Originally posted by zeitghost
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Masters of Money
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Masters of Money"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by zeitghostYeah.
Right.
That's why there was a whopping great tariff placed on iron & steel in the mid 19th century, to keep British made iron & steel out of the US.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gentile View PostThe weirdest thing about the whole global financial mess is that, at root, it appears to have been caused by the American sub-prime mortgage market. Basically, Americans that couldn't afford it were being loaned money under the early Bush administration's Greenspan plan to buy their own homes. That debt and the risk it represented was then being sold on almost straight away through IBs to global 'investors' throughout the world that had no real appreciation of the risk, such as pension schemes and local town councils. If America were Iceland, Europe would have frozen their banks' overseas assets by now for selling such a shoddy financial product that's caused so much unforeseen loss as properties subsequently foreclosed on a massive scale.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sasguru View PostIt did in the US, Japan, S. Korea and Taiwan. All followed protectionist policies in the early years.
All are rich now, from a poor start.
Oh and also Britain by setting tariffs on Indian cotton.
The evidence is overwhelming that on your way up protectionism can help against foreign competition.
Once you have industrialised it's no good since you need to sell your goods.
The United States is actually a very good example of how liberal trade across borders boosts everyone's wealth. The commerce clause prohibits restrictions of trade across state borders.Last edited by Robinho; 8 October 2012, 16:00.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Robinho View PostThat doesn't mean it caused prosperity though.
All are rich now, from a poor start.
Oh and also Britain by setting tariffs on Indian cotton.
The evidence is overwhelming that on your way up protectionism can help against foreign competition.
Once you have industrialised it's no good since you need to sell your goods.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Robinho View PostWrong. Rent is already at what the market will bear thus taxing property owners won't change that, they will take the tax hit not the tenants.
What would increase rents would be if by adding a tax there, we freed it up elsewhere meaning people have more disposable income and could bear to pay more rent. If you didn't free it up elsewhere though it wouldn't change rents.
Jeez when I was your age my fledgling BTL business was well on its way.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Robinho View PostSays SAS, the person who thinks protectionism boosts an economy.
Oh and recently South Korea followed exactly the same policyLast edited by sasguru; 8 October 2012, 15:39.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SueEllen View PostAt the moment all this would do is increase your rent.
What would increase rents would be if by adding a tax there, we freed it up elsewhere meaning people have more disposable income and could bear to pay more rent. If you didn't free it up elsewhere though it wouldn't change rents.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sasguru View PostReally? That is all a country is, is it?
I'm sure my 4 year-old has a more sophisticated grasp of economics than you.
At least he knows about incentives, negotiation, probabilities of success and such like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by SueEllen View PostAt the moment all this would do is increase your rent.
Originally posted by SueEllen View PostUnlikely - house prices are falling in some areas and the economies aren't moving there.
Nobody seems to want this scenario but me it seems.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Secondary NI threshold sinking to £5,000: a limited company director’s explainer Dec 24 09:51
- Reeves sets Spring Statement 2025 for March 26th Dec 23 09:18
- Spot the hidden contractor Dec 20 10:43
- Accounting for Contractors Dec 19 15:30
- Chartered Accountants with MarchMutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants with March Mutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants Dec 19 15:05
- Unfairly barred from contracting? Petrofac just paid the price Dec 19 09:43
- An IR35 case law look back: contractor must-knows for 2025-26 Dec 18 09:30
- A contractor’s Autumn Budget financial review Dec 17 10:59
Leave a comment: