-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="515655" data-time="1442199419">
<div>
<p>Companies do it now. Re employment. House building will increase employment</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>What nonsense. You can't pay for those houses if the people who pay the taxes to pay for them have gone.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="515688" data-time="1442208059">
<div>
<p>What nonsense. You can't pay for those houses if the people who pay the taxes to pay for them have gone.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>But Winger's argument is that you can: you can borrow the money and just never pay it back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In theory he's right, but in practice it's not much different to borrowing money on your credit card to pay your staff's wages, taking advantage of the 0% welcome rate, then when the rate holiday ends getting the balance transferred onto a new credit card with a 0% welcome rate. Then the long-term plan is to make enough someday that you'll be able to pay off whatever credit card you're using at the time so it's all good.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It becomes more difficult if you have to keep paying your staff that way for some time though, but if you can keep the credit card companies from noticing what you're doing, say through a credit agency, it might just work. I don't know why everyone doesn't do it.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="515693" data-time="1442208949">
<div>
<p>But Winger's argument is that you can: you can borrow the money and just never pay it back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In theory he's right, but in practice it's not much different to borrowing money on your credit card to pay your staff's wages, taking advantage of the 0% welcome rate, then when the rate holiday ends getting the balance transferred onto a new credit card with a 0% welcome rate. Then the long-term plan is to make enough someday that you'll be able to pay off whatever credit card you're using at the time so it's all good.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It becomes more difficult if you have to keep paying your staff that way for some time though, but if you can keep the credit card companies from noticing what you're doing, say through a credit agency, it might just work. I don't know why everyone doesn't do it.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Oh that sounds perfectly feasible with no repercussions , why isn't everyone doing that? </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Uk press has been fairly excoriating over the election, not even the Guardian seems to thinks its a great move for the Labour party . This piece here about the future for the party is worth a read , <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11860462/Corbyns-victory-reveals-Labours-revulsion-with-real-voters.html'>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11860462/Corbyns-victory-reveals-Labours-revulsion-with-real-voters.html</a> </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="515693" data-time="1442208949">
<div>
<p>But Winger's argument is that you can: you can borrow the money and just never pay it back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In theory he's right, but in practice it's not much different to borrowing money on your credit card to pay your staff's wages, taking advantage of the 0% welcome rate, then when the rate holiday ends getting the balance transferred onto a new credit card with a 0% welcome rate. Then the long-term plan is to make enough someday that you'll be able to pay off whatever credit card you're using at the time so it's all good.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It becomes more difficult if you have to keep paying your staff that way for some time though, but if you can keep the credit card companies from noticing what you're doing, say through a credit agency, it might just work. I don't know why everyone doesn't do it.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I worked with a dude in the uk who had 20 cards... withdrew cash off 1 card, balance transferred to another card.. repeat til all maxed out.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>stick money (think he had about 150k) into a mortgage offsetting account. pay off min each month.. end of zero percent period close all cards and repeat!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>basically was getting an interest free mortgage. Wingers onto something. You should listen to him.</p> -
Vote tonight and it's going to mean someone's job either way. Someone will step away from politics tonight. <br><br>
The key is Julie Bishop. She carries the WA block and right now with the Canning by-election this Saturday, they are a very influential bunch right now. <br><br>
Some conservatives in the Liberal Party cannot stand Turnbull, but they know Shorten wouldn't stand a chance against Turnbull. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="515693" data-time="1442208949">
<div>
