Volume two is here
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 01:31
|
Dog
Thanks for the link.
No I was not getting at you..
I find any thread that includes the following gem :
" A classic example of management, politicial and financial failure was the British Leyland debacle. Political inteference in appointing a useless salesman (Stokes) as CEO whilst sidelining a world beater (Lyons) whose management staff went on to found the motor industry in South East Asia almost single handed. This stunning error of judgement was followed by another, the appointment of a highly suspect city slicker by the name of Michael Edwards. And so it goes on"
.
a wonderful way of looking at the past with rose tinted glasses.
|
>>No I was not getting at you.. I find any thread that includes the following gem :
I know that of course madf, I was just this minute reading that post from IanB in Wales as it happens.
Here's another gem from a Norwegian posting on the Cyprus forum:
"I stand by my view, conspiracy theory or not, as I have been accused of, that this is the best possibility ever for Germany to take European control. But this is only me and my opinion. 3rd WW; but this time with money and politics. The two previous attempts using weapons failed. Now it seems they fail again, because Cyprus, against all odds, turned them down. I truly salute the Cypriots in this matter. I am actually wiilling to move to Cyprus simply in order to fight this. Just offer me a bed and I'll be there. Seriously.
But you have to judge for yourself.
I am "impressed" by the fact that while Cyprus is being "raped", not one single European country is protesting: Don't they understand that it may be them the next time, or don't they dare to speak out? It reminds me of a Brit named Chamberlain: "Peace in our time"....
|
Monetary union can't work without progressing to the next stage, full political union.
Fair enough, I accept the argument.
But it doesn't stop there. Political union only works if the participants also have cultural and historical union - in short, "feel" the same about their history, culture, way of life, aspirations, etc.
The union of Great Britain and Ireland fell apart because of past differences, and no one, not even the most ardent united Ireland propogandists, even thinks about the possibility of reuniting the British Isles.
The trend in fact is the other way. Regional differences everywhere are being highlighted and encouraged. Some countries are barely holding together - Belgium, Spain, even Italy has a separist movement in the north.
So simply lumping countries together and giving them a joint political system and common parliament is as doomed to failure as thinking a common currency will work without political union.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 08:25
|
There's truth in that Cliff.
Yugoslavia? And just look at how important nationality is throughout Europe, regardless of where the border is.
Of course that has been a major part of the origin of two world wars. And that was itself the original driver for the creation of what is now the EU. Stange, but maybe not surprising, that what was a peace project is now such a bone of contention.
|
>> EU. Stange, but maybe not surprising, that what was a peace project is now such
>> a bone of contention.
For the same reasons the war started. Militant Nationalism. You only need to see all the "Germany Wants to rule Europe" Horseship
|
"The union of Great Britain and Ireland fell apart because of past differences, and no one, not even the most ardent united Ireland propogandists, even thinks about the possibility of reuniting the British Isles."
No they don't but being united in a European Union is seen as a totally different matter and therein lies the strength of the idea. The Scots want independence form the UK but are happy to be in an EU that includes England. The people of Europe do share the same history culture way of life aspiration etc. The tragedy of the history of Europe can be very largely laid at the door of nationalism and it is only the implementation of something like the EU as a supra national organisation that will stop it once more descending into the tribal and warring politics of the past.
|
|
Gordon Brown must be kicking himself for failing to tax deposits.
|
The Scots want independence form the UK but are happy to be in an EU that includes England.
>>
What the Scots want is to get their snouts in the EU trough and become one of the countries that get out far more than they could ever hope to put in.
|
>>
>> The Scots want independence form the UK but are happy to be in an
>> EU that includes England.
>> >>
The Scots need a source of revenues to keep most of them employed by teh Government (local or central) or on benefits.
Period.
They will not vote for independence whilst times are hard...
A diet of Braveheart and fired Mars bars does not make a strong nation.
|
>> The Scots need a source of revenues to keep most of them employed by teh Government (local or central) or on benefits.
>>Period.
Other than the SE of England and London, Scotland has the highest regional GDP in the UK.
Add in the 'geographical share of oil' whatever that is, and Scotland is second behind London.
In saying that, anyone who wanted Scottish independence (other than Londoners!) for a purely financial basis needs their head examined: how much synergy there is between different regions' economies is hard to quantify, and as each side can make statistics fight their corner I think it boils down to: "Is an independent Scotland better than being part of the UK?" on a socio-political level.
Unless there is an outstandingly powerful argument for Independence (which I don't think there is) I feel it all reeks too much of that American film with the philandering alcoholic catholic Aussie anti-semite midget starring as the 13th Century Guardian of Scotland.
*edit to add more Gibson adjectives :-)
Last edited by: Lygonos on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 12:32
|
>> The tragedy
>> of the history of Europe can be very largely laid at the door of nationalism
>> and it is only the implementation of something like the EU as a supra national
>> organisation that will stop it once more descending into the tribal and warring politics of
>> the past.
>>
That might be true, but it requires a major effort of faith to believe so. All the past examples of forcing disparate peoples into the same political mould have served to exacerbate the enmities, not smooth them.
True, both world wars were ignited by nationalism, but wasn't it the earlier forced inclusion of minorities within those nations that provoked the instability and gave nationalists their excuse?
Perhaps the best previous example of a politically united super-country that almost worked was the Hapsburg empire. But even that required a compromise power-sharing agreement (with Hungary), and fell apart in the end precisely because the smaller individual peoples re-asserted their nationalism.
They had their "supra national organisation" but it didn't stop them "once more descending into the tribal and warring politics of the past".
|
The US managed to marry two disparate philosophies (North and South) with a proper Federal System where most powers were delegated to individual states. The states elected the President . The Federal Reserve consists of the Governors of Key State Banking systems.
The EC is busy gathering power to the centre. The President is unelected. The ECB is German run.
Hmmm.
Last edited by: madf on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 11:58
|
|
I expect I will get shouted down (I usually am) for pointing out that Germany feels it must dominate Europe.
|
|
I wouldn't shout you down but I would ask on what basis you make this claim.
|
It was an admittedly a subjective assessment, based partly on hunches and stray, wistful remarks from various Germans. On the other hand, judgements based on sources other than primary, such as recorded interviews or official documents, will be open to at least some degree of subjectivity and most of use will have to rely on secondary, tertiary etc. sources, or in fact, much more remote in many cases.
In the context of the thread I was thinking mostly, however, about the current problems of Cyprus and German influence over them. An article by Charles Moore in today’s Telegraph argues the point about domination strongly. In discussing imperial power he says, “Today that power is Germany. We have heard enough lies the Germans are saying haughtily to the Cypriots, now shut up and do what we want.” Also, “Now it is the Germans’ turn to exercise an imperium”.
This is not to say that there are not other views, and I think a weakness in his article (apart from its strident tone) is that he does not refer to German domination of the other Troika members, which he must be presuming.
|
>> The US managed to marry two disparate philosophies (North and South) with a proper Federal
>> System where most powers were delegated to individual states.
More like two strands of the same basic philosophy, viz "Let's Take this Land from the Indians".
The Native American Indian would take a lot of convincing about the benefits of large scale immigration.
|
" Ryanair CEO on Cyprus
As for the bailout that would require taxing Cyprus bank savers, O'Leary said, "[We] are the largest airline in Cyprus ... but we don't have any bank accounts or deposits in Cyprus, thankfully." He said Ryanair shut them down about a year ago "because there was always a danger of some kind of run on the Cyprus banks."
O'Leary added, "What the Europeans are doing is insane ... you can't go in there and steal people's money out of the banks." He said it could "undermine the whole European banking system, if people can't rely at least that their money is safe in banks."
In a couple other southern European trouble-spots, Italy and Spain, O'Leary said Ryanair is the No. 1 airline in those countries and it has bank accounts in each. He said he's had conversations about pulling money from Italy and Spain but he expects things there will calm down."
Interesting comments ?
|
Interesting from O'Leary's perspective - he will (as should we) be worried that a raid on savers will be seen as breaking the 'Infallability' of the banking system with knock-on effects on the rest of Europe where he runs his business.
As far as the Cypriots are concerned, I'd probably take the 6% haircut and get my loot out of the country than risk being forcibly ejected from the Euro with failed banks, (which ultimately may well still happen after the inevitable run that will occur even if they dodge the bullet this weekend), start up a Cypriot Central Bank and Pound which would plummet like a stone along with funky inflation.. leading to savings worth zilch.
Next up: Greece.
|
>>
>> No they don't but being united in a European Union is seen as a totally
>> different matter and therein lies the strength of the idea. The Scots want independence form
>> the UK but are happy to be in an EU that includes England.
>>
What they will get when the EU is totally united politically is 2 MEPs in the parliament and the status of a small county council. There won't be such a concept as "Scotland" any more than there is at present a Wessex, a Mercia, a Burgundy, a Prussia, or any other of the one-time states of Europe.
England next door however might have achieved the independence the Scots say they want.
|
>>England next door however might have achieved the independence the Scots say they want.
I still think it's a moot point: Scotland is quite unlikely to vote for Independence, and at the moment SNP currently have what they always wanted - power, just like every other bampot political party.
As a long-time cynic of all things politic, I don't think the Scottish Parliament has turned into the mess I feared it could have. I am suspicious that this 'success' is at least in part due to the checks/balances that are provided by being devolved rather than Independent.
|
>> the checks/balances that are provided by being devolved rather than Independent.
= kept in check by those canny old Sassenachs in Westminster?
There's something strangely winsome about Scottish lady politicians. Indeed the Scots in general speak and pronounce English better than most English people whose delivery is often slovenly (even in the so-called cut glass classes). Much the same can be said of the educated Irish and Afro-Caribbeans.
|
It seems that the deposit levy may well be back on, albeit modified, as the most influential members of the Eurozone are holding out for it as a condition of funding.
Why has Cyprus been singled out for such harsh terms when other basket-case countries have been granted EU taxpayers money without such draconian conditions?
I bet there is plenty of "black money", to use a Spanish phrase ,around in other Euro dominated accounts: certainly the Russians were pretty evident on the Costa del Sol.
There may well be more bail-outs needed in the coming months; who is to say that similar raids on bank accounts would not be part of their conditions?
I think this episode has, whichever way the cookie crumbles, let the genie out of the bottle.
Who rationally, particularly ordinary working or retired private citizens, would want to keep their money in any Eurozone bank, apart from those in Germany. (That country may, or may not, be fireproof when the full extent of their exposure to EU bad debt is made clear).
The UK is not fireproof either. We are hugely indebted, both privately & publicly.
Could we need IMF support? Would this "raid" precedent, now looking likely to be set, be applied as a condition?
Where in the world is one's money safe?
Last edited by: Roger on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 15:39
|
>> Where in the world is one's money safe?
>>
Switzerland probably :-)
|
>> >> Where in the world is one's money safe?
>> >>
>> Switzerland probably :-)
But if you put it in a safe place you might start losing some of it due to inflation and you not getting any interest.
Last week it seemed a terrible idea to all to take up to 9.9% from the accounts of people at Cypriot banks. Now it is looking like you're going to lose all of it....
Maybe they should have asked people what they'd prefer - losing up to 9.9% or losing it all.
|
>> Where in the world is one's money safe?
Canada, possibly...
|
The point is, though, why should Cyprus bank account holders be penalised in this way when other countries have received funding without such conditions?
Is this to set a precedent using an easy target, for future bail-outs as they become - and I bet they will - necessary?
|
|
In gold, in a sock up the chimney, they used to say.
|
Eh what, pardon? Are we back on priests again AC?
|
>> Are we back on priests again
Certainly not. Just the prosperous-yeoman response to all this panic about where to stash the old ill-gotten, comrade. What could be clearer?
|
>> The point is, though, why should Cyprus bank account holders be penalised in this way
>> when other countries have received funding without such conditions?
>> Is this to set a precedent using an easy target, for future bail-outs as they
>> become - and I bet they will - necessary?
>>
Simple really.
All the other countries involved could do something about their huge budget deficits which are the cause of their problems.
Except Iceland where their bailout involved non Icleandic depositors losing all their money - and the UK Gov't reimbursed the UK depositors for the £2.3 Billion they lost when the Icelandic Gov't confiscated it
(A fact Roger has omitted to mention - presumably because he has "forgotten it"..
In Iceland's case the bank bondholders lost their money. But there are no bondholders in Cyprus to lose money . Cyprus banks are funded by customer deposits.
So that is Roger's answer.
The fact that Cyprus's banking system is several times its GDP means that even if the Cyprus Gov't devoted the majority (!) of its revenues to repaying the bank losses which lead to this crisis#.. it still would take several decades to do it.
# neither physically nor politically feasible.
The Cyprus banking system was founded on customer deposits..Se e Northern Rock..
Of course if Roger is proposing that countries are allowed to rack up huge debts and repay none of them themselves but expect others to foot all the pain... :-)
tinyurl.com/c83qzpd
Last edited by: madf on Fri 22 Mar 13 at 20:13
|
Iceland was not part of the Eurozone and their government was able to decide how their country's problems should be solved.
Their bail-out came from the IMF, as I recall.
The full story (if you believe Wiki) is here:-
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80%932009_Icelandic_financial_crisis
Personally I do not agree with the UK taxpayer picking up the tab for lost deposits in Iceland, although I realise that there is depositor protection in the UK, which probably would have covered a good proportion of smaller depositor losses had the losses been in UK banks.
Nevertheless there was no reason, in law, for the UK taxpayer reimbursing those lost deposits.
Cyprus IS in the Eurozone and thus its options are much more limited when asking for a bail-out. As far as the ordinary citizens of Cyprus are concerned they do not see why they are being singled out, alone among Eurozone bail-out recipients , for personal deductions of this nature.
The way their banks are funded is not their concern and probably not within their scope of knowledge.
They are asking for a level playing field.
As far as other recipients of EU taxpayer's largesse is concerned:
"All the other countries involved could do something about their huge budget deficits which are the cause of their problems."
Oh, really?
The game is by no means over yet and I still suspect that this Cyprus, screw the depositor, scheme is to set the precedent for future begging bowl supplicants.
As far as countries racking up huge debts are concerned, of course these monies need to be repaid, whether the country is in or out of the Eurozone.
Of course the affected countries should not expect others to pick up the tab, but in the Eurozone itself, the single currency has been the cause of many of these profligate excesses.
Many of the entrants to the single currency should never have been admitted and were thus enrolled by blatant fiddling of the joining criteria. Once in, the money tree flowered, letting them borrow vast sums at interest rates and in such quantities, as few of them could have obtained as independent entities. Interest rates and capital availability for Germany the same as for Greece?
Daft. The whole thing was and is deeply flawed.
|
The instinctive reaction, including mine, to the proposed depositor haircut is "not fair".
However - on reflection it looks more than reasonable to me, especially if the small savers can be excluded.
Cyprus's banks, like Iceland's, have grown disproportionately large in assets because most of the deposits are foreign. There is also a widely held belief that most of it is laundered money.
The Cypriot banks put a lot of their money into Greek bonds, which have themselves been subject to severe haircuts. Because of the sheer scale of the financial sector (based on it's being a tax haven, or depending on your point of view a money laundering industry) and the state of the Cyprus economy, the Cypriot government can't bail out its own banks any more than Iceland could Landsbanki and Kaupthing.
Merkel has quite rightly judged that she will be lambasted for bailing out a load of money launderers who then walk away 'scot' free, not having paid tax in the first place or the second place. How can an EU member be allowed to make itself a tax haven and impose guarantee costs on the wider Union?
Sooner or later, depositors are going to have to start losing money when they put it in weak or badly regulated banks. A 10% haircut is a bargain compared to a total bank failure, and in itself no worse for the depositors than the inflation that is being forced on us here.
The Icelandic failure was badly handled by the UK and Netherlands, who covered the Landsbanki depositors in full though they had no obligation to (Iceland put two fingers up, having let its bank grow to a size way beyond the scale if its economy). The right thing to do would probably have been to protect 100% up to say £30k, then to have imposed escalating haircuts above that.
We had about £80k to deposit around that time. I swerved around Icesave (pre-bust) because it was unguaranteed and already causing concern, and got as far as opening a Kaupthing Edge account (Kaupthing, Singer and Friedlander, a UK licensed bank owned by Kaupthing and covered by FSCS) but tinned out of that too because of the possible hassle and loss of interest, and put the money in the Coventry BS.
The Kaupthing Edge depositors (including many with deposits in excess of the guarantee) continue to moan that the UK and Dutch governments didn't oblige ING to honour the high interest rates they had signed up for with Kaupthing. They deserve no sympathy, having been bailed out at the expense of generally poorer UK taxpayers who had no obligation to do so beyond the FSCS guarantee.
I feel sorry for the local depositors in the Cypriot banks but a 10% haircut is cheap. I'd bite their hand off and take my 90% elsewhere.
|
All that is true.
But there was supposed to be an £85,000 guarantee in place, and by suggesting that all depositors should in fact take a 6% charge they have breached that guarantee.
I know they have backtracked, and now it won't apply to small savers, but by even broaching the idea in the first place they have forfeited the trust that banking is based on.
Governments everywhere have been given the idea that perhaps they don't have to adhere to the guarantee after all, and that raiding it is a possibility.
For Cypriots, taking the hit and then withdrawing the remaining 90% is not an option. If everyone did that the banks would collapse anyway. Now as a result of the EU and Cyprus government ineptitude the population have been given the nod to do just that.
|
>>But there was supposed to be an £85,000 guarantee in place,
You're right Cliff. I was shooting from the hip. Honouring that would also give people confidence to keep their money in banks not under the bed, at least up to the guarantee level.
Even in the UK we are in a fool's paradise right now. Austerity? Never mind a 1% cap on public sector pay and a tweaking of the pensions, Ireland cut pay by 5%, benefits substantially and levies a property tax. Greece cut pay by up to 50% and pensions in payment by 20% and more of the portion in excess of €1200 per month.
If your income is £1000 a month, and your outgoings £1200, you don't fix the problem by cutting your spending to £1180 a month.
The coalition can't impose the required cuts and Labour won't. That would also decimate the economy. Inflation is the only credible way out - public borrowing is increasing by more than £300m a day despite "cuts".
Any advice for how to preserve my retirement fund, other than buying RPI annuities and halving my income anyway, will be welcome ;-)
|
>>
>>
>> Any advice for how to preserve my retirement fund, other than buying RPI annuities and
>> halving my income anyway, will be welcome ;-)
>>
Commercial property? 8% return.
I read recently of someone who was using his pension fund to buy smaller unused properties ripe for conversion to commercial use, and then directing the renovation himself. One was an abandoned chapel, which on completion was snapped up by a small IT company.
