us not quibble.
Yes let us not quibble about such a moot point...
That article is special. -
Tom_Servo 18,079 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 8 years ago -
LeoliansBro wrote:
Oh serves me right for trying to back him up
mcmonkeyplc wrote:
Steady on Leo, he thinks that sub-prime mortgages created a housing bubble which inflated house prices in the UK by allowing people on low income to afford housing which they couldn't before thus increasing the demand for said housing.
Nothing about low interest rates stifling wages there.it won't start growing properly until prices either fall in line with average wages or wages rise at the moment both are stagnant held at bay by a very low bank of England base rate.
...both? -
Also banks do not create money out of thin air. They charge an interest rate on loaning out the proportion of deposits they hold.
The interest rate is the price of money/ price of receiving the service of a loan. It is not money for nothing.
Just thought I'd get that off my chest.
Edited by mcmonkeyplc at 15:06:38 23-10-2012 -
Moot_Point 5,530 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 6 years agomcmonkeyplc wrote:
/Waves
One might equally say that this opened the way to England's agricultural revolution in the early 18th Century, the industrial revolution soon after, and the greatest economic and technological leap ever seen. But let us not quibble.
Yes let us not quibble about such a moot point...
That article is special. -
Tom_Servo 18,079 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 8 years agoLeoliansBro wrote:
Yeah, I would've thought it's something everyone has to implement for it to be effective and for it not to have a detrimental effect on some countries.
Tom_Servo wrote:
Windfall tax which works globally or not at all. Stupid short termism by governments looking for liquidity now at the expense of prosperity later, when of course it will be somebody else's problem.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20041588 -
Triple dip?
It's not a big deal really. If your ship is already scraping along the bottom, it's going to get bumped up and down. Still, it provides a new stick for Punch and Judy (Ed and George) to twat eachother with.
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
