The banks have taken a hiding in the last few years, but I find myself having some sympathy with those in Spain.
On my limited reading, the Spanish banks are mostly in bother because they advanced loans to property speculators who didn't repay them after the market collapsed.
Had the banks refused to lend the money at the time, they would have been berated for stifling entrepreneurial spirit and generally holding back the economy.
It's a bit rich to criticise them now purely because those they lent money to will not pay it back.
|
|
The Spanish Banks got carried away wtht the prospect of cheap loans available when they joined the Euro. THey borrowed money an re-lent it to property speculators at higher rates fuelling an uncontrolled boom . Not all Spanish banks acted in this manner, Santander for example took a much more cautious approach as did the Spanish Government who are now stuck with clearing up the mess. Do i feel sorry for them: no Do I feel sorry for the Spanish people: Yes.
|
The Spanish banks are solely the architects of their current misfortunes.
They were all knowingly lending on stupidly and fraudulently overvalued properties to people who were borrowing up and beyond their ability to repay.
They were all complicit in the paying of mortgage advances partly in cash (black money) to avoid the swinging property transfer taxes.
When we sold our first apartment there, the buyer was a young lass. We had to go to her bank with her after we signed the transfer, whereupon a large wodge of cash was withdrawn and divvied up (some to us, I'm afraid - it was accept that, or no sale).
We later found out that not only had the mortgage lender lent her the full purchase price, but also ALL the associated taxes and fees, amounting to around 12% of the sale price.
A similar deal was done for some nice Spanish neighbours in our last urbanisation, with the result that their mortgage was at least twice the value of their flat, even a couple of years ago.
The same banks also advanced huge sums to speculative developers, who had not only to cover land acquisition and building costs but also the massive bribes at every level of Government to obtain planning permissions, often on designated industrial, or agricultural land. Some of those pigeons are coming home to roost on unfortunate buyers who now find that their homes are illegal, in spite of all precautions being taken in employing solicitors (that's another story!).
The Ponzi schemes have all collapsed as they were bound to as soon as the flood of eager buyers dried up.
There are desolate sights on the Western Costa del Sol of massive developments of fully and partly built, apartments & houses (with a few lonely inhabitants in some of the built cases). They are using builder's electricity and water as the first occupation licences have not been granted, without which the utility companies will not supply. Weeds grow in the streets, there are piles of abandoned materials and a picture of decay is present.
These lovely places (!) are all owned by the cajas and banks as the developers have gone bust and decamped. Are they worth what the banks are showing them to be on their books?
No way José.
|
|
The banks in trouble are the cause of the current euro problems. Those in charge should be jailed.
|
|
I blame Liverpool in general.
|
>> I blame The Beatles.
I thought it was by the Stones?
|
>> The banks in trouble are the cause of the current euro problems. Those in charge
>> should be jailed.
The cause of the Euro troubles is the politicians who set up the Euro based on idealism, without thinking through the practicalities. They had monetary union without fiscal union. So countries with poor fiscal behaviour could borrow money just as easily as Germany and other more responsible countries. Many Greeks do not pay tax, many have absurd state pensions, and the country's accounts were fiddled.
Well, I think the politicians knew what they were doing. No country would have agreed to fiscal union, so they do monetary union with no exit strategy, then fiscal union is the only way out. It was the same with the EU. It was sold as a trading partnership, but the founders knew from the start that it would be a political union, only the electorate would not have accepted that.
Thank goodness we stayed out of this muddle headed idealistic road to a federal Europe, and loss of sovereignty.
|
|
The seeds were sown long before the euro came to being. This fuse was lit in 1986. Check out deregulation. The Big Bang.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 10 Jun 12 at 19:36
|
|
I don't know what the hell is going on in Europe.I watched some German television whilst in Holland.And the Germans are fed up paying the bills forever.Time will tell.
|
>> The seeds were sown long before the euro came to being. This fuse was lit
>> in 1986. Check out deregulation. The Big Bang.
I know what the big bang is/was. I disagree, that was not the cause, unless you think banks should be run by families, and only decent chaps promoted, tally ho, what what.
You are touching on the issue of bad debt, due to American banks selling mortgages to anyone, and the debt being hidden in complex financial tools, which were then sold around the world. This triggered the current crisis, as no-one knew who owned bad debt, and hence the markets lost confidence in banks. They did not know who would go bang next.
Bad debt is just part of the problem Italy and Spain had a booming housing sector, which went bust, leaving massive debts. Many countries were overspending. Even Britain was borrowing silly amounts. It is the nature of a boom.