Tax-free capital gain and tax free income to the pension fund.
|
Sooner or later, depositors are going to have to start losing money when they put it in weak or badly regulated banks. A 10% haircut is a bargain compared to a total bank failure, and in itself no worse for the depositors than the inflation that is being forced on us here.
Exactly.
I also did due diligence on Icelandic banks when looking for home for a sizeable sum.
Decided they were going bust/were dodgy.
People complain about the nanny state and then complain they are not given favourable tax treatment or a full refund for their own lack of care...
See UKIP who complain about EU spending but are now talking about immediate tax breaks..
tinyurl.com/d55jwo5
|
Pragmatically, you are right - a loss of 10% compared with a loss of 100% is a no brainer.
It still leaves open the questions about (a) Will such a confiscation be a condition of future Euro bailouts? and (b) who will have the balls to invest in Euro dominated funds held in most of the Eurozone countries?
Whatever happens, this episode has reinforced the point that the euro, one size fits all, project is a slam-dunk failure.
From my political stance, anything which diminishes the E.U. is to be welcomed.
Personally though, I do feel for the poor ordinary folk who are being hurt by the tom-foolery.
|
|
The Telegraph lays it on even thicker today, in both main and business sections.
|
The bailout as currently agreed looks much worse than that originally proposed.
Sure, the people who have 10,000 euros in the bank, now won't have to lose their 675 euros. But people who had, say, house deposits, or life savings in the affected bank could now possibly lose hundreds of thousands (if the predicted haircut of 40% is correct).
It is not only the Russian money launderers who would have 100k in the bank.
Oh, and there almost certainly will be mass withdrawals, because any promise of this being a one-off will be looked at with extreme skepticism.
Would any of you want your money in a Cypriot bank?
|
Soon after the original proposal was made public it sounded to me it was a desperate measure that was probably better than the alternatives - like losing all your money.
It looks like this is worse than imagined for many - okay not losing all of it. But if you had bought a bond in the bank that's closing you'd lose that for sure.
And longer term, they will not be a banking nation (maybe a good thing!) but the knock of effect will be terrible for many of those living in Cyprus.
I wonder where will be hit next?
|
Appropos of nothing really and I stress, absolutely not an attempt to even slightly compare the two events but...
The banking crisis has now gone on for approximately the same amount of time as the duration of the second world war.
Don't know why or what that makes me think but it does just sort of occur to me.
|
>>The banking crisis has now gone on for approximately the same amount of time as the duration of the second world war.
...and you wouldn't bet against Germany winning the peace again ;-)
|
>> Appropos of nothing really and I stress, absolutely not an attempt to even slightly compare
>> the two events but...
>>
>> The banking crisis has now gone on for approximately the same amount of time as
>> the duration of the second world war.
>>
>> Don't know why or what that makes me think but it does just sort of
>> occur to me.
>>
Well the last real banking crisis prior to this one was the Latin American one in the 1980s.. called "the lost decade" and the Argentinian economy has not yet recovered..
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American_debt_crisis
and the last UK banking crisis was the LTCM one of 1998 -
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banking_crises
So 20 years of no crisis but approx 20 years of loose money caused teh last UK one.. the worst for over 100 years since the Panic of 1890.
So to imagine it's going to be resolved in 5 years shows the shallowness of thinking
|
>>nd the Argentinian economy has not yet recovered..
Nor is it likely to if things remain as they are.
They could have a mining industry, but they can't sort it out. They also seized bank balance sin the late 90s. Argentinian banks outside Argentina may hold large bank balances for Argentinians available in country.
I know several wealthy Argentinians who wouldn't dream of keeping anything other than operating monies in country. Actually I must get hold of them and find out if they left it in Cyprus for safe keeping.
The difficulties in Argentina make the UK look like a summer holiday.
If you're interested;
www.economist.com/node/21548229
www.businessinsider.com/why-argentina-is-such-an-economic-mess-2012-11
www.businessinsider.com/luxury-brands-are-fleeing-argentina-2012-10
www.businessinsider.com/argentinas-downward-spiral-2013-3
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 25 Mar 13 at 13:20
|
Latest figures UK minus 75 billion GDP percentage minus 2.5 %.No summer holiday or picnic.
Germany plus 239 billion plus 5.3 percent .
|
>>
>> Oh, and there almost certainly will be mass withdrawals, because any promise of this being
>> a one-off will be looked at with extreme skepticism.
>>
Confidence again.
