FlyTheNest

A haven
It is currently Sat 26 May, 2018 11:34 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 7:33 pm 
Offline
Lord Chancellor

Joined: Sun 29 Nov, 2015 1:24 pm
Posts: 741
Has thanked: 3460 times
Been thanked: 1356 times
During last year's general election, Theresa May argued there was "No magic money tree" to pay for the things some voters wanted. Although she was chided for being unsympathetic to various worthy spending claims, a more fundamental criticism could have been levelled at the Prime Minister: There is indeed a Magic Money Tree!! Since the financial crisis, no less than £435billion of new money has been created through the policy of "quantitative easing", equivalent to a fifth of Britain's annual GDP. In this programme, financial journalist Michael Robinson finds out what happened to this staggering sum of money, and evaluates its effect on the lives of us all.

With the help of expert testimony, Robinson explains how this controversial policy works, effectively creating money at the push of a button. But as he also finds out, the new funds are only indirectly injected into the wider economy, typically through big institutional investors lending to companies. Few of these transactions, it turns out, have involved the kind of 'real world' investment that might be expected to stimulate the productive economy and generate growth. Indeed, almost all of them have been within the financial sector itself, and many people argue that the returns on QE have been astonishingly small.

Moreover, the influx of cash has inflated the price of assets, and led to a relative widening of the gap between rich and poor, which now threatens to upset our economic and political order. Even QE's deliberate objective to lower interest rates has also served to make homes and shares more expensive, while those already holding such assets have seen the greatest benefit. Britain's own 'Magic Money Tree' might have saved the economy from meltdown almost a decade ago, but it seems its many side-effects might have been far less beneficial


8PM R4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pl66b


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 8:37 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4670
Has thanked: 9908 times
Been thanked: 11615 times
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/h ... ssion=true

Quote:
US hospital paid £12.5m of taxpayer cash by Jeremy Hunt to improve British hospitals FAILS safety inspection
Virginia Mason hospital, in Seattle, Washington, was paid the huge sum to teach five NHS trusts how to raise standards

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 9:04 pm 
Offline
Lord Chancellor

Joined: Sun 29 Nov, 2015 1:24 pm
Posts: 741
Has thanked: 3460 times
Been thanked: 1356 times
https://twitter.com/carolinejmolloy/sta ... 7995486208

https://twitter.com/PrivateEyeNews

KPMG strikes again !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 9:35 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
frog222 wrote:
. Even QE's deliberate objective to lower interest rates



That is just flat wrong. Interest rates are at the zlb. Because rates cannot go negative, QE is the nearest monetary policy equivalent. Without QE rates would be below the zlb for longer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 9:41 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5767
Has thanked: 1942 times
Been thanked: 9589 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
frog222 wrote:
. Even QE's deliberate objective to lower interest rates



That is just flat wrong. Interest rates are at the zlb. Because rates cannot go negative, QE is the nearest monetary policy equivalent. Without QE rates would be below the zlb for longer.

What on earth are you talking about?

Lowering interest rates is an objective of QE.

Google it!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 9:54 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5767
Has thanked: 1942 times
Been thanked: 9589 times
Dynamite if true

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardell ... uk-will-be

the-governments-own-brexit-analysis-says-the-uk-will-be

bit of a cliff-hanger there :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3208
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5544 times
Here is a link that tries to explain it simply

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/q/qu ... easing.asp

I will accept that these unconventional policies can have complicated interactions that cannot be easily be written in a simplified format - they may also have contradictory outcomes (and that is the basis of a lot of the tax arguments when people say raising taxes causes a fall in income - I am not saying they are right though).

Unfortunately a lot of these consequences are predicated on people's behaviour (eg for the tax question, the argument is that people will avoid paying or move money) which I think is a dangerous basis as people tend not to always behave as anticipated

What I think is the intention is that the ZLB is a limit that cannot practically be passed and so interest rates cannot go lower (although the Swiss have tried it to weaken the Franc). A way to bring growth when the ZLB is reached is to use QE - so in effect without QE my reading is that there would be a temptation to hold or breach the ZLB to provide stimulus but the law of unintended consequences comes into play.

The thing is Hugo, you reply with such dismissal and arrogance to other people's posts when you have demonstrated time and again you are just, at least, as fallible as the rest of us. The world is complicated and it is very rarely as black and white as you try to make it. Coping with complexity and trying to make a judgement on it an intelligent person makes. The second important thing, that I have had drummed into me as a scientist, is that you have to keep an open mind and accept that you will be proved wrong time and again. To err is to be human. If you cannot maintain an open mind then really you do not have much place on a board such as this

I suggest that if you cannot learn some good manners and humility you should just avoid posting.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:09 pm 
Online
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 9:51 am
Posts: 2246
Has thanked: 5309 times
Been thanked: 5347 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Dynamite if true

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardell ... uk-will-be

the-governments-own-brexit-analysis-says-the-uk-will-be

bit of a cliff-hanger there :lol:

Quote:
This new analysis suggests that there could be opportunity for the UK in agreeing trade deals with non-EU countries and deregulating in areas such as the environment, product standards, and employment law.

However, the analysis also casts doubt on the idea that these benefits would be enough to mitigate the losses to the economy caused by leaving the single market and customs union. Moving away from the existing set of rules and standards would also make it harder to trade with the EU in the future, and would be politically controversial domestically.

One hopes that 'politically controversial' is an understatement.

It's saying that we could trash all our environmental, health and labour protections and still be worse off in trade terms.

_________________
One world, like it or not - John Martyn


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:13 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3208
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5544 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Dynamite if true

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardell ... uk-will-be

the-governments-own-brexit-analysis-says-the-uk-will-be

bit of a cliff-hanger there :lol:



This could be a game-changer...wonder how the nut jobs like Rees-Mogg will react?

If they turn nasty, it could become very nationalistic and be all about sovereignty and immigration again, seeing the economic argument will be difficult to agree - unless they drag Minford from out of his hole again.

Th trouble is, and I know I sound like a broken record, is that any deal such as the EEA will play into the sovereignty-maniacs' hands as we will not have a significant input into new rules and regulations, and definitely no vote or veto.

Labour will have to react to this as well - could this be a step to them changing policy? I wonder if they will be allowed to see it - it would be astonishing if this was kept secret from them or Benn and his committee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:39 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Dynamite if true

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardell ... uk-will-be

the-governments-own-brexit-analysis-says-the-uk-will-be

bit of a cliff-hanger there :lol:



Everyone rational already knows this. It doesn't matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:50 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7317
Has thanked: 731 times
Been thanked: 15933 times
In your opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 10:59 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
In your opinion.



Who else's would it be do you think? Am I chaneling a third person without knowing it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 11:06 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14535
Has thanked: 80736 times
Been thanked: 13379 times
We just don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 11:48 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
citizenJA wrote:
We just don't know.



You think I'm possessed?

But if I am, and as you don't know who I am, why would that matter to you out here in the internet?

Of all the complaints,that I express opinions without adding the words "this is my opinion"is the weirdest. In my opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 29 Jan, 2018 11:49 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14535
Has thanked: 80736 times
Been thanked: 13379 times
Goodnight, everyone
love,
cJA


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], gilsey, Google [Bot], refitman and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group