But the Euro is fundamentally flawed, nothing to do with bands per se, and everything to do with a lack of fiscal union. You can't have interest rates and loans to Greece for example, as if it was Germany. No wonder they had a decade long party. The US states have fiscal and monetary union.
|
|
I feel sorry for the working people Leif.In Spain sky high youth employement same in the UK if we are not carefull.I don't think anybody has got a answer Leif.Sometimes there is no answer.
|
|
One of my friends where I work (she's a volunteer) went to sign on last week - there was one job on the books basically - this is in a town of 8000 souls plus all the outlying areas. Huge amounts if youth unemployment. The wind is being sown.
|
|
On my way back I was talking to a young family in Calais waiting for the ferry.The young man was in his mid thirties lived in Brittany France for six years.He and his family returned to the UK there was no work for him anymore in France.Things arn't right this moment of time in Europe.Not good to hear that Rob one job on the books and that amount of people.
|
|
Its very very regional and age/experience selective. I could where I am now, get a job easily. Not a good job, minimum wage stuff, but a job. Tomorrow for example I could walk into a job delivering Tesco groceries in a van.
|
|
You're right Zero - I considered the Supermarkets at one time.....but wanted something I enjoyed for a change. A guy I worked with in the Census was a tool-setter in the aluminium smelting factory up the road - it closed and he re-invented himself, drives a Tesco van on a zero hours contract. A young man that won my immediate respect. He has pretty specialist skills no longer required in the UK.
|
>I could where I am now, get a job easily. Not a good job, minimum wage stuff, but a job.
Applications are still open Zero (till 26/6).
£60k tax free less than 1hr from Cassa Zero?
Better than watching daytime TV surely?
|
Stop it!
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 10 Jun 12 at 22:53
|
>
>> But the Euro is fundamentally flawed, nothing to do with bands per se, and everything
>> to do with a lack of fiscal union. You can't have interest rates and loans
>> to Greece for example, as if it was Germany. No wonder they had a decade
>> long party. The US states have fiscal and monetary union.
And still had the problem of bad debt and are in the mire as much as europe.
Your answer is no answer to the problem, because you don't understand the cause.
|
>> The US states have fiscal and monetary union.
>>
>> And still had the problem of bad debt and are in the mire as much
>> as europe.
>>
>> Your answer is no answer to the problem, because you don't understand the cause.
The US had a property boom fueled by selling mortgages to anyone even people who could not afford them, as I said earlier. That problem hit them hard, and is why they are suffering. It was pure stupidity fueling a boom. They are bouncing back, unlike Europe.
Yes the problems in southern Europe are dreadful.
|
OK I will spell it out. The cause is lack of regulation on the gears of the commercial and fiscal machine upon which we all depend.
The lack of fiscal controls on banks allowed them to break all the rules of prudence, become massively over stretched, and hence collapse like a house of cards. The same issues allowed companies to be bought with borrowed money, and the debt loaded onto them. Debt. Global debt.
All this lack of controls can be directly led back to 1986. The collapse of RBS can be timelined back to that precise moment.
|
|
86 Zero? Help me out on that one. I seem to remember property prices going through the roof and then 17% interest rates about 1988.
|
|
Yes? Two years after deregulation? sounds about right, that was the first tremor. We have had several tremors before the major earthquake.
|
>> OK I will spell it out. The cause is lack of regulation on the gears
>> of the commercial and fiscal machine upon which we all depend.
>>
>> The lack of fiscal controls on banks allowed them to break all the rules of
>> prudence, become massively over stretched, and hence collapse like a house of cards. The same
>> issues allowed companies to be bought with borrowed money, and the debt loaded onto them.
>> Debt. Global debt.
>>
>> All this lack of controls can be directly led back to 1986. The collapse of
>> RBS can be timelined back to that precise moment.
No that is not the cause of the Euro crisis. I suggest you do some reading. The world is more complex than you like to think.
|
|
The euro crisis is a DIRECT result of the junk loans in the states and the subsequent collapse in world banking - I Suggest you are in denial caused by some quasi political bias. You need to read history.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 10 Jun 12 at 22:42
|
>> The euro crisis is a DIRECT result of the junk loans in the states and
>> the subsequent collapse in world banking - I Suggest you are in denial caused by
>> some quasi political bias. You need to read history.
I think you've been reading the Guardian haven't you. It'll make you go blind. (Blind to reality that is.) The US bad debt is one factor, not the only one. It was perhaps the pin that burst the balloon, but the balloon was weak. Have you not heard of the property booms in Spain and Ireland? The false accounting in Greece where the government lied to the EU about their finances? The fact that many Greeks do not pay tax? The absurdly generous pension deals of some Greeks? Some countries were having one long party until reality intruded.
By the way you originally pinned all of this on UK deregulation of banks. You are now talking about US debt.
Obviously something went badly wrong in the US, where financial institutions were allowed to sell mortgages to no hopers, in order to earn commission for the sales people. But also the fact that the debt was wrapped up and hidden in complex financial tools, then sold around the world, compounded the problem.
|
>> No that is not the cause of the Euro crisis. I suggest you do some
>> reading. The world is more complex than you like to think.
If the euro crisis was due to the internal working of europe, the rest of the world would be in good shape, wouldn't it. Its not. You can't look at the problems of the euro in isolation.
|
>> If the euro crisis was due to the internal working of europe, the rest of
>> the world would be in good shape, wouldn't it. Its not. You can't look at
>> the problems of the euro in isolation.
I did not say that. Go back and reread.
|
|
I did not say you can look at the Euro in isolation. I think you want to blame everything on Thatcher. Did she snatch your school milk? ;)
|
>>
>> >> No that is not the cause of the Euro crisis. I suggest you do
>> some
>> >> reading. The world is more complex than you like to think.
>>
>> If the euro crisis was due to the internal working of europe, the rest of
>> the world would be in good shape, wouldn't it. Its not. You can't look at
>> the problems of the euro in isolation.
I didn't say you can look at the Euro in isolation. There are many issues. So how come the rest of the world is predicted to do much better? For example:
www.conference-board.org/data/globaloutlook.cfm
Countries that depend on Europe as a buyer of goods and services will suffer a hit. Europe acts as a drag on growth, but for example China is growing a lot.
|
Chinese growth is slowing and they are worried. The largest consumer on earth is still in the duldrums and you blame it on the single problem of monetary union in Europe without fiscal or political union.
It's not it's caused by global bank deregulation 30 years ago. Check the timeline
I will say no more
|
...I will say no more...
A micro-flounce?
Oh sorry, you can't answer that because you are saying no more.
|
>> Chinese growth is slowing and they are worried. The largest consumer on earth is still
>> in the duldrums and you blame it on the single problem of monetary union in
>> Europe without fiscal or political union.
>>
Which is why I said: "You are touching on the issue of bad debt, due to American banks selling mortgages to anyone, and the debt being hidden in complex financial tools, which were then sold around the world. This triggered the current crisis, as no-one knew who owned bad debt, and hence the markets lost confidence in banks. They did not know who would go bang next. "
Your reading comprehension is poor.
>> It's not it's caused by global bank deregulation 30 years ago. Check the timeline
Is that the sound of a drum banging that I can hear in the distance?
>> I will say no more
Phew. Now there is a first. Is that a promise? Never. Ever.
|
>> Your reading comprehension is poor.
Because you spout rubbish you pick up from others but have no idea what they are saying or any comprehension of the issues or causes or any sense of history or cause and effect
>> >>
Sorry idiot statements like yours above deserves a broken promise
|
>>
>> >> Your reading comprehension is poor.
I quoted something I wrote, which directly contradicted your claim.
>> Because you spout rubbish you pick up from others but have no idea what they
>> are saying or any comprehension of the issues or causes or any sense of history
>> or cause and effect
>> >> >>
>>
>> Sorry idiot statements like yours above deserves a broken promise
Wow. You can't argue rationally, so you have a hissy fit, and become abusive. :( Do you have anything constructive to say, or are you just going to throw your toys out of the pram as part of a childish tantrum.
By the way I prefer to read commentary by world class economists such as Nouriel Roubini, rather than self proclaimed experts such as yourself.
|
You wrote lots of things that directly contradicted yourself which is why I was not prepared to accept any criticism of my reading comprehension.
You can read what you like but you have to understand what's said
And as for rational argument , please do remind us who left the site a while ago with a massive hissy fit because two letters of his name got transposed accidentally?
|
...please do remind us who left the site a while ago with a massive hissy fit because two letters of his name got transposed accidentally?...
Zeor?
|
>> You wrote lots of things that directly contradicted yourself which is why I was not
>> prepared to accept any criticism of my reading comprehension.
Unless you can prove that statement, I shall ignore it and file it under 'empty rhetoric'.
Any fool can shout "You're wrong" and thumb their nose, which is what you have done. You made a statement which was directly contradicted by my earlier post. You have also refused to comment on goodness knows how many issues in the current crisis e.g. Greece falsifying goverment balance sheets, Spain, housing bubbles, and so on and so on. If you wish to monomaniacally focus on only one pet issue, and ignore everything else, well fine, enjoy.
>> You can read what you like but you have to understand what's said
See above.
>> And as for rational argument , please do remind us who left the site a
>> while ago with a massive hissy fit because two letters of his name got transposed
>> accidentally?
You have completly lost me there.
May I add that I was impressed by the quality of your flounce, and subsequent tantrum. You should apply for Strictly Come Flouncing, you would be a contender.
|
accidentally?
>>
>> You have completly lost me there.
It was you my son. You flounced out of the site with a hissy fit, claiming that because I had transposed two letters of your name it was a deliberate insult and you were not prepared to stay and and suffer such abuse. With a memory like that no wonder you contradict yourself.
>> May I add that I was impressed by the quality of your flounce, and subsequent
>> tantrum. You should apply for Strictly Come Flouncing, you would be a contender.
You will be the judge I assume, with such a rich history in the sport.
|
|
Can we stop the bickering and get back to discussing the Guns and Roses song please.
|
Have deleted some stuff from this thread as my polite request went unnoticed by one of the bickering parties. It wasn't relevant to the thread anyway.
VxFan - C4P Moderator (Made it more obvious who I am this time as clearly the wand by my name wasn't sufficient enough a clue)
|
>>Made it more obvious who I am this time as clearly the wand by my name wasn't sufficient enough a clue<<
Probably thought you were a torch bearer.
:}
|
>> Probably thought you were a torch bearer.
Or a passing magician.
|
|
Not a torch bearer Dog but a piecekeeper.Watching the telly this morning and listening to the lady who got hit by this fascist thug in the Greek parlement.They are scaring the Greeks now that if they leave the union there be armageddon.Don't fall for it Greeks.The banks will take care of it.>:)
|
>>They are scaring the Greeks now that if they leave the union there be armageddon.Don't fall for it Greeks.The banks will take care of it.>:)<<
Whichever way the Greeks vote tomorrow Dutchie, it won't make an awful lot of difference to their plight in-the-immediate-future, the poor will still bare the brunt of it, as always.
The whole Eurozone is in a right 2 and 8, but its too late to go back now and so perhaps a US of E is in the offing, which was their intention all along IMO.
|
|
Blame on fractional reserve banking - the biggest Ponzi scheme ever.
|
" Blame on fractional reserve banking - the biggest Ponzi scheme ever."
Bit late to go back though it since the whole of the world's economy is based on it or do UKIP propose a wholesale ban on usury? ;-)
|
Exactly the same as any other banks, Iffy.
Businesses go under because they fail to plan/budget for contingencies in a realistic fashion. (OK some go under because their entire business model does not work and they never get to contingencies, but of those that should be OK, this applies.)
|
Zero is partly right. But the fundamental cause was reckless behaviour by governments all over the world, thinking that they can control the laws of economics and create growth by manipulating the financial environment. They borrowed too much, spent too much, and interfered too much. Banks merely followed their lead, plunging eagerly into a virtual world of Monopoly money and fictitious assets.
They all need to eat a lot of humble pie, and realise that individuals and organisations produce growth and prosperity, and governments' should confine themselves to providing a stable, law-abiding environment and a stable currency. As soon as a government says "we want to do this" it means inevitably that someone somewhere is going to be taxed and stopped from doing something more productive.
|
>> Zero is partly right. But the fundamental cause was reckless behaviour by governments all over
>> the world, thinking that they can control the laws of economics and create growth by
>> manipulating the financial environment. They borrowed too much, spent too much, and interfered too much.
>> Banks merely followed their lead, plunging eagerly into a virtual world of Monopoly money and
>> fictitious assets.
A lot of truth there. There are also bubbles, such as property, which seem to be a feature of markets and human nature. Tulip anyone?
Another problem is that banks have not enough concept of ethics. American banks were selling mortgages when they should not have, because they made commission. I am told that most of them knew it was wrong, but they were all doing it, and no-one stopped them. We've seen plenty of mis-selling scandals in this country.
One area where Zero is correct - IMO - is that there was a lack of regulation. He/she seems to think deregulation per se is evil, but without doubt some activities should have been regulated, or regulated more effectively.
>>
>> They all need to eat a lot of humble pie, and realise that individuals and
>> organisations produce growth and prosperity, and governments' should confine themselves to providing a stable, law-abiding
>> environment and a stable currency. As soon as a government says "we want to do
>> this" it means inevitably that someone somewhere is going to be taxed and stopped from
>> doing something more productive.
I think there was a lot of Emperor's new clothes. Remember Brown's end of boom and bust? Very few people saw it coming, apart from one notable chap in America called Nouriel Roubini. He predicted the crash, although I think it took longer to appear than he expected.
|
Saw a quote re Spain earlier somewhere - along the lines of all that's happening is that they are borrowing yet more, which will dilute their GDP for many years to come.
I probably have the detail wrong, but it does seem daft for countries to be doing more of what seems to have helped wreck them in the first place - but I do understand that entire economies can't be allowed to collapse.
Last edited by: smokie on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 22:55
|
>> but I do understand that entire economies can't be allowed to collapse.
>>
The world's economy is based on the idea that "growth" is good thing because it makes the people in a growing economy "richer" or "wealthier" or "better off" (whatever those terms mean), and everyone benefits just as all points on the surface of an expanding bubble "grow".
The reality is that someone down the chain has to get poorer in real terms. The bubble bursts eventually taking everyone down with it.
In the end shrinking or collapsing economies like Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Iceland, etc. (and eventually the UK too) will reach a point where their production becomes competitive and are able to export more than they import from the "richer" countries such as Germany or China.
A better economic model might be a balanced world economy where no one gets richer or poorer, the stauts-quo is maintained forever - a kind of "world communism"?
Last edited by: John H on Tue 12 Jun 12 at 23:24
|
"A better economic model might be a balanced world economy where no one gets richer or poorer, the stauts-quo is maintained forever - a kind of "world communism"?"
So who gets to decide who stays rich or who stays poor? And why would the poorer nations accept their ever continuing poverty in some sort of feudal economic hierarchy?
|
>> So who gets to decide who stays rich or who stays poor?
The Dictator at the top. (Simply extrapolate the old USSR to USSR-World.)
>> And why would the poorer nations accept their ever continuing poverty in some sort of feudal economic hierarchy? >>
Because the Master would put them in their place.
But we all know that communism fails in the end because humans are not intrinsically altruistic. On the other hand, Capitalism/Euro is failing now because the Greeks/Spanish/French/Germans aren't being altruistic - they don't realise that it is in their best interests as well as of the world that they should suffer pain now. If they don't take the pain, they will make others suffer while compounding their own pain.
|
Shouldn't we not be prepared to run a society on a basis of welfare and fairness of all.
None of us wants to see children having shortage of food.Or grow up in a warzone.
The pain is already there for lots of people,it might come our way if we arn't carefull.
|
>> Shouldn't we not be prepared to run a society on a basis of welfare and
>> fairness of all.
>>
Welfare and Fairness for all. Communism. Tried and tested experiment - result: a big failure.
>> None of us wants to see children having shortage of food.Or grow up in a
>> warzone.
>>
Nice altruistic ideals. Solution:
Open our door to let in all Afghans and Syrians growing up in their war zone?
Open our door to let in all the starving children in the 3rd World?
Or give them all your "spare cash", i.e. curtail all your "discretionary spending" and give it to the "poor"?
>> The pain is already there for lots of people,it might come our way if we
>> arn't carefull.
>>
So we act only because we fear that otherwise the pain might come our way.
|
'Fairness to all' is an impossibility.
Communism didn't and could never work because there's always someone better off. The rulers grabbed a load more for themselves and kept everyone else down. It's an unpleasant human trait.
Out and out capitalism with no safeguards for the truly needy isn't very nice either...work house anyone?
The best system IMO is somewhere nearer the middle, but with a big capitalistic slant, so we earn enough to cater for the needy.
I think this country has given it a good go...but...has got the balance wrong, because our welfare state encourages the work shy. There needs to be a welfare system, but considerably more robustly managed.
There will always be inequality, sadly.
|
>> 'Fairness to all' is an impossibility.
>>
>> Communism didn't and could never work because there's always someone better off. The rulers grabbed
>> a load more for themselves and kept everyone else down. It's an unpleasant human trait.
