Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It could be bad news. We went through a similar period after the last cock up they made of the economy. They never learn. " They don't need to. The politicians, bankers and corporate bigshots are doing just find thanks very much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is not a problem if it is accompanied by growth" . Real growth or just stocks and shares and a housing bubble growth! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is not a problem if it is accompanied by growth. Real growth or just stocks and shares and a housing bubble growth!" I'm afraid that is all the last 30 years represent, the Harry and Paul sketch on two idiots selling the same bit of paper back and forth to each other at ever more inflated prices pretty much sums up our economy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is not a problem if it is accompanied by growth. Real growth or just stocks and shares and a housing bubble growth! I'm afraid that is all the last 30 years represent, the Harry and Paul sketch on two idiots selling the same bit of paper back and forth to each other at ever more inflated prices pretty much sums up our economy." . Lol yeah but remember if we put tax up,they will move to Switzerland and we'd be forced to build things and have a working economy... Free market economics my arse. It's important to understand where the counties apparent debt is being spent to some people were spending way to much money giving people an easy life on benefits and fat pensions!!. Now let's examine where the 400 billion in QE has gone.... Errr straight to the top where there having a free ride with our money and sticking their vastly improved wages into massive pension pots. Now if the poor need austerity, the rich really do need austerity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is not a problem if it is accompanied by growth" Biggest problem with zero inflation is the lack of growth , and the fact that we all want wage increases . Savings are affected , yet people still don't spend , the pound gets stronger and exports diminish . It's a tough one , and never easy to see the best way forward . If oil prices go back up , inflation will follow . Interest rates are ridiculously low and this affects pensions and available money to spend which further reduces growth . Who knows ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is not a problem if it is accompanied by growth Biggest problem with zero inflation is the lack of growth , and the fact that we all want wage increases . Savings are affected , yet people still don't spend , the pound gets stronger and exports diminish . It's a tough one , and never easy to see the best way forward . If oil prices go back up , inflation will follow . Interest rates are ridiculously low and this affects pensions and available money to spend which further reduces growth . Who knows ?" . There's only one way out of the mess we're in.... That's high interest rates and high inflation of around 7-8%, now how they do that without crashing the banks is the tricky bit because I'm guessing the minute those interest rates hit 4or5% bank rates meaning 7-8% mortgage rates there's a few people defaulting which means the house price will crash anywhere from 20-50%, which in turn de-leverages the banks back to insolvency (technically they've always been insolvent) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I went to see a interesting lecture by an American economist about 6 years ago (bearing in mind inflation was about 6%then and oil around 120) who predicted a deflationary period with falling oil prices in 2014 followed by hyper inflation and surging commodity prices in 2016. The more I remember of it the more accurate he seems to have been "And what was his reasoning for falling oil prices? Cause unless it was "a move by the opec cartel to damage the growth of the shale oil industry" then the fact he predicted a drop in prices is utterly irrelevant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally I don't see any problem with 0% interest rates 0% growth and 0 % inflation. However under modern capitalism and perpetual growth it's nails in coffins time!" If only it were that simple! What buggers all economic theories up is human behaviour.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I went to see a interesting lecture by an American economist about 6 years ago (bearing in mind inflation was about 6%then and oil around 120) who predicted a deflationary period with falling oil prices in 2014 followed by hyper inflation and surging commodity prices in 2016. The more I remember of it the more accurate he seems to have been
And what was his reasoning for falling oil prices? Cause unless it was "a move by the opec cartel to damage the growth of the shale oil industry" then the fact he predicted a drop in prices is utterly irrelevant". I think his point was a global drop in demand causing the price fall, OPEC have actually had a falling out, most of the countries want to cut supply to boost the price, there's only the Saudis maintaining output and if they were doing that during normal usage it really wouldn't make any difference to supply, as we currently struggle to meet demand on a worldwide supply | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally I don't see any problem with 0% interest rates 0% growth and 0 % inflation. However under modern capitalism and perpetual growth it's nails in coffins time! If only it were that simple! What buggers all economic theories up is human behaviour. ". At the moment the human behaviour they can't inspire is consumption! Were a consumption economy and it's not happening even with pumping money into the system!. Now I'm no expert but I reckon when people have less and less disposable income and therefore fucks up consumption, now this happened 25 years ago and we've been filling that void of disposable income with debt based consumerism... Now thats over their trying to replace it with government sponsored debt based consumerism(QE) and thats not working either?. My prognosis is stop giving it to the people at the top in the hope it trickles down, which clearly isn't working. Radical solution give it to the people at the bottom as we definitely know it trickles upwards through spending! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I went to see a interesting lecture by an American economist about 6 years ago (bearing in mind inflation was about 6%then and oil around 120) who predicted a deflationary period with falling oil prices in 2014 followed by hyper inflation and surging commodity prices in 2016. The more I remember of it the more accurate he seems to have been
And what was his reasoning for falling oil prices? Cause unless it was "a move by the opec cartel to damage the growth of the shale oil industry" then the fact he predicted a drop in prices is utterly irrelevant.
I think his point was a global drop in demand causing the price fall, OPEC have actually had a falling out, most of the countries want to cut supply to boost the price, there's only the Saudis maintaining output and if they were doing that during normal usage it really wouldn't make any difference to supply, as we currently struggle to meet demand on a worldwide supply"Then his point was s utterly irrelevant. And your missing the massive impact shale oil has had in the last few years and why it's such an issue to opec. The USA went from one of the largest importers of oil to a net exporter due to shale oil. The shale oil firms are all very heavily leveraged and require the prices to stay high, opec wants to force the price down to drive them into bankruptcy and potential buy them out, but once that's happened production will be cut and prices will rise again. But when the price it's 120 a barrel tar sands start becoming a potential target again and opec is very concerned about new technology and investment in that area as atm it's massively unprofitable and requires natural gas to be used Inn the process. But if it becomes economical viable and the technology is developed to exploit it more efficiently then we'll see a long term depression in oil prices due to the very large amounts of oil in those deposits.. But on the whole no the demand for pil isn't really down we've just increased supply a lot in the last 5 years It means his reasoning was wrong and so just because the outcome he predicted occurred it doesn't mean anything else he said is relevant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I went to see a interesting lecture by an American economist about 6 years ago (bearing in mind inflation was about 6%then and oil around 120) who predicted a deflationary period with falling oil prices in 2014 followed by hyper inflation and surging commodity prices in 2016. The more I remember of it the more accurate he seems to have been
And what was his reasoning for falling oil prices? Cause unless it was "a move by the opec cartel to damage the growth of the shale oil industry" then the fact he predicted a drop in prices is utterly irrelevant.
I think his point was a global drop in demand causing the price fall, OPEC have actually had a falling out, most of the countries want to cut supply to boost the price, there's only the Saudis maintaining output and if they were doing that during normal usage it really wouldn't make any difference to supply, as we currently struggle to meet demand on a worldwide supply
Then his point was s utterly irrelevant.
And your missing the massive impact shale oil has had in the last few years and why it's such an issue to opec.
The USA went from one of the largest importers of oil to a net exporter due to shale oil.
The shale oil firms are all very heavily leveraged and require the prices to stay high, opec wants to force the price down to drive them into bankruptcy and potential buy them out, but once that's happened production will be cut and prices will rise again.
But when the price it's 120 a barrel tar sands start becoming a potential target again and opec is very concerned about new technology and investment in that area as atm it's massively unprofitable and requires natural gas to be used Inn the process. But if it becomes economical viable and the technology is developed to exploit it more efficiently then we'll see a long term depression in oil prices due to the very large amounts of oil in those deposits..
But on the whole no the demand for pil isn't really down we've just increased supply a lot in the last 5 years
It means his reasoning was wrong and so just because the outcome he predicted occurred it doesn't mean anything else he said is relevant". The usa despite having massive gains in shale oil is still the world's largest oil importer. The usa have actually had a ban on exporting oil since 1972 when they became a net importer. I wouldn't disagree with your prognosis that the Saudis are trying to dismantle the shale business but for political reasons not financial ones! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I went to see a interesting lecture by an American economist about 6 years ago (bearing in mind inflation was about 6%then and oil around 120) who predicted a deflationary period with falling oil prices in 2014 followed by hyper inflation and surging commodity prices in 2016. The more I remember of it the more accurate he seems to have been
And what was his reasoning for falling oil prices? Cause unless it was "a move by the opec cartel to damage the growth of the shale oil industry" then the fact he predicted a drop in prices is utterly irrelevant.
I think his point was a global drop in demand causing the price fall, OPEC have actually had a falling out, most of the countries want to cut supply to boost the price, there's only the Saudis maintaining output and if they were doing that during normal usage it really wouldn't make any difference to supply, as we currently struggle to meet demand on a worldwide supply
Then his point was s utterly irrelevant.
And your missing the massive impact shale oil has had in the last few years and why it's such an issue to opec.
The USA went from one of the largest importers of oil to a net exporter due to shale oil.
The shale oil firms are all very heavily leveraged and require the prices to stay high, opec wants to force the price down to drive them into bankruptcy and potential buy them out, but once that's happened production will be cut and prices will rise again.
But when the price it's 120 a barrel tar sands start becoming a potential target again and opec is very concerned about new technology and investment in that area as atm it's massively unprofitable and requires natural gas to be used Inn the process. But if it becomes economical viable and the technology is developed to exploit it more efficiently then we'll see a long term depression in oil prices due to the very large amounts of oil in those deposits..
But on the whole no the demand for pil isn't really down we've just increased supply a lot in the last 5 years
It means his reasoning was wrong and so just because the outcome he predicted occurred it doesn't mean anything else he said is relevant". Had to dig out my notes but found them after a bit of searching, he thought oil would crash in price due to a contracting money supply basically, he'd done some reconfigurations on base money to m3 money and found that if you subtract one from the other you could see that the money supply was contracting for the first time since the great depression and this would push oil to down below 40 dollars according to him with a deflationary period lasting 3 years followed by hyper inflation, he basically based his theories on bad governments, lots of debts, too much tax and an illegally operated banking system ( this lecture was 2009 at the lse). He must have been interesting anyhow as I managed to stay awake through 3 hours  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. " . Care to elaborate a bit more? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more?" Elaborate on what?... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?..." . Your statement! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement!" Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement! Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot...." . Yeah it's a bit seagulls and trawlers ,I meant can you expand on it a little? Like what's the mystery problem? Why can't it be fixed? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The stuff I'm buying is still increasing in price, and the way the government figure is measured may be wide of the mark for many people. Fuel has been creeping up, at least 1p per week, usually 2 increases, for the last few weeks too. I'm sure they're looking to make money from more driving being done over Easter. Is anyone finding that things aren't rising in price? I need more money than last year for a comparable lifestyle and see price rises in shops every week." . Ah that's because everybody has a different inflation rate depending on your circumstances/lifestyle. The government are quite selective in what they use to determine it and these have changed quite a bit over the last 30 years | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The stuff I'm buying is still increasing in price, and the way the government figure is measured may be wide of the mark for many people. Fuel has been creeping up, at least 1p per week, usually 2 increases, for the last few weeks too. I'm sure they're looking to make money from more driving being done over Easter. Is anyone finding that things aren't rising in price? I need more money than last year for a comparable lifestyle and see price rises in shops every week." .For instance somebody with a lot of debt will find it getting more expensive in real terms with no inflation, whereas people with savings will find there going up in real terms instead of the usual downward losses | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement! Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot..... Yeah it's a bit seagulls and trawlers ,I meant can you expand on it a little? Like what's the mystery problem? Why can't it be fixed?" No..no..the trade off that I said above IS the problem. The problem isn't even UNDERSTOOD properly before it's anywhere close to being solved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The stuff I'm buying is still increasing in price, and the way the government figure is measured may be wide of the mark for many people. Fuel has been creeping up, at least 1p per week, usually 2 increases, for the last few weeks too. I'm sure they're looking to make money from more driving being done over Easter. Is anyone finding that things aren't rising in price? I need more money than last year for a comparable lifestyle and see price rises in shops every week..For instance somebody with a lot of debt will find it getting more expensive in real terms with no inflation, whereas people with savings will find there going up in real terms instead of the usual downward losses" No shit sherlock, nearly seven years after Gordon Brown royally fucked up, dont you think the hardworking and prudent deserve a turn? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The stuff I'm buying is still increasing in price, and the way the government figure is measured may be wide of the mark for many people. Fuel has been creeping up, at least 1p per week, usually 2 increases, for the last few weeks too. I'm sure they're looking to make money from more driving being done over Easter. Is anyone finding that things aren't rising in price? I need more money than last year for a comparable lifestyle and see price rises in shops every week." Broccolli's cheaper this week. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The stuff I'm buying is still increasing in price, and the way the government figure is measured may be wide of the mark for many people. Fuel has been creeping up, at least 1p per week, usually 2 increases, for the last few weeks too. I'm sure they're looking to make money from more driving being done over Easter. Is anyone finding that things aren't rising in price? I need more money than last year for a comparable lifestyle and see price rises in shops every week..For instance somebody with a lot of debt will find it getting more expensive in real terms with no inflation, whereas people with savings will find there going up in real terms instead of the usual downward losses No shit sherlock, nearly seven years after Gordon Brown royally fucked up, dont you think the hardworking and prudent deserve a turn? " . Hey I'm more like Holmes, the bumbling pipe smoker living off others genius. Do they deserve a turn?. You'd think so but not under the system we work under! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement! Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot..... Yeah it's a bit seagulls and trawlers ,I meant can you expand on it a little? Like what's the mystery problem? Why can't it be fixed? No..no..the trade off that I said above IS the problem. The problem isn't even UNDERSTOOD properly before it's anywhere close to being solved. " . Tell you what, just forget it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement! Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot..... Yeah it's a bit seagulls and trawlers ,I meant can you expand on it a little? Like what's the mystery problem? Why can't it be fixed? No..no..the trade off that I said above IS the problem. The problem isn't even UNDERSTOOD properly before it's anywhere close to being solved. . Tell you what, just forget it "I've also tried and failed to decode that passage as well. Maybe he means that the system is inherently broken, there is no such thing as perpetual growth, yet that is what our economy requires for peak functionality. In that case I agree | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I've also tried and failed to decode that passage as well. Maybe he means that the system is inherently broken, there is no such thing as perpetual growth, yet that is what our economy requires for peak functionality. In that case I agree " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inflation is almost ALWAYS a trade off AGAINST unemployment OR Employment for the majority but paid below breadline wages. You cannot debate inflation before the REAL problem is fully understood and solved. And, incidentally, that problem is a pretty damn complex one that won't be solved. . Care to elaborate a bit more? Elaborate on what?.... Your statement! Well what part of it? ... I said quite a lot..... Yeah it's a bit seagulls and trawlers ,I meant can you expand on it a little? Like what's the mystery problem? Why can't it be fixed? No..no..the trade off that I said above IS the problem. The problem isn't even UNDERSTOOD properly before it's anywhere close to being solved. . Tell you what, just forget it
I've also tried and failed to decode that passage as well.
Maybe he means that the system is inherently broken, there is no such thing as perpetual growth, yet that is what our economy requires for peak functionality. In that case I agree ". The monetary system isn't broken though, it was designed like that to do exactly what it's doing!. Bees have worker bees, army bees and ruler bees, it's inherently built into them!. They don't need treats to get them to jump through hoops. Humans on the other hand are taught from an early age the pattern of reward and punishments. Work= reward, no work= no reward. The trouble with that philosophy is we soon build up enough rewards to slow up working. Inflation is a secret stealth tax eating away at your rewards. I earn ten quid today(1 hour of labour) and I put it away in my jar to save for a rainy day, in 20 years time I get my ten pounds out and now it's worth is actually 50p or 5 minutes work, so I worked one hour 20 years ago to get 5 minutes labour today!. So what it's actually designed to do is perpetual! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
