Originally posted by Platypus
View Post
-
What does the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families have to do with it? You're really clouding the issue now.
-
I never said negative interest rate. I didn't cover savers entitlement to make money on savings because that's not directly relevant to the observation that we are still bailing out the banks. Or rather that savers and house buyers are.Originally posted by Platypus View PostLeave a comment:
-
Well I’d have thought it was an easy question too, but apparently we are now entering a phase of quantum economics in which money can be both real and fake, both lent and given, all at the same time. A bit like a photon, but more expensive.Originally posted by BobTheCrate View Post
as I say, me not understand either.Leave a comment:
-
Balls.Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
Show me a bank or building society that is advertising a negative interest rate.
(I expect you might mean relative to inflation. Well tough, what law of the universe states that you're entitled to make money on your savings?)Leave a comment:
-
I'm still none the wiser guys.
Given the current stat d'affaire (excuse my rubbish french), I'm surprised & maybe a bit frustrated the answer to this pretty goddamn fundamental question is so elusive.Leave a comment:
-
…and a brand new Labour government, just like the last three.Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
Leave a comment:
-
Yes, higher petrol prices...Originally posted by Churchill View PostLeave a comment:
-
We're still bailing out the banks and will do for some time. Or at least some of us are. Savers are earning negative interest and house prices are being kept artificially high to prevent mortgage defaults, which would hurt the banks.Leave a comment:
-
Oh, so the really smart bankers will now go and get themselves into trouble so they can have an easy life taking public money?Originally posted by minestrone View Post
doh, me not understand any more.Leave a comment:
-
I have been meaning to ask this as my impression was that the majority of this was made available to the banks as a loan if they got in trouble but little was used.
The only cost has really been buying the banks ( 70 billion I think ) at a very cheap price which they will make back easily.Leave a comment:
-
Yeah... I must admit I have no idea what Afghanistan is about but Iraq was all about oil wasn't it, have you seen the price of petrol.Originally posted by Churchill View Post
...Or did our government really buy the WMD story? The septics must be pissing themselves over that one.Leave a comment:
-
Because next time the banks go belly up it'll all be lost.Originally posted by BobTheCrate View PostLeave a comment:
-
[QUOTE=BobTheCrate;1125439]Okey dokey then, some help from you lot please ...
The £squillion public banking bail out ... ?
Was all this money "given" to the banks or was it a public loan ? I was under the apprehension it was the latter.
[QUOTE]
No money changed hands what-so-ever. Not even in the form of loans.Leave a comment:
-
On another note, when are we going to get some recompense for Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan?Leave a comment:
-
The £squillion public banking bail out ?
Okey dokey then, some help from you lot please ...
The £squillion public banking bail out ... ?
Was all this money "given" to the banks or was it a public loan ? I was under the apprehension it was the latter.
Again if the latter, even with a modest interest rate attached, the public finances can at some moment in time expect quite a welcome boost in repayments. Certainly enough to make one hell of a difference to the structural deficit.
Why do we never hear about this side of the equation from our political friends & foes ? Unless of course I'm under a mis-apprehension.
Leave a comment: