The british budget.. Are you ready for tomorrow?

[Oscar Namechange]

Tomorrow we will hear Alistair Darling's pre-budget statement.

Some speculators predict this could be the basis of a winer election campaign.

The basics of the budget will be:

Up to £20 billion in tax cuts for lower paid workers. This will be paid for NOT by raising taxes for all as the opposition claimed but by the shock announcement that Gordon Brown is to tax the rich to pay for the big give away.

Workers earning over over £150,000 a year will pay for tax cuts.

VAT to be adjusted for the first time since 'Norman Lamont' raised the 15% to 17.5%.

It's expected that Gordon Brown is to cut the 17.5% back to 15% urging other EU countrie's to follow his plan.

Wealthy slapped with 45p tax rate | The Sun |News

David Cameron is stuffed politicaly. If he opposes Gordon Brown's tax on the rich, he will be seen as wanting to tax struggling bussiness's and familie's instead.

What do you expect from the budget?

[gmc]

oscar;1067619 wrote: Tomorrow we will hear Alistair Darling's pre-budget statement.

Some speculators predict this could be the basis of a winer election campaign.

The basics of the budget will be:

Up to £20 billion in tax cuts for lower paid workers. This will be paid for NOT by raising taxes for all as the opposition claimed but by the shock announcement that Gordon Brown is to tax the rich to pay for the big give away.

Workers earning over over £150,000 a year will pay for tax cuts.

VAT to be adjusted for the first time since 'Norman Lamont' raised the 15% to 17.5%.

It's expected that Gordon Brown is to cut the 17.5% back to 15% urging other EU countrie's to follow his plan.

Wealthy slapped with 45p tax rate | The Sun |News

David Cameron is stuffed politicaly. If he opposes Gordon Brown's tax on the rich, he will be seen as wanting to tax struggling bussiness's and familie's instead.

What do you expect from the budget?


F__k all. Gordon brown is like one of those sad people you see standing at traffic lights waving on the traffic every time the lights change kidding themselves it's them that are keeping things moving when in reality they haven't a clue what is going on. It's given a massive hand out to the banks without the common sense to get rid of the management responsible for the **** up or even impose any kind of conditions on it as a consequence of which the banks are looking to their bottom line and cutting back on lending to small businesses first as an easy target to go for. Had anything from your bank recently as to how they are changing their conditions to allow then to withdraw agreed overdrafts with only a months notice? Small business then tough ****. ( I am one but luckily with no overdraft or need for one to work with ) He's doing nothing to stop repossessions-( did you know they can evict you after only two missed payments on your mortgage?) or curb those lenders that are taking every opportunity to repossesses and clear their mortgage book. He's handed lloyds TSB virtual control of the british mortgage market-wonder how big a donation they are giving to labour coffers which they need as membership haemorrhaging so fast they'll cease to exist as a viable political party sooner rather than later.

Used to think Maggie would go down as one of the worst PM's in British history but I think TB and now GB will win that one.

GORDON IS A MORON.

[Victoria]

GORDON IS A MORON.


OOhhh... GMC its been a long time since I heard that song ..jilted John.. maybe you could re-jig the words and re-release it? That would bring in a bit of extra cash LOL

[gmc]

Victoria;1067672 wrote: GORDON IS A MORON.


OOhhh... GMC its been a long time since I heard that song ..jilted John.. maybe you could re-jig the words and re-release it? That would bring in a bit of extra cash LOL


been beaten to it

YouTube - Gordon Brown 'Jilted Gordon'

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1067669 wrote: F__k all. Gordon brown is like one of those sad people you see standing at traffic lights waving on the traffic every time the lights change kidding themselves it's them that are keeping things moving when in reality they haven't a clue what is going on. It's given a massive hand out to the banks without the common sense to get rid of the management responsible for the **** up or even impose any kind of conditions on it as a consequence of which the banks are looking to their bottom line and cutting back on lending to small businesses first as an easy target to go for. Had anything from your bank recently as to how they are changing their conditions to allow then to withdraw agreed overdrafts with only a months notice? Small business then tough ****. ( I am one but luckily with no overdraft or need for one to work with ) He's doing nothing to stop repossessions-( did you know they can evict you after only two missed payments on your mortgage?) or curb those lenders that are taking every opportunity to repossesses and clear their mortgage book. He's handed lloyds TSB virtual control of the british mortgage market-wonder how big a donation they are giving to labour coffers which they need as membership haemorrhaging so fast they'll cease to exist as a viable political party sooner rather than later.

Used to think Maggie would go down as one of the worst PM's in British history but I think TB and now GB will win that one.

GORDON IS A MORON.


GORDON BROWN 1

SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY 0

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

[el guapo]

THE SUMS DONT ADD UP

we will have to find all this extra at some stage

vat cuts only for a year

45% tax rate only after 2011

national insurance up

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068148 wrote: THE SUMS DONT ADD UP

we will have to find all this extra at some stage

vat cuts only for a year

45% tax rate only after 2011

national insurance up


The sums add up guopo and if they didn't then Gordon would have fiddled them so they did. :yh_rotfl

He can't impose the 5% tax increase on the rich as the Labour government pledged they would not do so under this four years. He has simply stuck by his word. That's why the increases will kick in 2010 and not now.

We, will not have to find this any where. The government has also invested heavilly into the infrastructure creating more jobs. More jobs... more peeps paying tax... the books balance.

National Insurence would have gone up anyway, it was one thing that was totaly unavoidable and if it was a Tory Government, it would have been increased long ago at a far higher rate.

[el guapo]

oscar;1068155 wrote: The sums add up guopo and if they didn't then Gordon would have fiddled them so they did. :yh_rotfl

He can't impose the 5% tax increase on the rich as the Labour government pledged they would not do so under this four years. He has simply stuck by his word. That's why the increases will kick in 2010 and not now.

We, will not have to find this any where. The government has also invested heavilly into the infrastructure creating more jobs. More jobs... more peeps paying tax... the books balance.

National Insurence would have gone up anyway, it was one thing that was totaly unavoidable and if it was a Tory Government, it would have been increased long ago at a far higher rate.


so where is all this money coming from ascar

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068148 wrote: the sums dont add up

we will have to find all this extra at some stage

vat cuts only for a year

45% tax rate only after 2011

national insurance up


gordon brown

the man who saved great britain







8 more years

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068156 wrote: so where is all this money coming from ascar


What money do you refer to my little pickled egg?

Do you mean all the lovely money that Great Gordon has given away today??

GORDON BROWN

SCOTTISH AND SEXY

[el guapo]

yes all that money that the country cant afford

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068159 wrote: yes all that money that the country cant afford


It's called 'Saudi' fiscal injection :yh_rotfl



GORGEOUS GORDON

BRILLIANT BROWN

CAMA- - MORON

[el guapo]

oscar;1068162 wrote: It's called 'Saudi' fiscal injection :yh_rotfl



GORGEOUS GORDON

BRILLIANT BROWN

CAMA- - MORON


you must be gordon browns mum she is the only one who thinks he is great

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068164 wrote: you must be gordon browns mum she is the only one who thinks he is great


Excuse me you little cheeky monkey. I am far too young to be Gordon's mum. :yh_rotfl

[el guapo]

oscar;1068178 wrote: Excuse me you little cheeky monkey. I am far too young to be Gordon's mum. :yh_rotfl


come on tell the truth u are gordens mum or are you secretly ashamed of him

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068181 wrote: come on tell the truth u are gordens mum or are you secretly ashamed of him


If i were Gordon's mum, I'd have no chance of ******* him if ever i got the chance :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

[el guapo]

oscar;1068185 wrote: If i were Gordon's mum, I'd have no chance of ******* him if ever i got the chance :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


well i agree he wants ***king:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

[Oscar Namechange]

barman;1068179 wrote: oscar, one of the all time great wind up merchants, you little devil.

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


who me??????????????



g gorgeous

o outstanding

r reliable

d dynamic

o over-powering

n noble

b brilliant

r rugged

o outragous

w wonderful

n notorius

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068189 wrote: well i agree he wants ***king:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


YES, BUT WHAT I HAD IN MIND WOULD BE ENTIRELY DIFFERNT TO YOURS:yh_rotfl

(Got to go for a while, I'm a celeb is on tv)



GORDON BROWN

NEVER A FROWN

WITH GORDON BROWN

[el guapo]

oscar;1068192 wrote: YES, BUT WHAT I HAD IN MIND WOULD BE ENTIRELY DIFFERNT TO YOURS:yh_rotfl

(Got to go for a while, I'm a celeb is on tv)



GORDON BROWN

NEVER A FROWN

WITH GORDON BROWN


nothing but a frown with gordon brown

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068196 wrote: nothing but a frown with gordon brown


GORDON BROWN

TEXTURE LIKE SUN

LAY'S ME DOWN

WITH MY MIND HE RUNS

THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT

NO NEED TO FIGHT

NEVER A FROWN

WITH GORDON BROWN



(Curtesy of The Strangler's)

[el guapo]

oscar;1068201 wrote: GORDON BROWN

TEXTURE LIKE SUN

LAY'S ME DOWN

WITH MY MIND HE RUNS

THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT

NO NEED TO FIGHT

NEVER A FROWN

WITH GORDON BROWN



(Curtesy of The Strangler's)


yea ya right 30 yrs out of date

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068205 wrote: yea ya right 30 yrs out of date


Wht don't you listen to the original and some decent music?

YouTube - Golden Brown, The Stranglers.

Curtesy of the Stranglers

[el guapo]

oscar;1068223 wrote: Wht don't you listen to the original and some decent music?

YouTube - Golden Brown, The Stranglers.

Curtesy of the Stranglers


ya boring me now

[Oscar Namechange]

el guapo;1068224 wrote: ya boring me now


What it sunbeam, one of those Stranglers is now a 13th dan in karate. And he lives near you :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

[Galbally]

Okay, could we dispense with the 6 inch high letters for a minute and lets talk some numbers.

This budget is based on the idea that they are going to essentially throw a large amount of borrowed money at the economy, allowing the books to go to hell, (in other words allowing their borrowing to go way over what they can raise in tax for a while). They hope that by reducing VAT and all of that, they will stimulate demand, and keep the economy afloat or at least stave off the worst of what they forsee as being a nasty, but very short recession, ending in the middle of next year. Once the recession ends, they will increase taxes by a significant amount to get the books balanced by 2016.

Okay, so far so good.



Here is the problem.



Almost no one thinks that there is any likelihood that the global economy is going to start recovering in 7 months time, from what is an absolute catastrophe in global financial systems, and now what is turning into a simultaneous global recession, perhaps even a depression. It is certainly starting to look that way in the US. So how the British government thinks that the economy will be actually growing in the second half of 2009, and then strongly in 2010 seems like very wishful thinking to me.

This means that all the calculations that the borrowing are based on will be wrong, and that not only will they be borrowing the massive sums already announced, they will end up running much much higher borrowings as tax revenues are not going to recover in the ways that they have planned based on this (rather optimistic) vision of growth in the near future.

In that case you will have a situation whereby Britain could still be in a deep recession by the end of 2011-12, it may have borrowings of 80-90 percent of GDP, it will have a very low level of private savings, huge personal debts, a collapsed property market, 3 million unemployed, and a flight of capital out of Sterling based bonds and equities. That may cause Britain, quite frankly, to go bankrupt.

Thats the scale of this gamble. If it pays off, Gordon Brown will rightly be called a hero, if not, then Britain will have to call in the IMF and face economic ruin for a generation.

[Accountable]

It sounds like both our gov'ts are trying to put out a housefire by smothering it in paper.

[Oscar Namechange]

galbally;1068284 wrote: okay, could we dispense with the 6 inch high letters for a minute and lets talk some numbers.

This budget is based on the idea that they are going to essentially throw a large amount of borrowed money at the economy, allowing the books to go to hell, (in other words allowing their borrowing to go way over what they can raise in tax for a while). They hope that by reducing vat and all of that, they will stimulate demand, and keep the economy afloat or at least stave off the worst of what they forsee as being a nasty, but very short recession, ending in the middle of next year. Once the recession ends, they will increase taxes by a significant amount to get the books balanced by 2016.

Okay, so far so good.



Here is the problem.



Almost no one thinks that there is any likelihood that the global economy is going to start recovering in 7 months time, from what is an absolute catastrophe in global financial systems, and now what is turning into a simultaneous global recession, perhaps even a depression. It is certainly starting to look that way in the us. So how the british government thinks that the economy will be actually growing in the second half of 2009, and then strongly in 2010 seems like very wishful thinking to me.

This means that all the calculations that the borrowing are based on will be wrong, and that not only will they be borrowing the massive sums already announced, they will end up running much much higher borrowings as tax revenues are not going to recover in the ways that they have planned based on this (rather optimistic) vision of growth in the near future.

In that case you will have a situation whereby britain could still be in a deep recession by the end of 2011-12, it may have borrowings of 80-90 percent of gdp, it will have a very low level of private savings, huge personal debts, a collapsed property market, 3 million unemployed, and a flight of capital out of sterling based bonds and equities. That may cause britain, quite frankly, to go bankrupt.

Thats the scale of this gamble. If it pays off, gordon brown will rightly be called a hero, if not, then britain will have to call in the imf and face economic ruin for a generation.


6 inch high letters........... Who me??

[Oscar Namechange]

Accountable;1068288 wrote: It sounds like both our gov'ts are trying to put out a housefire by smothering it in paper.


There is no doubt that the borrowing is a gamble and naturally Brown has his critic's.

Tony Blair ruled that the rich would not be hit under the four year term. Brown has simply kept his word which is why the hike on taxing the rich to pay for tax cuts of immediate effect for lower income earners, can not kick in until 2010.

No, the books are not going to balance until approx 2012, true.

Time and time again on here, i ask my fellow countrymen for an alternative solution other than fiscal injection yet i recieve little back.

There is no alternative when all things are considered.

Without boring you with the 'Brown' recovery plan,

From 2010 anyone earning over £150,000 year will pay 45% on the £1 tax while immidiate tax cuts apply for lower income sector.

Value added tax has been reduced by 2.5% which will immediately affect the price of consumer goods.

Interests rates have been slashed and although some lenders have been slow to pass these savings on to borrowers, Brown has threatened legal action against them. One bank this week froze interest rates on over-drafts.

Massive £ billion injection into the infrastructure such as health, education and transport creating a £ multi billion package of new jobs.

Three months grace for home-owners who fall behind with mortgage payments.

Opposition to block credit card companie's re-possessing homes for debt under £25,000.

The only alternative to this would be to reduce borrowing when infact Gordon Brown in his time as Chancellor under Blair, borrowed the least amount of money than any other EU or free country.

If if were not for borrowing, the way forward would be to raise tax on all, hurting already struggling small bussiness's and familie's. It would also mean certainly cut-backs in health and education and the loss of far more jobs.

It is a budget today of fiscal injection to kick start the economy. From what i have seen, the shops are heaving and not just due to Christmas. There is a feeling of hope in the country. Folk are not dumb, they know this money has to be re-paid but if it staves off a general slump now, the economy can be kick-started into recovery long term.

[Accountable]

oscar;1068290 wrote: Time and time again on here, i ask my fellow countrymen for an alternative solution other than fiscal injection yet i recieve little back.

There is no alternative when all things are considered.
I don't understand why you, and we, don't simply allow the companies to fail. The gov't will save tons and won't have to raise taxes at all. The failed companies will make room for smarter, leaner, more innovative businesses. The pain may be sharp, but nowhere near as prolonged.

[Oscar Namechange]

Accountable;1068346 wrote: I don't understand why you, and we, don't simply allow the companies to fail. The gov't will save tons and won't have to raise taxes at all. The failed companies will make room for smarter, leaner, more innovative businesses. The pain may be sharp, but nowhere near as prolonged.


You have raised a very good point there.

On another thread, galbally mentioned the collapse of one of our High Street giants, 'Woolworths', and the loss of jobs. His trend as always seemed to be blaming the government.

When i replied to his post, i basically said 'tough' to Woolworth's. This is a store that is just one example here. For a generation is was the leading high street chain with healthy profits. Until, it diversified to compete with other high street giants that really it shouldn't have. It went into a price war with department stores when really, they could not compete. they borrowed extensively to the tune of £35 million and now i am supposed to feel bad because they have gone tits up? Well, i don't.

While Gordon Brown is talking about saving folks homes from re-possession.. fine..

The businesses that are likely to go under are no different from the greedy neighbour who has spent the plastic, got 4 cars on hire purchase, re-mortgaged and now can't pay it back.

My brother and other immediate family have their own businesses and sorry if this sounds smug, but they don't owe huge amounts of money and are not facing ruin because of it.

Business expansion is too much, too soon or biting off more than you can chew. What ever it's called, I'm sorry but i don't have much sympathy.

Of course, greedy banks will lend to greedy people. if there were no greedy people, there would be no greedy lenders. One creates the other.

It is not the governments sole blame that people are losing jobs. they are losing their job because their emploer invested badly or borrowed too much under the 'boom or bust' policy. Employee's should be looking for answers from their management, not the government. Why should the government be responsible for reckless borrowing?

It makes me chuckle some-what when Brown is critised for borrowing to kick-start the economy. What do these people think they were doing exactly when they bought their house with a mortgage and even later re-mortgaged?

The truth is, there is plenty of work in Britain. People are too choosey about work these days. They don't want to sweep the roads when we have such a generous benifit system and free health care if you are out of work.

[Galbally]

Actually I am not blaming the government for Woolworths, or the financial crisis at all. Private companies are private companies, I am not in favour of keeping businesses that have destroyed themselves through incompetence or greed to be kept going with public money at all. Thats public money, it shouldn't be used to prop up private companies.

I actually think that where the government are at fault is in firstly allowing things such as massive banks that are of national importance, to be run in a manner that undermines the state, then when they do that to simply rush in and prop them up using untold billions of your borrowed money, that you will have to pay back with interest, through taxation.

What should happen in that instance is that if a bank is about to collapse the bank can be bought out by the government, its executive class, and board of directors summarily dismissed, a new team put in for 5 years under public ownership or until it makes the money back for the public that was spend. Then they can think about selling it off again, while insuring the rules of banking are such that you can't get into this situation again. That will teach future bank officials a lesson against being arrogant idiots.

The fact that most of the people who caused this total calamity are not only still in their jobs, they are looking for bonuses, and trying to get new jobs advising us how to get out of it is ridiculous and disgusting.

Similarly for companies like Woolworth and Tesco, and GM and Microsoft, if the destroy themselves through bad management or greed, I certainly don't advocate propping up the rotten system with hard earned tax so these idiots can do it again. No one else gets that kind of let off in life. It just shows you that if you are so ingrained into the system as they are, you can essentially do whatever you want, and if you mess up? They change the rules! Thats not acceptable. At the moment with neither have Capitalism or Socialism, we have the worst of both worlds.

[spot]

There's slightly confused thinking there about saving companies discussed in terms of saving big companies. I watched the debate, I didn't see any offer to save big companies. What I saw was an offer to keep small companies from bankruptcy during the period of low turnover. It they posted profits during the last three years and they don't make one this year they can claim proportionately up to a maximum of £50,000 tax rebate to keep themselves afloat. It won't save Woolworths but it'll save thousands of firms with ten or twenty staff, together with all the associated jobs. It's a skillful application of targeted government aid. I think he ought to have set his limit at a half million pounds to be effective, I'm not sure why he cut it so low having had such a good idea in the first place.

The reason it's not propping up inefficient firms is that their low turnover is nothing to do with their internal inefficiencies, it's an aspect of the exceptional market conditions. Normal market economics would kill all those firms and turf all those employees out onto the street where there are few equivalent replacement jobs. Tiding them over saves the employees and their families from ruin. I agree there are those capitalists who don't care two hoots whether the employees and their families are ruined and regard it as a natural consequence of trade. The Labour party reflects the desire of the British electorate in caring.

[gmc]

posted by oscar

The businesses that are likely to go under are no different from the greedy neighbour who has spent the plastic, got 4 cars on hire purchase, re-mortgaged and now can't pay it back.

My brother and other immediate family have their own businesses and sorry if this sounds smug, but they don't owe huge amounts of money and are not facing ruin because of it.

Business expansion is too much, too soon or biting off more than you can chew. What ever it's called, I'm sorry but i don't have much sympathy.


Yes it does sound smug. What is happening is that he banks are not proceeding with already agreed business loans. Agreed overdraft limits are being reduced or the whole amount called in at short notice-ask your brother if he has recently received anything from his bank telling him that they are amending the terms of his business account specifically they are taking to themselves the right to call in the whole amount of an overdraft with a month's notice. many businesses need short term bank finance-operating capital- to operate-a contractor that has to lay out on material and wages to complete a contract before he gets paid for instance. A retailer will have bought stock on credit to sell over Christmas, a jeweller for example, if the bank calls in his overdraft before they have had time to sell that is probably him out of business-if he can''t pay his supplier they are in trouble with lay-offs and possibly going out of business Big companies delay paying their small suppliers by a month or two because it makes their cash flow look good but it jeopardises the smaller ones and if the bank is unsympathetic they go to the wall.

If he really wants to help businesses he should force the banks to stop those kind of practices. Make it illegal for large companies not to pay bills on time. We've bailed out the banks but he does nothing to make sure they don't just use the bail out for their own bottom line and bonuses. He's just also guaranteed that we will no longer have a competitive mortgage market by handing one lender the biggest share.

I also run my own business-don't have any borrowing but the people I do business with are beginning to worry because of what the banks are up to. They are already seeing bills not being paid on time or companies that owe them money ceasing to trade and suppliers demanding payment up front for material. Unless your relatives deal only with local or central government sooner or later it is going to hit them as well. Two thirds of all jobs in this country are government linked in some way-it is the other this that finances it all. This idea that we can have a totally service economy was stupid when thatcher first came out with it and it is silly now. Maybe of gordon had regulated the financial services industry properly instead of letting them have a free for all we might not be in such a bad position as we are now. He cannot escape culpability in all of this

GORDON IS A MORON AND DARLING IS A CHARLIE

[Imladris]

It's frightening the level of debt this country is in.



It's worrying trying to run a business at the moment, the banks won't help if you have cashflow hiccups, your creditors don't pay then you're pretty much buggered.



If you've got money put aside for your retirement then the value of your investments keep falling.



Your kids can't even consider getting a mortgage.





And how the hell is increasing the tax on those that earn over £150k going to help? There aren't enough of them to make up the £100billion or whatever it really is that we owe.





I wish I'd emigrated years ago and taken all my money in a suitcase with me.

[spot]

Imladris;1068434 wrote: And how the hell is increasing the tax on those that earn over £150k going to help? There aren't enough of them to make up the £100billion or whatever it really is that we owe.Darling's not trying to pay for all of it from that tax hike, he's paying for some of it with that tax hike. It'll help because it'll go some way toward paying for it.

[Galbally]

But the problem with all this extra borrowing is that the ability for Britain to pay it back is being based on the idea that the British economy will be growing by 3 percent per year again by 2011. Therefore because the economy grows, the tax take will grow, and on top of that they will raise some taxes and start paying back the money until they get back into the black in 2016.

The problem, and I reiterate, is that there is almost no chance that Britains economy is going to be back into growth by the middle of next year; therefore they are going to have to actually continue to increase borrowing just to stand still, that can only end one way. In a bankrupt economy and a collapsed currency.

Now, they may pull it off and I could be wrong, and I really hope they do that, but I just see it as a massive gamble, and for once, I think I actually agree with the Tories, they are right to be making the points they are making.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1068424 wrote: posted by oscar



Yes it does sound smug. What is happening is that he banks are not proceeding with already agreed business loans. Agreed overdraft limits are being reduced or the whole amount called in at short notice-ask your brother if he has recently received anything from his bank telling him that they are amending the terms of his business account specifically they are taking to themselves the right to call in the whole amount of an overdraft with a month's notice.




Sorry to sound smug. My brothers finances are very complex to me. He does not have an over-draft, he has profit only, and he systematically moves money from one high interest rate to another. I do his profit and loss accounts and final balance sheet and have trouble keeping up with this constant moving of money around. He has never been in the red due to this but i have to admit that he is far more qualified than i at when to pull out, where to re-invest his money at the highest rates. Guess that's why he's a millionaire and I'm not.

[Accountable]

Where is all this borrowed money coming from? I assume it's the same place for both of us.

[spot]

Accountable;1068600 wrote: Where is all this borrowed money coming from? I assume it's the same place for both of us.


The government issues securities, anyone who wants a gilt-edged investment that's guaranteed not to fail buys it. Most of the government borrowing is from the country's citizens, quite often by way of investment funds. Some of it's from international investors but most of what's borrowed by the government is lent to it from wealthy individuals who profit from the interest paid. Rich americans tend to buy US government bonds, rich Britons tend to buy UK government bonds. That may be becoming less true but historically it'a accurate and I think it's still true of most of the holdings. I remember seeing a breakdown of national vs international ownership of current US government bonds and most were held within the country.

