Bank of England are printing 75Bn

Tefal · 9 Oct 2011 at 13:59

robskinner said:
So who was he being sarcastic to?

did you not see the cunningly coloured text at the bottom of his post?

Freakbro · 9 Oct 2011 at 14:13

robskinner said:
A lot of the issues are linked to low liquidity, people payign back debt will improve this and should help to remove the liquidy issue.

As far as I was aware this is a solvency issue not an illiquidity issue?

Danthus · 9 Oct 2011 at 14:56

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...al-crisis-heralds-loss-for-Goldman-Sachs.html

Goldman Sachs is expected to make its first quarterly loss since the depths of the financial crisis, underlying how the current market turmoil is hurting Wall Street's biggest banks.

There may be trouble ahead............

Deleted member 77746 · 9 Oct 2011 at 14:59

OldCoals said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...al-crisis-heralds-loss-for-Goldman-Sachs.html

There may be trouble ahead............

More trouble ahead of trouble. This is how I'm thinking right now.

sigma · 9 Oct 2011 at 15:09

To be expected really, there is a bit of a financial crisis gong on at the moment. You can massage profit figures to suit your needs anyway.

Freakbro · 9 Oct 2011 at 15:15

OldCoals said:
There may be trouble ahead..........mind :) [MEDIA=youtube]TnfKmNRfLYU[/MEDIA]

[TW]Fox · 9 Oct 2011 at 15:16

Gaygle said:
Can't they just share out this 75bn with every tax payer in the country (about £2000 each) with the proviso that they have to spend it within 30 days. This will stimulate growth by 120%, reduce unemployed by 3m as well as increasing morale which will in turn lead to a 30% increase in job productivity, which should create a £100bn bonus for the treasury.*

Problem, economy?

*figures may not be accurate

Isn't this similar to what Australia actually did back in 2009? They didnt use printed money but everyone got some sort of a bonus to spend on... stuff. I was speaking to a guy out there who had bought a 50 inch TV with it..

Gaygle · 9 Oct 2011 at 15:26

robskinner said:
Why?
Because what you quote is so far from reality its just a joke.

Stimulate growth by 120%, how?
Reduce unemployment by 3M, how?
Increase productivity by 30%, how?

Absolutely no idea how you came up with that.

OldCoals said:
Because the "money" has been used to sure up various financial institution's.

$picard_facepalm_RE_Woman_doesnt_know_about_light_refraction-s921x606-78126.jpg$

Obviously my humour is too subtle for some!

[TW]Fox;20260950 said:
Isn't this similar to what Australia actually did back in 2009? They didnt use printed money but everyone got some sort of a bonus to spend on... stuff. I was speaking to a guy out there who had bought a 50 inch TV with it..

Really? Did it work at all?

Danthus · 11 Oct 2011 at 23:41

Well two ratings agencies have downgraded several Spanish bans and Slovakia voted against the the bail out proposals.

Heofz · 12 Oct 2011 at 00:13

rz30 said:
About 6 months before the crash, Goldman Sachs finally caught onto what was about to happen and they bet againt the housing market while still selling sub-prime mortgages for ex.

Are you kidding? They knew what was going to happen all along. They aren't stupid. It was a systematic ponzi scheme of global proportions, and most of the people who passed the bills in the U.S. government (making it "illegal" to regulate derivatives) worked for Goldman Sachs or were on the board of directors for one of the other major firms (e.g. Morgan Stanley etc) who were in on it. They were the direct benefactors of said Ponzi scheme.

The previous U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson used to be the CEO of Goldman Sachs. What does that tell you?

Freakbro · 12 Oct 2011 at 00:29

OldCoals said:
Slovakia voted against the the bail out proposals.

And I just read on the news they said they will have another vote shortly that should pass.

How come whenever there is countries referendum on an issue regarding Europe, they seem to keep asking until they get a yes vote..

Mercenary Keyboard Warrior · 12 Oct 2011 at 07:57

Freakbro said:
As far as I was aware this is a solvency issue not an illiquidity issue?

Solvency issue for banks, liquidity issue for individuals

IE most individuals despite all the issues are quite solvent, but they have poor liquidity. Their assets are tied up in the homes (typically) so they if they were forced to would be able to clear all their debts, but currently are struggling with short term cash (ie liquidity)

Paying down the debts would move the balance slowly in the direction that they improve their liquidity in the future.

Your right little has been said about banks liquidity, they are forced to hold certain amounts of highly liquid assets and will be doing so daily anyway. Insurance companies are the same they have to have liquid assets by FSA rules so that they can deal with claims etc.

Mercenary Keyboard Warrior · 12 Oct 2011 at 08:00

Gaygle said:
$picard_facepalm_RE_Woman_doesnt_know_about_light_refraction-s921x606-78126.jpg$

Obviously my humour is too subtle for some!

Really? Did it work at all?

Nah fine if you were taking the **** fine. But thing is there are lots who genuinely are saying this, I overheard a conversation at work that basically said exactly the same points not in same detail but that giving us all the free money would mean we could spend the economy out of the issues.

Check the BBC site and loads are posting the same, not being sarcastic so after reading that I just happened on your post. Looked to be exactly the same so a bit doh to me

Danthus · 12 Oct 2011 at 08:10

robskinner said:
Solvency issue for banks, liquidity issue for individuals

IE most individuals despite all the issues are quite solvent, but they have poor liquidity. Their assets are tied up in the homes (typically) so they if they were forced to would be able to clear all their debts, but currently are struggling with short term cash (ie liquidity)

Paying down the debts would move the balance slowly in the direction that they improve their liquidity in the future.

Your right little has been said about banks liquidity, they are forced to hold certain amounts of highly liquid assets and will be doing so daily anyway. Insurance companies are the same they have to have liquid assets by FSA rules so that they can deal with claims etc.

Don't forget, the balance sheets of the banks have been propped up with money that does not exists. it is quite right for people to question whether the banks can cover their liabilities.

scorza · 12 Oct 2011 at 08:35

Freakbro said:
And I just read on the news they said they will have another vote shortly that should pass.

How come whenever there is countries referendum on an issue regarding Europe, they seem to keep asking until they get a yes vote..

On the radio this morning it said that the first vote was tied in with a vote of no confidence in the Slovakian PM. He lost so has since resigned. It sounds an awful lot like the first vote was just to get rid of an unpopular politician.

Danthus · 12 Oct 2011 at 09:15

scorza said:
On the radio this morning it said that the first vote was tied in with a vote of no confidence in the Slovakian PM. He lost so has since resigned. It sounds an awful lot like the first vote was just to get rid of an unpopular politician.

That is what I understood, a bunch of Slovakians playing wild and loose with the future of Europe.