75 Billion Quid Pumped Into The Economy By The Bank Of England. What If...

[Chicken Runner61]

Yes to both Fighter & Beorhthelm but then my guess is the new guys will increase interest rates (they will have to) Commodities will go through the roof.

The winners will be the bankers who have already taken the money and converted it to assets that will not be destroyed by financial meltdown ie land, property, gold and anything else in that sphere.

The losers will be anyone who saved or set aside assets in banks or pensions.


I now suspect that if the banks fail only savings/bonds held directly with the Government will be honoured. All physical Gold / assets held in Banks will be confiscated by the government and no compensation will be made.

As the old joke goes when they officially deny it will happen - it will happen! Look at Greece they didn't say anything for ages then they (germany & France) said they officially stated (greece) wouldn't default! A week later Greece said they would!

One minute Cameron is saying the problem is the banks are not lending the money - the next he is telling everyone to pay off their credit cards. Surely he knows you can get a 0% balance transfer for 12 months for a 3% fee but go to a bank for an ordinary loan they want 8% or more!

People need to realise that Cameron & Osbourne (and Blair & Brown) have no more economical nous than the average bloke in the street. Its the same whitehall economists that advised both Tory then labour and then tory/libs about the banking system. They might tinker with the public spending budget and interest rates but the real financial clout is with the World and European bankers whose names we don't see in the papers.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

It's highly unlikely that EVERY bank will collapse, what will happen is that banks in countries that are not exposed to the sovereign debt crisis are likely to snap up UK institutions at knock down share prices and retain the profitable part, whilst shedding as much of the liabilities as possible. Which may include a proportion of the workforce.

In that scenario, people with money deposited in the bank concerned won't lose their money. The people who will take the hit are the shareholders ( many of whom will also be on the boards of directors so that is wholly appropriate ).

Surely anybody investing in stocks and shares knows the risk they are taking on. Lloyds Names must realise they are exposing themselves to unlimited liabilites when they are advised to invest in Lloyds of London, but it doesn't stop them doing it. Pension Funds know that the value of shares can go down as well as up.

Anyone who has chosen to put their money into land, property, gold or other commodities won't necessarily be better off either, in a near recession situation there is little liklihood of them being able to profit from these in the short term due to the low growth.

This government has blinkeredly focussed on reducing the public sector deficit and public spending. Unfortunately a substantial part of this spending takes place ultimately with private sector companies who provide the government with the items it purchases, be it a new Fire Engine, a new Eurofighter or a Care Home operator. So the policy actually curtails growth in the private sector as much as it does to help the Treasury.

And yet everyone blames the politicians for this when the buck stops in the boardrooms of the City where the poor investment decisions were made. Now you can argue that the government allowing deregulation gave the banks a free hand to get in to this mess, but ultimately the MD's, CEO's and directors have just as little economic nous as the politicians, which is why giving them yet more money is utter madness.

 

[melias shoes]

It's all too late! We're all going to hell in a handcart.

 

[RexCathedra]

What will happen to my loan debts if the bank system or paper currency collapses?

Your debts are the least of your problems in that event. Your thoughts should be running more to ammunition, canned goods and antibiotics.

£75bn is not that much in the grand scheme of things.

$116 billion is of a ~$2.2 trillion GDP. How much of that actually hits the streets? One pound in 10?

It's a pisshole in the snow.
Anyone who approaches you in the present situation to talk about the economy, and the first two words out of his mouth aren't 'aggregate' and 'demand', knee him in the groin
If the first word out of their mouth is 'hyperinflation', knee him in the groin, twice.

If the first two words out of his or her mouth are 'aggregate demand' and the next four are 'marginal propensity to consume', make them Chancellor of the Fookin' Exchequer. Giving banks more ones and zeroes to pass back and forth between themselves without them ever making it out of a cashpoint and into a High Street till isn't going to do anything

It's not complicated. Your Keynes chappie explained all of this years ago.

Plan B is to persuade Ms. Merkel to threaten the Czechs. If that doesn't do the trick, insist that she invade Poland. That is a form of economic stimulus with a historical record of success, albeit with some unpleasant side effects.