[Accountable]

spot;1068613 wrote: The government issues securities, anyone who wants a gilt-edged investment that's guaranteed not to fail buys it. Most of the government borrowing is from the country's citizens, quite often by way of investment funds. Some of it's from international investors but most of what's borrowed by the government is lent to it from wealthy individuals who profit from the interest paid. Rich americans tend to buy US government bonds, rich Britons tend to buy UK government bonds. That may be becoming less true but historically it'a accurate and I think it's still true of most of the holdings. I remember seeing a breakdown of national vs international ownership of current US government bonds and most were held within the country.
I'm out of my depth. Wikipedia shows that most of US gov't debt is held by the US gov't. :-2 Next in line is China. Individual investors are pretty far down the list.



Bowing out but still reading.

[Galbally]

spot;1068613 wrote: The government issues securities, anyone who wants a gilt-edged investment that's guaranteed not to fail buys it. Most of the government borrowing is from the country's citizens, quite often by way of investment funds. Some of it's from international investors but most of what's borrowed by the government is lent to it from wealthy individuals who profit from the interest paid. Rich americans tend to buy US government bonds, rich Britons tend to buy UK government bonds. That may be becoming less true but historically it'a accurate and I think it's still true of most of the holdings. I remember seeing a breakdown of national vs international ownership of current US government bonds and most were held within the country.


Here is the killer, the bond market is actually global, and international bond dealers hold large percentages of national bonds and government securities, especially US ones as they are seen (even now) as the safest ones. If you see the bond market turning on the US Government-backed bonds, then that signifies that the bond managers will have decided that the whole game is up. Thats economic meltdown time.

[spot]

Accountable;1068646 wrote: I'm out of my depth. Wikipedia shows that most of US gov't debt is held by the US gov't. :-2


It might help if you show me the paragraph that this relates to - as far as I'm concerned it's a logical impossibility. if the government holds it then it's self-cancelled, it's a bond they can resell perhaps but it's certainly not a debt. It might at most be an interdepartmental budget loan but it's still only an internal book-keeping transfer.

[Galbally]

I have to say as well, that however profligate the British budget may appear to people in the future, it will pale into insignificance beside what they have just announced in the states, another 800 billion on top of the 750 billion about 2 months ago. That brings their spending up to 1.5 trillion trying to rescue collapsed financial institutions and get access to credit restored so people can resume buying rubbish they don't need like there is no tomorrow. These people in charge are literally going to choke the USA in debt, I don't understand why people are not more alarmed. What's next? Running the printing presses all night, and just knocking a few zero's off the dollar when you need 50,000 of the them to buy a loaf of bread??

[Oscar Namechange]

Galbally;1068890 wrote: I have to say as well, that however profligate the British budget may appear to people in the future, it will pale into insignificance beside what they have just announced in the states, another 800 billion on top of the 750 billion about 2 months ago. That brings their spending up to 1.5 trillion trying to rescue collapsed financial institutions and get access to credit restored so people can resume buying rubbish they don't need like there is no tomorrow. These people in charge are literally going to choke the USA in debt, I don't understand why people are not more alarmed. What's next? Running the printing presses all night, and just knocking a few zero's off the dollar when you need 50,000 of the them to buy a loaf of bread??


To accumalate you must speculate

So, what is your government doing to get Ireland out of the shyte??

[Accountable]

spot;1068815 wrote: It might help if you show me the paragraph that this relates to - as far as I'm concerned it's a logical impossibility. if the government holds it then it's self-cancelled, it's a bond they can resell perhaps but it's certainly not a debt. It might at most be an interdepartmental budget loan but it's still only an internal book-keeping transfer.
United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Accountable]

oscar;1068908 wrote: To accumalate you must speculate


Government-sponsored speculation is idiocy. The system is market capitalism, not venture capitalism. We never should have turned down this road. It can't possibly end well.

[spot]

Accountable;1068988 wrote: United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


There are 5,200 words on that page. Even the slightest hint of what you're trying to draw my attention to would improve my chances of following your thought.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... States.gif - if that's where you want me to look - has a higher total for public than for government accounts.

You ignored my point that every government holding of a that same government's bond is an internal book-keeping transaction, not a debt?

[Bryn Mawr]

Accountable;1068988 wrote: United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


OK, the Government held debt comprises the future obligations to pay that the government has entered into - monies they will be forced to pay but which have not fallen due yet.

The public debt is money they have borrowed on the open market to pay their current debts.