<p>But Winger's argument is that you can: you can borrow the money and just never pay it back.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In theory he's right, <span style="color:#ff0000;">but in practice it's not much different to borrowing money on your credit card</span> to pay your staff's wages, taking advantage of the 0% welcome rate, then when the rate holiday ends getting the balance transferred onto a new credit card with a 0% welcome rate. Then the long-term plan is to make enough someday that you'll be able to pay off whatever credit card you're using at the time so it's all good.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It becomes more difficult if you have to keep paying your staff that way for some time though, but if you can keep the credit card companies from noticing what you're doing, say through a credit agency, it might just work. I don't know why everyone doesn't do it.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This is the mistake that many economists also make.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>They see a monetary sovereign Govt like the UK as no different to a household or company (or non monetary sovereign Govt like Greece,Spain or the UK in the ECM etc). This mistake could destroy the West. Due to ignorance about money and debt</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Debt is needed. To back money. To back our saving as we age. And to back company profit. Otherwise one companies profit is offset by other companies losses. This is just an unavoidable fact of life. And at present individuals have taken on almost all the debt they can. There is a limit to how much more we can all pay for property. Or debt students or companies etc can take on. So the only option is monetary sovereign Govts who can take on debt without limit. (despite what some ignorant economists and politicians believe). The question is how best to do this so we all benefit not just a few without creating inflation or currency depreciation.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="WillieTheWaiter" data-cid="515699" data-time="1442210567">
<div>
<p>I worked with a dude in the uk who had 20 cards... withdrew cash off 1 card, balance transferred to another card.. repeat til all maxed out.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>stick money (think he had about 150k) into a mortgage offsetting account. pay off min each month.. end of zero percent period close all cards and repeat!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>basically was getting an interest free mortgage. Wingers onto something. You should listen to him.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>But I'm not suggesting this for anything or anyone but monetary sovereign Govts. Not even for Greece in the Euro or any country that does not have a floating currency</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Why do people find it so hard today to differentiate between a MS Govt in a stable country to an irresponsible person. And also believe that people taking on debt to buy or build a valuable asset is ok or even a smart move (like a house) but not a big government doing likewise.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="515655" data-time="1442199419">
<div>
<p>Companies do it now. Re employment. House building will increase employment</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>You are right on this. The massive burst in house building over a 2 or 3 year period will make a shitton of jobs. For that 2 or 3 year period. You can't just keep building them forever... not unless you build them REALLY badley</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And as there is a shortage of builders in the UK they will be Polish, Irish, NZ builders. Who will send their money home. And then leave. And the million new houses will depress the property market. At a time of all time low mortage rates when people are barely able to get remortaged (many are not) because they don't have enough equity. So that policy means upwards of a million people have their houses repossed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So the net effect of rapidly building a million homes is a boost to the economy of Poland, and crashing the UK housing market.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Add to this the demonisation of the rich meaning the other thing propping up UK housing (with the zero rates) being massive foreign & buy to let ownership of flats gets pulled too. Now I'm very much in favour of that one being pulled, but gradually (as Osbourne is actually doing now). As it will crash the South East - the one bit of the UK housing market that hasn't crashed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then come onto higher taxes for the rich. The great thing about being rich is you can choose where you want to live. So you can just move. To Switzerland, to Singapore, to New York... so they can go, good ridance to them. And also good ridance to the 30% of HMRC revenue the 1% at the top pay. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>So now we've crashed housing in the south east, cut tax revenue by 30% (ignoring the jobs they created & took with them). So we will just print money to take care of that, Which is fine as we never have to repay that. But actual government debt issued to 3rd parties we DO have to repay, and we do have to pay interest on that debt.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And the way that works is if your country is an inflationry nightmare that is devaluing its currency every 5 minutes, you need to pay MUCH higher interest. Lets not even mention Argentina or Greece. NZ can issue 10 year debt at 3.2%. The UK can curently issue at 1.8%. Thats because Sterling is a better bet that NZ $. (remember NZ has a rockstar economy & the UK is tied to Europe & has issued £300bn in QE). So the cost of any issued debt will go up. And for businesses because they are issuing in GBP, and because the UK is printing cash & devaluing GBP, the rate they have to pay goes up.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So for example, Thames Water is the company that supplies water services in London. At the moment, because sterling is stable, it can issue debt at about 6%. So to rebuild the London pipes it can issue £500m in bonds, at 6%. Upgrade pipes, which cuts leaks & makes long term water rates go down (tho' it'll obviously pass on the 6% cost to costomers). But now Sterling is in free fall because of excessive (and never ending) QE, so they can't get debt at 6%, they get it at 10%. Which they pass directly on. Boosting inflation & hitting every household in London. Thats only an issue for Thames Water tho' - as they obviously can't relocate to Italy, or Germany. Most companies can do exactly that. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>So all in all looking good for the UK with Corbyn in charge. Which he never will be.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Tho' alas we will also miss out on Tony Blair being charged with war crimes (which Corbyn put forward)... That would have been fucking great. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="515726" data-time="1442223606">
<div>
<p>You are right on this. The massive burst in house building over a 2 or 3 year period will make a shitton of jobs. For that 2 or 3 year period. You can't just keep building them forever... not unless you build them REALLY badley</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And as there is a shortage of builders in the UK they will be Polish, Irish, NZ builders. Who will send their money home. And then leave. And the million new houses will depress the property market. At a time of all time low mortage rates when people are barely able to get remortaged (many are not) because they don't have enough equity. So that policy means upwards of a million people have their houses repossed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So the net effect of rapidly building a million homes is a boost to the economy of Poland, and crashing the UK housing market.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Add to this the demonisation of the rich meaning the other thing propping up UK housing (with the zero rates) being massive foreign & buy to let ownership of flats gets pulled too. Now I'm very much in favour of that one being pulled, but gradually (as Osbourne is actually doing now). As it will crash the South East - the one bit of the UK housing market that hasn't crashed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then come onto higher taxes for the rich. The great thing about being rich is you can choose where you want to live. So you can just move. To Switzerland, to Singapore, to New York... so they can go, good ridance to them. And also good ridance to the 30% of HMRC revenue the 1% at the top pay. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>So now we've crashed housing in the south east, cut tax revenue by 30% (ignoring the jobs they created & took with them). So we will just print money to take care of that, Which is fine as we never have to repay that. But actual government debt issued to 3rd parties we DO have to repay, and we do have to pay interest on that debt.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And the way that works is if your country is an inflationry nightmare that is devaluing its currency every 5 minutes, you need to pay MUCH higher interest. Lets not even mention Argentina or Greece. NZ can issue 10 year debt at 3.2%. The UK can curently issue at 1.8%. Thats because Sterling is a better bet that NZ $. (remember NZ has a rockstar economy & the UK is tied to Europe & has issued £300bn in QE). So the cost of any issued debt will go up. And for businesses because they are issuing in GBP, and because the UK is printing cash & devaluing GBP, the rate they have to pay goes up.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So for example, Thames Water is the company that supplies water services in London. At the moment, because sterling is stable, it can issue debt at about 6%. So to rebuild the London pipes it can issue £500m in bonds, at 6%. Upgrade pipes, which cuts leaks & makes long term water rates go down (tho' it'll obviously pass on the 6% cost to costomers). But now Sterling is in free fall because of excessive (and never ending) QE, so they can't get debt at 6%, they get it at 10%. Which they pass directly on. Boosting inflation & hitting every household in London. Thats only an issue for Thames Water tho' - as they obviously can't relocate to Italy, or Germany. Most companies can do exactly that. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>So all in all looking good for the UK with Corbyn in charge. Which he never will be.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Tho' alas we will also miss out on Tony Blair being charged with war crimes (which Corbyn put forward)... That would have been fucking great. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Please get it right. People do not send money home. They would use £s to buy NZ$'s. The money stays in the UK. This is very different to Euro countries. And its one of the keys to understanding why countries like Greece are in the shit</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And what is so wrong with housing that people can afford to live in without being burdened with massive debt for life. Or do you want prices to keep on going up and up due to future massive shortages</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And why go the irrelevant Greece and Argentina route. Greece does not have their own currency so is no different to a company. Argentina is a different country to the UK but he's recent articles on this country (not when they were fixed to the US dollar and issued bonds denominated in US dollars = like Greece)</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2012/10/09/mmt-argentina-and-views-on-inflation/'>http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2012/10/09/mmt-argentina-and-views-on-inflation/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2015/06/argentina-at-a-crossroads/'>http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2015/06/argentina-at-a-crossroads/</a></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="515728" data-time="1442224100">
<div>
<p>Please get it right. People do not send money home. They would use £s to buy NZ$'s. The money stays in the UK</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This is very different to Euro countries. And its one of the keys to understanding why countries like Greece are in the shit</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And what is so wrong with housing that people can afford to live in without being burdened with massive debt for life. Or do you want prices to keep on going up and up due to future massive shortages</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Well first money is just a unit of exchange, so when they send money home what they are actually doing is exchanging one unit of exchange for another. Which they then spend. So if I earn GBP, exchange it for NZD, go to NZ & spend it, its not then helping the UK economy. Unless you can explain how it is... to me it looks like all its doing in the UK is changing the currency reserves.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Second, yes, its lovely if people can live in affordable housing. The problem there is to get affordable housing you have to reduce the current value of housing in the UK. EG the average house in London costs 300k. Thats not affordable, so you hit buy to let, you build a million homes, that crashes the property market. Now the homes that were worth 300k & worth 200k. Which is awesome. Unless you owned a home.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>We already have at least 750,000 people in the UK on interest only mortgages, unable to remortage because they don't have enough equity. And because they can't remortage they are paying the variable rate, and thats more or less doable because UK rates are at the lowest they have ever been. When those rates go up they are fucked. So its a race for those folks to save for a deposit, or for their house to go up in value, so that when rates rise they can remortage with equity. And you want to crash prices.... </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Maybe it needs to be simpler.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Millions of people in the UK live in houses with 10% equity or less. They are barely making payments <em>with rates in the shitter</em> - interest in the UK depends on equity, you have 10% equity you might pay 5%, 25% equity 3%, 40% equity 2%. You want to wipe out their equity. So they will drop onto the variable rate - 6%. Then rates go up (they can only go up). And literally millions of UK house owners default. </p> -
No Gollum no, Winger and Corbyn are right . Despite the fact the hard left socialist governments pretty much always lead to a financial meltdown of varying proportions and usually end up with years of hardship trying to dig themselves out of holes people like Muldoon created you are wrong .<br><br>
Things are cool in Venezuala right now aren't they? No how about Greece? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="515741" data-time="1442227404">
<div>
<p>No Gollum no, Winger and Corbyn are right . Despite the fact the hard left socialist governments pretty much always lead to a financial meltdown of varying proportions and usually end up with years of hardship trying to dig themselves out of holes people like Muldoon created you are wrong .<br><br>
Things are cool in Venezuala right now aren't they? No how about Greece?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The neo-liberal, uncaring, stuff the poor as long as its not me hard right can't help themselves.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Labeling slightly left of center policies hard left. And automatically comparing a MS Govt running economically sensible deficits even to invest in valuable assets to a country like Greece etc when this comparison is completely and utterly meaningless.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="515741" data-time="1442227404">
<div>
<p>No Gollum no, Winger and Corbyn are right . Despite the fact the hard left socialist governments pretty much always lead to a financial meltdown of varying proportions and usually end up with years of hardship trying to dig themselves out of holes people like Muldoon created you are wrong .<br><br>
Things are cool in Venezuala right now aren't they? No how about Greece?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Venezuala & Greece (and Argentina) are extremes so probably not good examples & it just gives ammo to those who want to defend it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The likes of Spain now or even NZ in the early 80's are probably better, state home building, massive deficits, infratructure projects to create jobs. Leading to devaluation, 30% of the top earners & highest educated leaving, total destruction of entire sector. In Spain massive home building programs have destroyed the housing market, the top earners all migrated overseas etc.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Both countries turned it round (Spain is not there yet), but only by bringing in very market orientated policies that hurt like fuck (see the farmers in the late 80's in NZ) & reversing everything done.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The compartison with Greece would be pre current morons they were starting to turn it round & needed say €50b in bailout. After 6 months of lefty nutters they are still having to go with the same policies (everything they campaigned on has gone), but everyone who could has left, their banks are all fully underwater & the bailout need to be €80bn. </p> -
<p>Meanwhile in Australian politics, the Liberal Party - or at least, those who want to win the next election and maybe look somewhat human - are trying to fuck Tony Abbott's shit up again.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Second spill this year. They look remarkably like Labor right now, who knifed KRudd then knifed J-Lard to bring KRudd back in a losing race within the space of one term.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In any case, Abbott is a gormless fluffybunny who has stood on the shoulders (or feet) of other gormless fluffybunnys, and has only himself to blame. My opinion of course, but I think Malcolm Turnbull is at least intelligent enough to see which way the wind is blowing.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>More importantly from my personal point of view: he supports a carbon tax, gay marriage, and other policies that I think are forward-looking. Who knows? He might even get renewables back on the agenda after Abbott called wind turbines "ugly" and wandered off to warm himself around a fire built of coal and dolphin foetuses.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not that most people give a shit, but the guys over at Wikipedia have been having a laugh with it:</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="515753" data-time="1442230366">
<div>
<p>Meanwhile in Australian politics, the Liberal Party - or at least, those who want to win the next election and maybe look somewhat human - are trying to fuck Tony Abbott's shit up again.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Second spill this year. They look remarkably like Labor right now, who knifed KRudd then knifed J-Lard to bring KRudd back in a losing race within the space of one term.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In any case, Abbott is a gormless fluffybunny who has stood on the shoulders (or feet) of other gormless fluffybunnys, and has only himself to blame. My opinion of course, but I think Malcolm Turnbull is at least intelligent enough to see which way the wind is blowing.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>More importantly from my personal point of view: he supports a carbon tax, gay marriage, and other policies that I think are forward-looking. Who knows? He might even get renewables back on the agenda after Abbott called wind turbines "ugly" and wandered off to warm himself around a fire built of coal and dolphin foetuses.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not that most people give a shit, but the guys over at Wikipedia have been having a laugh with it:</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Wind turbines are ugly. And an unbelievably poor option for Aust. Solar would be far and away better for Aust if you want to move down the unreliable expensive energy route. And reject nuclear as the only sensible option if a few extra PPM of CO2 is the massive issue that some believe.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And I'm surprised you are so in favor of even more and a NEW tax NTA.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">Solar would be far and away better for Aust if you want to move down the unreliable expensive energy route.</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> :think: I'm betting you think Elon Musk is some kind of upstart kid who got into the red cordial, too...</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">And reject nuclear as the only sensible option if a few extra PPM of CO2 is the massive issue that <strike>some</strike> <strong>over 95% of qualified scientistic experts</strong> believe.</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Fixed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And I'm not taking nuclear off the table. It will be important for space exploration. But for our domestic needs, solar combined with a suitably distributed storage array will do the job.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">And I'm surprised you are so in favor of even more and a NEW tax NTA.</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>We're living on this planet like we've got another one to go to. Until we fix that problem, yeah I'll pay my share to make sure my kids can have kids without a resource war breaking out.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As long as the tax system is streamlined I'm happy to go with it.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="515757" data-time="1442231951">
<div>
<p> :think: I'm betting you think Elon Musk is some kind of upstart kid who got into the red cordial, too...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Fixed.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And I'm not taking nuclear off the table. It will be important for space exploration. But for our domestic needs, solar combined with a suitably distributed storage array will do the job.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>We're living on this planet like we've got another one to go to. Until we fix that problem, yeah I'll pay my share to make sure my kids can have kids without a resource war breaking out.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As long as the tax system is streamlined I'm happy to go with it.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This EOW due to CO2 is boring now NTA. Worse than debating end of world religious devotees. So please move it to the Aussie thread. Or start another the world of ending, think of the kids, climate thread</p>
British Politics