"We are thinking about levying a 6% charge on bank accounts" = grab your money as soon as you can.
|
Capital withdrawals from Cyprus? Capital Controls imposed to prevent that ...
tinyurl.com/buvsx5e
|
|
Here's a wheeze for cash-strapped countries: take a levy on pensions (before tax, so pensioners can't claim there has been an increase in income tax). My French pension was subject to a 2.4% social security deduction when I started to draw it in 1999, rising to 3.8% in 2000. It was never clear what it was for, an unemployment scheme, perhaps. As a UK resident, it could not benefit me in any case. It was stopped, for non-residents at least, with the advent of the Euro, with refunds for two years. Maybe it is still there still for the French. It is another thing Gordon brown must be kicking himself for not having thought of. My receipts are net of income tax but I pay it here.
|
>> Would any of you want your money in a Cypriot bank?
......or any EURO denominated account in the weaker EU members banks?
|
I'm not too chuffed about having sterling denominated accounts in a UK bank bearing in mind it has been devalued by at least 30% of its value in the past 5 years.
God knows what would happen to the pound if by some ghastly misfortune you were to get your wish and the UK exit the EU.
|
Whether or not the UK leaves the EC, I'm still expecting £1= $1.00 in the next 3-5 years.
And £1 = $2.00 in the following 15..
|
>> Whether or not the UK leaves the EC, I'm still expecting £1= $1.00 in the
>> next 3-5 years.
>>
>> And £1 = $2.00 in the following 15..
>>
Come on, madf, you can't tease us like that. ;-)
You can't just make startling claims like that without explaining your reasoning.
Assuming that you are correct it would make fascinating reading.
Last edited by: Londoner on Mon 25 Mar 13 at 17:55
|
>> >> Whether or not the UK leaves the EC, I'm still expecting £1= $1.00 in
>> the
>> >> next 3-5 years.
>> >>
>> >> And £1 = $2.00 in the following 15..
>> >>
>> Come on, madf, you can't tease us like that. ;-)
>> You can't just make startling claims like that without explaining your reasoning.
>> Assuming that you are correct it would make fascinating reading.
Hes not been right with any of his other dire financial warnings. I remember the one where the FTSE would fall to 1500 with amusement.
|
If he's right, and who's to say he's not, I might as well pack up now. We buy most of our inventory in $ and sell it again in £.
"Eek", would seem to be the only appropriate comment. Either that or "goodbye cruel world"...
:-)
|
|
Wouldn't £1 = $2 be good for us we haven't been that strong against the dollar in years
|
|
It certainly would. I look forward to hearing the reason for this future economic miracle.
|
(a) he might have miss keyed and meant £2=$1
(b) £1 = $2 is great for raw material prices, including oil. Death to our exporters though.
|
>> If he's right, and who's to say he's not, I might as well pack up
>> now.
Well yeah really, regardless of what currency you buy and sell your stock in, the retail model is dead. You need to think outside the carrier bag. You got any other skills? Lumberjack course perhaps?
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 25 Mar 13 at 18:22
|
It is simple. None of you read history.
The US£ versus US$ fluctuates between that range over 20 odd years. I remember in the 1980s £1=$1.0 and in 2007 £1 = $2.1 and currently the GBP is falling.
Of course I am a pessimist. Being an optimist means you take rash risks...
Meanwhile.. the Dutch Finance Minister is a c.... idiot
"Markets in Europe and the US moved downwards when Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the Dutch Finance Minister who as head of the Eurogroup played a key role in the Cyprus negotiations, said the deal represented a new template for resolving future eurozone banking problems.
He also said other countries may have to restructure their banks."
So depositors in Greece, Italy and Spain will start a run on their banks.. Moron.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21920574
Last edited by: madf on Mon 25 Mar 13 at 18:32
|
"It is simple. None of you read history."
I think the problem is you are looking at a 20 year period. The overall trend since 1945 had been inexorably downwards. After the war the rate was GBP1 =USD 4 (the reason 5/- was known as a dollar.
To see the rate recover to GBP1 = USD2 in 5 years time would need either an amazing recovery of the UK economy or more worryingly a collapse of the US economy
|
Whether or not the UK leaves the EC, I'm still expecting £1= $1.00 in the next 3-5 years.
And £1 = $2.00 in the following 15.
."
"To see the rate recover to GBP1 = USD2 in 5 years time would need either an amazing recovery of the UK economy or more worryingly a collapse of the US economy "
I agree. That's why I said 20 years.. 5+15 =20!
|
|
I'd love to do a lumberjack course. I'd pay to do a lumberjack course. Wonder where they do them?
|
>> I'd love to do a lumberjack course. I'd pay to do a lumberjack course. Wonder
>> where they do them?
A fellow went for a job as a lumberjack, the boss didn't much like the look of him but as he could plainly handle his axe he decided to pose him some hard questions.
The boss pointed to a tree in the clearing and asked what species it was. The fellow squinted and replied that it was a birch. Another tree was pointed out and correctly identified as an ash, followed by a common oak and a sessile oak, "You can tell by the acorns you know."
Unable to catch him out on his extensive knowledge of trees the boss was getting frustrated and pointed to tall symetrical conifer and asked which was the front and which was the back. The lumberjack walked over to the tree, took a slow walk around the trunk and returned. "Well?" asked the boss, "That side's the front" said the lumberjack. "How the heck can you tell the difference?" asked the boss, exasperated. "Oh, that's easy" replied the lumberjack "Someone's had a crap round the back".
|
>> I'd love to do a lumberjack course. I'd pay to do a lumberjack course. Wonder
>> where they do them?
>>
It is called tree surgery in the UK, I have a pal who retrained when his farm was bought for OC mining. Lots of H&S rules, chainsaw qualifications, etc. He has it as a side line to his new business, (equestrian centre). Tree surgeons do not come cheap. :-)
|
|
I know of someone who did a lumberjack type course (including driving the trucks hauling the timber) when working as an RAF driver. Never know when they might need to fell a few trees to recover an airframe.
|
|
I did my HGV 1 training with the RAF while I was submarine crew, work that one out. :-)
|
|
Well its pretty heavy, and its full of food, so I guess its not that different to a tesco lorry. Not sure Tesco are doing bog-off on nuclear tipped trident yet tho.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 25 Mar 13 at 20:54
|
|
Close Z, mainly for the (Polaris and Chevaline in my day) missiles, should the civilian drivers union choose to strike. And for food stores of course for the same reason. When the Navy had been inconvenienced once and trained up their own drivers the unions went very quiet.
|
>>
>> It is called tree surgery in the UK,
>>
Arborist, I have just discovered by looking it up.
But tree surgery is surely small-beer compared with real lumberjacking - felling giant pines in remote Alaska, winching them across frozen terrain, sliding them miles down "skid row" to the nearest river, rafting them downstream?
It doesn't sound quite like the man who comes round to lop a few branches of an ornamental tree in suburbia.
|
>> I'd love to do a lumberjack course. I'd pay to do a lumberjack course. Wonder
>> where they do them?
>>
You need the necessary qualifications first.
Can you skip and jump, and do you like to press wild flowers?
|
|
One of our regular customers trains forestry workers. Lots of associated qualification are now required in this industry. And he tells some funny stories. Not all of which have happy endings.
|
>> Can you skip and jump, and do you like to press wild flowers?
>>
I'm trying not to think of Humph in suspenders and a bra.
|
>>
>> >> Can you skip and jump, and do you like to press wild flowers?
>> >>
>>
>> I'm trying not to think of Humph in suspenders and a bra.
>>
I thought Robert De Niro looked quite fetching in those.
|
Well, thanks for the advice you lot ! Sorry I haven't responded before but I've been at work. Remember that? :-)
I reckon I could just buy a chainsaw and an axe and blag it. I've already got a tartan shirt...
Last edited by: Humph D'Bout on Tue 26 Mar 13 at 21:37
|
>> I reckon I could just buy a chainsaw and an axe and blag it. I've already got a tartan skirt...
There, fixed the typo.
|
>> >> I reckon I could just buy a chainsaw and an axe and blag it.
>> I've already got a tartan skirt...
>>
>> There, fixed the typo.
>>
:-)
Plus, I'm sure that Humph could find a suitable pair of ladies shoes if he rummages around in the back of the LEC. :-)
|
>> I reckon I could just buy a chainsaw and an axe and blag it. I've already got a tartan skirt...
>There, fixed the typo.
Post of the month!
Still giggling.
|
|
I'd read Humph's post as saying skirt to begin with! :-) I had assumed he'd taken on board the jokes and references to Monty Python and he'd just joined in.
|
|
I assumed Humph was in touch with his feminine self... obviously not...
|
|
A view from the USA (N.Y.Times) tinyurl.com/ckvmhkt
|
The failure of Cyprus banks was forecast by many when the Greek deal was done.
I am sue the EC saw it coming. In reality the amounts are small.
Last edited by: madf on Wed 27 Mar 13 at 08:30
|
Forecast by Southpark even earlier
www.therundown.tv/videos/misc-videos/south-park-and-its-gone-scene/
sorry if it has been posted before, but it made me smile :(
Last edited by: pmh on Fri 5 Apr 13 at 17:59
|
www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/11/cyprus-bailout-leaked-debt-analysis-bill
Why exactly Cyprus has to listen to EU? Why can't they simply default and ditch the Euro?
|
>> www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/11/cyprus-bailout-leaked-debt-analysis-bill
>>
>> Why exactly Cyprus has to listen to EU? Why can't they simply default and ditch
>> the Euro?
>>
Well it's quite simple.
Within the Euro, the fairy godmother gives them 10billion euros and their banks survive (just) and their economy shrinks 10 to 20%. And anyone with over 100k Euros in the bank loses 40 or 60 or 80%.
Outside the Euro, all their banks go bust, everyone loses all their savings, the state goes bust , their new currency buys very little . Of course this could mean a huge boost to business when it';s all sorted - cheap holidays in Cyprus etc.. but it could also mean most of the locals losing everything. As for GDP? Think 50% falls in year 1...and more in Year 2..
You pays your money .. except that's what Cyprus does not have. And Cyprus banks are about 7 times its GDP so if its banks go bust... wipeout...
Last edited by: madf on Thu 11 Apr 13 at 17:43
|
You are way too optimistic, madf.
Cyprus won't survive INSIDE the Euro either.
Have a look at today's blog from the Guardian
www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/11/eurozone-crisis-cyprus-bailout-dsa-eurogroup
The numbers behind the EU "rescue" plan are described in the "Debt Sustainability Report".
Pawel Morski tears it to shreds as as "worse than literally laughable".
Cyrus is heading for a political earthquake.
|
Londoner
Just read something similar on FTAlphaville.
Well the Cyprus Government and civil servants know if they leave the Euro all their salaries and pensions * will be worth zero.. Can you imagine turkeys voting for Christmas? I can't .
* Cos the state will need the money to create one new solvent bank to pick up the pieces of the banking system and let trade move and people live.
Dammed if they do, dammed if they don;t..
When your banking system has assets of 128billion Euros and your GDP is 17 billion Euros, any hiccup in your banks = disaster.
The Germans don't want to pay, the Euro banking system assumes they will pay.
Closer monetary union is needed for EC political survival. The chances of it are falling daily ... not that they were high anyway.
|
Closer monetary union means closer political union i.e. The Federated States of Europe, which has been the goal all along.
Pretty clear this was, in the original Treaty of Berlin, which set up what were told (no, lied to) was just a Common Market.
Not too many of us who were able to vote at the time had a clue what was there, but deliberately concealed from us. (I voted NO then, as I had a glimmering of the meaning of the project)
THAT cat is now out of the bag!
Last edited by: Roger on Thu 11 Apr 13 at 20:47
|
More likely the Tabloids correctly worked out that their readership wouldn't be able to understand anything that complex and so didn't print it.
Or do you believe that politicians are capable of convincing the tabloids of a cover up?
However, if one wanted monetary union, why would you object to political union? Since one is required to assure viability in the other. And if you want your money managed in a particular way, then you're probably of the same political persuasion anyway.
If on the other hand one did not want political union, why would monetary union be attractive? And why would you think it would be workable?
My point being, you're being disingenuous or at least simplistic. Nobody was conned, nobody was lied to, but most people were either disinterested or unwilling to listen.
And I didn't have a glimmer, I worked out. And voted yes. As I would again tomorrow.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 11 Apr 13 at 20:56
|
I want neither monetary nor political union in a Federated Europe.
My NO vote will cancel out your YES vote ! :-)
|
>> I'm going to cheat.
>>
Ah - the postal vote "system", eh? :-)
|
|
Dammit. There goes another cunning plan.
|
It was always there Roger,I knew what it meant from the beginning and I am not a scholar.
I was born in a proud nation with a tremendous history right or wrong.You can't spend what you don't have and if you do it will bite you in the ankles.These countries are finding this out now and the price has to be payed.Unfortenately it is always the people who can least afford it who are made to suffer.Leadership is about uniting peoples and not divide them.We have not many great leaders,can't think of any at the moment.(Tongue in cheek)
|
>> born in a proud nation with a tremendous history right or wrong.
Right AND wrong Dutchie.
I stayed in a former Dutch colonial fort in Colombo once. An elegant building with an elegant garden and ramparts all around. But in the middle of the biggest rail marshalling yard in the country, added of course long after the fort had fallen into the hands of (cough) another imperialist country. Huge goods trains being violently shunted all night... didn't get a wink of sleep although I was only 9. 1948 that was.
>> the price has to be payed.Unfortenately it is always the people who can least afford it who are made to suffer.
It's always the people who can least afford it who suffer the most in peace and war. It's always been like that. The human tragedy (or comedy if you are heartless enough).
|
Of course mistakes where made with the Dutch colonial past.Indonesia never understood what we where doing there except for the rijsttafel maybe.
Amerika we where there for a short while,New Amsterdam till it was taking away.
Eighty year war with the Spanish,French invasions battle whith the Brits.Maarten Tromp,
Michiel de Ruiter on their sailing ships entering the Thames.And now we have Amsterdam with its coffee shops and lady's of the night.We have come a long way..;)
|
and now we have Amsterdam with
>> its coffee shops and lady's of the night.We have come a long way..;)
>>
Ladies of the night? In Amsterdam? Never!
What is the world coming to?
No wonder the EC is in trouble.
I hear the Reeperbahn is more scenic...:-)
|
|
Google Earth is your friend! ;-)
|
Cyprus Bailout - Volume 3 - madf