>>
The problem is, that no-one has ever practised communism. The communist states never did that was merely dictatorship and serfdom, so we will never know if it works or not.
|
|
Socialism is the nearest we have .Seems to work well in the Scandinavian country's.
|
>>The problem is, that no-one has ever practised communism.
The simple problem that is likely impossible to solve for communism:
Who is going to choose to clean the toilets/sewers?
If you have to compel someone to do it then you have dictatorship-serfdom.
If you make it an economic reason ('the only job I could get') then you have capitalism.
|
>> >>The problem is, that no-one has ever practised communism.
>>
>> The simple problem that is likely impossible to solve for communism:
>>
>> Who is going to choose to clean the toilets/sewers?
>>
>> If you have to compel someone to do it then you have dictatorship-serfdom.
>>
>> If you make it an economic reason ('the only job I could get') then you
>> have capitalism.
No reason why doctors, sewer cleaners, nurses and vets can't be paid the same amount - they all have to don the rubber gloves and stick it in a sh.. hole at some time.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 17 Jun 12 at 22:02
|
>> >> So who gets to decide who stays rich or who stays poor?
>>
>> The Dictator at the top. (Simply extrapolate the old USSR to USSR-World.)
Capitalism is a way to decide what goods to produce and when. In many respects it is very efficient. Communism was based on a command economy, and it failed miserably. Firstly you had corruption. Secondly it simply did not work. It takes away responsibility and incentive. And how do you decide what to produce? Russia had shortages of basic goods such as food stuffs. And millions died during the collectivisation, when Stalin forced Russia to modernise. Is that acceptable?
>> >> And why would the poorer nations accept their ever continuing poverty in some sort
>> of feudal economic hierarchy? >>
>>
>> Because the Master would put them in their place.
>>
>> But we all know that communism fails in the end because humans are not intrinsically
>> altruistic. On the other hand, Capitalism/Euro is failing now because the Greeks/Spanish/French/Germans aren't being altruistic
>> - they don't realise that it is in their best interests as well as of
>> the world that they should suffer pain now. If they don't take the pain, they
>> will make others suffer while compounding their own pain.
As Westpig indicates later on, the solution is a mixed economy. Capitalism is very efficient, which means basic goods get produced, so we do not have mass starvation in the UK. But capitalism has no ethical basis, that is not what it is. So you introduce laws to protect the workers, allow unions, newspapers etc. Not ideal. But better than the alternatives.
|
Unfortunately, the "mixed economy with appropriate Laws" solution which both you and Westpig believe works in the UK cannot work on a global basis unless the whole world is governed by the same laws.
Our wealth in the UK was/is built upon the work-houses and mass starvation of peoples of less fortunate countries in the world, and is now maintained by borrowing Billions from the savers of the likes of India and China.
On a related matter, I can tell you from personal experience that the well intentioned US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the stricter UK Bribery Act ("the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the world") are only doing damage to UK exports and business overseas.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Act
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery_Act_2010
The UK Act bars "facilitation" payments, whereas the US draws a distinction between bribery and "facilitation" or "grease" payments. A consequence of this is that a UK subsidiary of a US company trying to sell goods abroad drags the US company in to the UK definition of corrupt practises.
|
For heavens sake, when's someone gonna post this:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBecM3CQVD8
|
I wonder why this is one of the most viewed of our current threads.
Could it be my OP was so interesting everyone was desperate to read the next contribution to the fascinating debate?
Or is the thread viewed a lot because everyone loves a forum argument?
Mmm, hard one, that.
|
>> I wonder why this is one of the most viewed of our current threads.
I think a good way of measuring thread popularity is:
number of views / number of posts
and this one does score quite well using that method.
|
I don't really see that.
Number of views is certainly a basic measure of popularity. But why would you reduce that the more people respond? Isn't number of posts also a measure of popularity? Surely they should be additive rather than offsetting?
|
My thinking is that every time a new post is, er, posted, a certain percentage of the membership will read it depending on whether they think it's interesting or not. My calculation effectively measures that percentage.
So for example a thread has 100 posts, 2000 views, and the membership is 40. Average of 20 views per post (= the score according to my calculation), so the percentage of members reading each post is 50.
If there are another 100 posts and 50% of the members continue to read each post, the number of views will rise to 4000; the score remains the same = 4000 / 200 = 20, which feels right to me.
A higher score just indicates a greater percentage of the membership is reading each post.
Last edited by: Focus on Sun 17 Jun 12 at 12:57
|
|
You lost me there Focus.Which is easy.>:)
|
Sympathy for the devil - CGNorwich
