Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Florio
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:49:00 -
[1]
uh oh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7880189.stm
the implications would be awful tbh.
|
Dau Imperius
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:56:00 -
[2]
Mr Balls?
Yeah that's an uh oh alright mate.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar MasterBlasters Inc. CORPVS DELICTI
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:11:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Dau Imperius Mr Balls?
Yeah that's an uh oh alright mate.
|
IVeige
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:15:00 -
[4]
''Mr Balls, the schools secretary''
oh**** that's Mr Balls, that must be true !
Face it, THEY HAVE NO F****** CLUE WHAT GOING TO HAPEN
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:16:00 -
[5]
why did i never listen said the fool.. because you did not care said the reaper. |
Crackuji
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:24:00 -
[6]
More ridiculous FEAR MONGERING from the BBC
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:39:00 -
[7]
He is an idiot, but what he said here is correct.
|
Epegi Givo
Amarr Demon Theory UNLeashed Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 23:05:00 -
[8]
unemployment has to climb another 20% before it gets as bad. ------------------------------------- My other alt is a Ferrari |
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 23:13:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Epegi Givo unemployment has to climb another 20% before it gets as bad.
It depends which series you are looking at. In the US, U6 is closer to how it was counted back in the 30s, so that measure needs to add "only" another ten percentage points. It would be a massive increase, but it is also looking almost certain. It is similar elsewhere. A lot of underemployed people battling for hours get shoved into a different column and hey presto, it's an economic miracle.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 00:55:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Crackuji More ridiculous FEAR MONGERING from the BBC
Fear sells. |
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 01:38:00 -
[11]
Mr Balls and Downing Street have attempted to play down
balls and downing...
CCP Atlas - The Short Story - "With Quantum Rise, we kind of messed up the performance of the EVE client."
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 04:49:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Epegi Givo unemployment has to climb another 20% before it gets as bad.
Depends who's figures you look at.
Unemployment figures in UK depict only how many are claiming unemployment benefit (Jobseekers Allowance). It does not take into consideration the people getting benefits while on job training schemes, husband and wife households with both unemployed (since only one claims for both), people who are on sickness benefit even though they would still be unemployed if they weren't. Also those who have completed 6 months of unemployment and are now no longer on JSA but Income Support instead are not counted either.
Adding those figures to the existing 2 million or so that they state, it would be closer to 10 million or more. No doubt many countries use similar filtering methods to play down unemployment figures.
|
Florio
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 06:41:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Florio on 10/02/2009 06:41:42
Originally by: Crackuji More ridiculous FEAR MONGERING from the BBC
nope, they're simply reporting what a cabinet minister said.
this economic climate appears to be qualitatively different from the other recessions i've been in, rather than quantitatively different. we do not appear to be just looking at fear, we are looking at an intrinsic structural and global problem. i don't know anyone in the investment industry who isn't ****ting their pants.
in this case, crackuji, i fear the reality Bite will be worse than the media Bark. more and more people, for instance, are talking about severe inflation to come: say goodbye to the value of your cash. |
solidshot
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 08:39:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Cmdr Sy He is an idiot
Just like the rest of the British government then, including the one eyed Scottish idiot that is leading them Signature removed as outside forum rules.Please mail [email protected] for more information.Laurelin |
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 18:30:00 -
[15]
Originally by: solidshot
Originally by: Cmdr Sy He is an idiot
Just like the rest of the British government then, including the one eyed Scottish idiot that is leading them
Don`t just stop at the British government |
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Out of Order
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 18:36:00 -
[16]
Crap like this is what keeps this thing going.
People need to "man up" and quit doing business in fear.
TBH, the unemployment rate here in the states is no where near that of the 30's.... |
Elora Danzik
Caldari Ward-Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 18:39:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: Epegi Givo unemployment has to climb another 20% before it gets as bad.
Depends who's figures you look at.
Unemployment figures in UK depict only how many are claiming unemployment benefit (Jobseekers Allowance). It does not take into consideration the people getting benefits while on job training schemes, husband and wife households with both unemployed (since only one claims for both), people who are on sickness benefit even though they would still be unemployed if they weren't. Also those who have completed 6 months of unemployment and are now no longer on JSA but Income Support instead are not counted either.
Adding those figures to the existing 2 million or so that they state, it would be closer to 10 million or more. No doubt many countries use similar filtering methods to play down unemployment figures.
Exactly, in the US the unemployment number is based on a random telephone sample by the BLS. They ask if you are still seeking employment. IF you answer yes then you are unemployed if no then they simply don't count you.
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 20:11:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge Unemployment figures in UK depict only how many are claiming unemployment benefit (Jobseekers Allowance). It does not take into consideration...
I understand it is also means-tested, which means people with savings considered significant, ie enough to get them by for a few months, are not able to claim. So those who lose their jobs and have a year of expenses set aside (especially if a redundancy payment nudges the scales) will not appear in the figures for a considerable time either. However, that does not change the fact that they are out of work and each household is eating beans on toast and making a negligible contribution to economic activity.
I suspect in each country, what purports to be a measure of unemployment is actually a measure of something else deemed a proxy. But when we get to the depression, everyone will know we have arrived regardless. |
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 22:47:00 -
[19]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 10/02/2009 22:58:21 and all this based on some ahats convincing us that paper they print out of thin air is worth something.. and taking ppls stuff based on them owing them x amount of worthless paper..
and because of all the people agreeing to this system the world can be brought down just cause they don't got however amounts of worthless paper.. or some useless 0's and 1's in a database.
we don't need a new currency, we don't need global id's or rfid chips and a cashless society
and we definately don't need no banks or stock markets or centralized control either..
we need a totally new judicial, political and economic system.. and whatever suggestions the cfr and similar "think tanks" come up with.. they can shove right back up their arse tbqh.
it's time to start over and divide ressources completely evenly, erase all debt, shut down the economic system completely, and build everything up from scratch.. time to take the world down for some much needed maintenance.. cause all that's happening right now is some 0's and 1's being given to the 5% of the people who through lies and deciet control 95% of the assets to the detriment of the rest of the world.. and people are screwing eachother over for the last 5% because of it.
if we don't, and just allow the rich ****suckers to grab all the stuff, we are looking at the end of civilization and a one world government with a world military and police doing the bidding of the elite who grabbed all the stuff on false pretenses hording it from the rest of the peoples of the world.
this |
ReaperOfSly
Gallente Zetsubou Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:04:00 -
[20]
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 10/02/2009 22:58:21 and all this based on some ahats convincing us that paper they print out of thin air is worth something.. and taking ppls stuff based on them owing them x amount of worthless paper..
and because of all the people agreeing to this system the world can be brought down just cause they don't got however amounts of worthless paper.. or some useless 0's and 1's in a database.
we don't need a new currency, we don't need global id's or rfid chips and a cashless society
and we definately don't need no banks or stock markets or centralized control either..
we need a totally new judicial, political and economic system.. and whatever suggestions the cfr and similar "think tanks" come up with.. they can shove right back up their arse tbqh.
it's time to start over and divide ressources completely evenly, erase all debt, shut down the economic system completely, and build everything up from scratch.. time to take the world down for some much needed maintenance.. cause all that's happening right now is some 0's and 1's being given to the 5% of the people who through lies and deciet control 95% of the assets to the detriment of the rest of the world.. and people are screwing eachother over for the last 5% because of it.
if we don't, and just allow the rich ****suckers to grab all the stuff, we are looking at the end of civilization and a one world government with a world military and police doing the bidding of the elite who grabbed all the stuff on false pretenses hording it from the rest of the peoples of the world.
this
It's called a consensus reality. That paper has value because everyone agrees that it does. And for better or worse, we're stuck with it for the time being. ____________________
|
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:08:00 -
[21]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 10/02/2009 22:58:21 and all this based on some ahats convincing us that paper they print out of thin air is worth something.. and taking ppls stuff based on them owing them x amount of worthless paper..
and because of all the people agreeing to this system the world can be brought down just cause they don't got however amounts of worthless paper.. or some useless 0's and 1's in a database.
we don't need a new currency, we don't need global id's or rfid chips and a cashless society
and we definately don't need no banks or stock markets or centralized control either..
we need a totally new judicial, political and economic system.. and whatever suggestions the cfr and similar "think tanks" come up with.. they can shove right back up their arse tbqh.
it's time to start over and divide ressources completely evenly, erase all debt, shut down the economic system completely, and build everything up from scratch.. time to take the world down for some much needed maintenance.. cause all that's happening right now is some 0's and 1's being given to the 5% of the people who through lies and deciet control 95% of the assets to the detriment of the rest of the world.. and people are screwing eachother over for the last 5% because of it.
if we don't, and just allow the rich ****suckers to grab all the stuff, we are looking at the end of civilization and a one world government with a world military and police doing the bidding of the elite who grabbed all the stuff on false pretenses hording it from the rest of the peoples of the world.
this
It's called a consensus reality. That paper has value because everyone agrees that it does. And for better or worse, we're stuck with it for the time being.
yeah.. a consensus reality dictated by 5% of the population because they control 95% of the assets...
but you're right about one thing though.. it IS a consensus reality.. but we never apply it, instead we submit and allow the 5% to dictate to us rather than uniting as the 95% and telling them where to shove it.
if we do that then we can indeed change reality.. the 5% are not interested in that, why would they be.. they win regardless what happens to the rest of the 95%, unless we decide to turn the tables for once..
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari Terradyne Networks Terradyne Networks Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:11:00 -
[22]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
It's called a consensus reality. That paper has value because everyone agrees that it does. And for better or worse, we're stuck with it for the time being.
yeah.. a consensus reality dictated by 5% of the population because they control 95% of the assets...
but you're right about one thing though.. it IS a consensus reality.. but we never apply it, instead we submit and allow the 5% to dictate to us rather than uniting as the 95% and telling them where to shove it.
if we do that then we can indeed change reality.. the 5% are not interested in that, why would they be.. they win regardless what happens to the rest of the 95%, unless we decide to turn the tables for once..
I'll let you lead the charge there Sarge, I'll stay back and be stocking up on Canned goods and beaver pelts.
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:14:00 -
[23]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 10/02/2009 23:16:08
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
It's called a consensus reality. That paper has value because everyone agrees that it does. And for better or worse, we're stuck with it for the time being.
yeah.. a consensus reality dictated by 5% of the population because they control 95% of the assets...
but you're right about one thing though.. it IS a consensus reality.. but we never apply it, instead we submit and allow the 5% to dictate to us rather than uniting as the 95% and telling them where to shove it.
if we do that then we can indeed change reality.. the 5% are not interested in that, why would they be.. they win regardless what happens to the rest of the 95%, unless we decide to turn the tables for once..
I'll let you lead the charge there Sarge, I'll stay back and be stocking up on Canned goods and beaver pelts.
you don't need violent revolutions, you just need all the people of the world to stop cooporating with the 5% all at the same time.. then all they can do is sit behind their desks and spout..
or would you rather tell everyone else to go screw themselves and then stock up on canned food and live the rest of your life like that just cause 5% of the world don't want to change things unless it's for their own benefit?
cause that every man for himself method sure has done wonders for the world hasn't it.
just shows how little you've understood when it comes down to it.. sigh..
back on iggy..
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari Terradyne Networks Terradyne Networks Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:27:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Micheal Dietrich on 10/02/2009 23:29:19 I don't think 95% of the world sitting on the front porch of their trailer home pumping out babies and living on welfare is a very productive countermeasure.
Although aspiring to do something with your life and becoming one of the 5% looks hopeful. I would be there myself if I could just think of a good gimmick the masses will buy like the pet rock or something.
Edit: Doh, forgot the 5 minute shining repost rule
Quote: cause that every man for himself method sure has done wonders for the world hasn't it.
I guess that's why it's called every man for himself It's not my fault that I planned ahead and stocked up on essential goods while you sat on your ass.
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:31:00 -
[25]
linkage
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.02.10 23:48:00 -
[26]
A debt-based monetary system would work without a deflationary reset every human lifespan if the rules on the counterfeiting of credit were enforced consistently across generations. Sadly they are not. The first generation says never again, the next decides there can be exceptions, and the third grows up knowing nothing else. Then kaboom. 1815, 1873, 1929, 2008, and we can expect our grandchildren to furnish the world with a repeat around 2070. That an obligation to perform work is manifested in a token is not the root of all evil, nor is speculation on future productivity. It is when trades are made on a fraudulent premise and they go unchallenged because some market participants are more equal than others that we all have a problem. |
HankMurphy
Minmatar Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 08:11:00 -
[27]
it's bad real bad
and ya know what? we are getting exactly what we deserve.
this is the punch line to the sick joke of a socioeconomic structure we've established in the western world. ---------- "This is Chopper Dave's made for TV movie, Blades Of Vengeance. See, he's a chopper pilot by day, but by night he fights crime as a werewolf... YEAH!" |
Ka Jolo
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 10:12:00 -
[28]
This recession has just got to be worse than the Great Depression. Actual numbers are no match for media hype and government fear-mongering.
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 10:52:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Dantes Revenge on 11/02/2009 10:53:18
Originally by: Ka Jolo This recession has just got to be worse than the Great Depression. Actual numbers are no match for media hype and government fear-mongering.
The main problem is that the governments have become more adept at hiding real figures.
What they fail to realise is that their previous work in un-uniting people so that don't band together against the government is counter-productive in this situation. People won't work together as they did in the 30's to help turn around an economic crash. Everyone is too busy grabbing the biggest slice for themselves at the expense of everyone else. Highly paid managers and directors won't take a moderate pay cut that they can easily afford to prevent lower paid workers being made redundant like they did back in the 30's. This causes more unemployment and increases the problems we face simply because there is less income to spend.
Income is just one point of a big circle that keeps the economy stable. Income (employees wage) -> spending -> revenue for the companies -> income for employees. Reduce income by increasing unemployment and it causes a ripple around the circle to balance it out.
When you divert a major portion of the company revenue to massively increase directors and shareholders incomes, it reduces the reaminder that is available to pay employees. This must be balanced, according to the companies, by redundancy. The problem with that is the redundant workers then have less spending power, spend less which results in less revenue for the companies. This creates the downward spiral that we have seen and are still experiencing. So many companies try to increase prices to compensate but this still compounds the problem and creates an even faster downward spiral because everyone suddenly has less spending power, not just the unemployed.
Those at the top are the only ones who can redress the problems but "every man for himself" has been ingrained by governments to prevent organised coups. This means the people who could make a difference as they did in the 30's are not going to now.
|
Ka Jolo
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 12:56:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge The main problem is that the governments have become more adept at hiding real figures.
What they fail to realise is that their previous work in un-uniting people so that don't band together against the government is counter-productive in this situation. People won't work together as they did in the 30's to help turn around an economic crash. Everyone is too busy grabbing the biggest slice for themselves at the expense of everyone else.
Meh. Greed is a constant; I don't see any particular impetus added over the past 10 years to make it suddenly cause an economic meltdown.
On the other hand, I can identify a handful of specific government moves that have:
An expanded money supply and low Federal Reserve interest rates; cheap credit means cheaper mortgages, cheap mortgages increases demand for houses, higher demand for houses means higher housing costs.
Department of Housing and Urban Development pressure in several instances to increase mortgage lending to people not previously considered credit worthy by lenders: borrowers in the banks' local communities (who may have been too poor), raise the percentage of minority borrowers, raise the percentage of home loans going to below-median earners. In other words, lend money to people you're not so confident will be able to repay the loan.
Congress fueled this process by implicitly guaranteeing ***** Mae and Ferdie Mac loans. (They didn't actually guarantee those investments, but by offering favorable money terms in exchange for following political mandates the result was investors felt their money was safe.)
The result of lower interest + pressure to loan to subprime borrowers was a lot of people buying houses they couldn't really afford, further increasing demand and further driving up home values. People began to buy homes and condos just to "flip" them (more demand, higher prices), people began to count on rising prices to finance consumer debt (cheap refinancing), people began to buy houses on the theory that if they couldn't make their payments, they could always sell at a profit a few months down the road.
But subprime loans to high-risk borrowers (which rose from about 10% of all bank loans to almost 25%) means more defaults, more foreclosures. Eventually investors grew wary of investing in real-estate instruments based on too many subprime loans. Housing prices sputtered; the condo flippers began to default, and people who planned to finance their credit card debt with a new mortgage found they also had to default. Prices started dropping, banks started getting in trouble, etc. etc. etc.
Unlike greed, which is a human constant, these particular regulations (cheap credit, requirements for more subprime lending) happened at specific points that correlate well with the housing bubble and collapse.
Other regulatory mechanisms, however, that would tend to get the problem over with fast (if painfully) and prevent its recurrance, met with (and are meeting with) stiff government interference. I'm speaking of bankruptcy. Rather than allowing institutions with bad loans to go bankrupt, massive bailouts began. Going bankrupt punishes foolish corporation. It punishes foolish investors. (If you want, you could say it punishes greedy business people.) It reinforces more conservative lenders who stayed out of subprime lending, and protects their investors and depositors. Instead, we get bailouts, which make messing up less painful and reward the fools.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |