FabSwingers.com mobile

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

America on the brink?

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obbytupperMan
over a year ago

Menston near Ilkley

....and the people who caused it all are still reaping false rewards.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead... "

which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead...

which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity "

But this is nothing to do with "sub prime!" This is the chickens coming home to roost after Governments around the world lived on borrowing instead of living within their means! Exactly what Labour and Gordon Clown have done!!

All "sub prime" has done is allowed those governments to bring it out into the open and actually try to blame someone else...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead...

which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity

But this is nothing to do with "sub prime!" This is the chickens coming home to roost after Governments around the world lived on borrowing instead of living within their means! Exactly what Labour and Gordon Clown have done!!

All "sub prime" has done is allowed those governments to bring it out into the open and actually try to blame someone else... "

All governments have lived on debt for 100+ years at some points in our history we have been 180% of gdp in debt and via austerity measures have recovered ,why is it different now except for globalisation,and who mentioned sub prime ?

Its a global money go round crisis and not peculuar to one government, the first globilisation hickup and in my oppinion as important as the south sea bubble,and the leaving of the EMF which could be argued was the first indicator of problems,governments at the mercy of George Sorros and the currency speculators even tho they were is common supported currencies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden


"which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity "

Well there you are, you mentioned Labour and Brown. Brown blamed the "crisis" on the Sub Prine debarcle and by extension, the Bankers!!

In actual fact, the problems we are facing now and nothing to do with the Sub Prime thing. It is to do with the fact that when New Labour took over, they inherited an almost (relatively speaking) clean plate. Now we have massive debts to pay for the "social engineering" that New Labour tried!

One of the first things they did was sell a sizable chunk of our Gold reserves at much reduced prices instead of waiting for the price to rise to an acceptable level. They raided the pension pots of everyone in the country who had private pensions and borrowed massively to pay for the sweeteners that they offered to everyone and especially at election time!

This current squeeze we are suffering is mostly because of Labours miss-management!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

wish i understood all this..

or maybe i dont

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead... "

actually.... not quite that bad now....

basically there is a standoff between the democrats and republicans in the fact that they are about to reach the debt ceiling (raised 17 times under bush 2 without any fuss) this time the republicans kicked up a fuss... wonder why...

so basically the president wants to try and reduce it... but cuts in social security, medicare, defence and closing tax loopholes on business' and letting the bush tax cuts expire (which only affect those earning more than 250,000 dollars)

the last 2 are unacceptable to republicans.... so that caused the impass.. and they are on the wrong side of public opinion.....so they caved a bit and have said they will allow the president to raise the debt ceiling without the need to consult congress....

if all the cuts go thru they could amount to 4 trillion dollars....

the last

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Dont think it can get much worse in Spain if it does then were all doomed , need to ditch the albatross Euro and revert back to the peseta , Turkey ,Bulgaria and the other non EU full members without the Euro are much cheaper options for holidaying in Europe

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

but while theres moonlight and music and love and romance lets face the music and dance

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"but while theres moonlight and music and love and romance lets face the music and dance "

lol you beat me to it!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"but while theres moonlight and music and love and romance lets face the music and dance "

I left that there deliberately as I knew someone would... sooner or later..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead...

actually.... not quite that bad now....

basically there is a standoff between the democrats and republicans in the fact that they are about to reach the debt ceiling (raised 17 times under bush 2 without any fuss) this time the republicans kicked up a fuss... wonder why...

so basically the president wants to try and reduce it... but cuts in social security, medicare, defence and closing tax loopholes on business' and letting the bush tax cuts expire (which only affect those earning more than 250,000 dollars)

the last 2 are unacceptable to republicans.... so that caused the impass.. and they are on the wrong side of public opinion.....so they caved a bit and have said they will allow the president to raise the debt ceiling without the need to consult congress....

if all the cuts go thru they could amount to 4 trillion dollars....

the last "

Isn't it strange how in America, the Democrats are what we would know as Labour and the Republicans represent Conservative America, yet it is the Democrats who want to bring in widespread cuts to reduce their deficit and it's the Republicans who are against it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

may be

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mumaWoman
over a year ago

Livingston

yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity

Well there you are, you mentioned Labour and Brown. Brown blamed the "crisis" on the Sub Prine debarcle and by extension, the Bankers!!

In actual fact, the problems we are facing now and nothing to do with the Sub Prime thing. It is to do with the fact that when New Labour took over, they inherited an almost (relatively speaking) clean plate. Now we have massive debts to pay for the "social engineering" that New Labour tried!

One of the first things they did was sell a sizable chunk of our Gold reserves at much reduced prices instead of waiting for the price to rise to an acceptable level. They raided the pension pots of everyone in the country who had private pensions and borrowed massively to pay for the sweeteners that they offered to everyone and especially at election time!

This current squeeze we are suffering is mostly because of Labours miss-management! "

I disagre the reason we are in a higher position of debt is because brown was forced to prop up the uk and our commitments to european banking system after the collapse, not because of over spending in a social engineering experiment ,we have in fact like almost every other country in the world extended our level of debt to pay for it.

Its not money chucked down the plug hole we have major stakes in the banks we can resell when\if the Global recovery happens. When labour came to power the debt was 49.7% of gdp it is now 54% source(ONS).That after propping up the banks and weathering the biggest global crisis since the 30's to put that debt into context in 1950 our debt was 250% of GDP and reduced carefully and steadily until its level in 79.

Re the gold ,the reason the gold price has gone up is because of the global crisis and no one saw that coming or predicted it (except one professor in Harvard who was ignored),so the americans ,the french ,the germans ,the Irish they were all like rabbits in the headlights when this unprecedented crisis hit ,so we have a 4% increase in gdp-compared debt ,not money gone, but recoverable and with that debt we saved the banking system from collapse (dont forget we were 30 mins from the cash points running dry ....small price to pay i say,compared to previous debt levels,fairly manageable over the long to medium term ,and that is why our bond interest rates still remain low and are comparible with the german rates.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

and scotland want to go it alone

i would defo not agree to an independence just yet

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"yes"


"may be"

So you both agree that Labour is the Democrats in the U.S. and the Republicans are the Tories?

Muuuahhaahaaa you walked right into my trap

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i know nuffin i still dancing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I disagre the reason we are in a higher position of debt is because brown was forced to prop up the uk and our commitments to european banking system after the collapse, not because of over spending in a social engineering experiment ,we have in fact like almost every other country in the world extended our level of debt to pay for it.

Its not money chucked down the plug hole we have major stakes in the banks we can resell when\if the Global recovery happens. When labour came to power the debt was 49.7% of gdp it is now 54% source(ONS).That after propping up the banks and weathering the biggest global crisis since the 30's to put that debt into context in 1950 our debt was 250% of GDP and reduced carefully and steadily until its level in 79.

Re the gold ,the reason the gold price has gone up is because of the global crisis and no one saw that coming or predicted it (except one professor in Harvard who was ignored),so the americans ,the french ,the germans ,the Irish they were all like rabbits in the headlights when this unprecedented crisis hit ,so we have a 4% increase in gdp-compared debt ,not money gone, but recoverable and with that debt we saved the banking system from collapse (dont forget we were 30 mins from the cash points running dry ....small price to pay i say,compared to previous debt levels,fairly manageable over the long to medium term ,and that is why our bond interest rates still remain low and are comparible with the german rates. "

£1.2tr of debt was not incurred solely by propping up the banks, if it was we could discount most of it as we can realistically expect to recover the vast amounts doled out to the banks in addition to a healthy profit on those funds when they are eventually sold back to the private sector.

£1.2tr is the true figure of our national debt and it was racked up by the Labour govt of Blair/Brown promising gold-plated pensions and trying to spend their way through each successive election. Would the Tories have done any different if they'd been in power between 1997-2010? Probably not actually, because a set of conditions already in place on a global scale were always going to lead us to where we are now regardless of which party was in power at that time. Brown's mistake as chancellor, and then as PM, was that he didn't limit our exposure to a long foreseen European crisis, nor did he curb the banks in deals made on American toxic debt. He should have and he admitted as much during the election. I don't think he was as bad a chancellor as we're now spoonfed to believe, but he was incredibly out of his depth as PM, and I think those crucial three years with him at the helm could have made the level of financial hardship we're now experiencing a lot less hardhitting had someone else been Prime Minister, he just didn't have the gravy for the job in my opinion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Dont think it can get much worse in Spain if it does then were all doomed , need to ditch the albatross Euro and revert back to the peseta , Turkey ,Bulgaria and the other non EU full members without the Euro are much cheaper options for holidaying in Europe "

so I guess the UK must be the exception that proves the rule.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Dont think it can get much worse in Spain if it does then were all doomed , need to ditch the albatross Euro and revert back to the peseta , Turkey ,Bulgaria and the other non EU full members without the Euro are much cheaper options for holidaying in Europe

so I guess the UK must be the exception that proves the rule. "

You need a bank loan to buy a loaf of bread in the UK these days. Foreigners must shit themselves on the first day of their holidays here when they first buy something.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Dont think it can get much worse in Spain if it does then were all doomed , need to ditch the albatross Euro and revert back to the peseta , Turkey ,Bulgaria and the other non EU full members without the Euro are much cheaper options for holidaying in Europe

so I guess the UK must be the exception that proves the rule.

You need a bank loan to buy a loaf of bread in the UK these days. Foreigners must shit themselves on the first day of their holidays here when they first buy something. "

bldy hell they better not, they better keep as much inside as they can! My kids pay the = of an average local weekly salary to get from Heathrow to Medway.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"

Isn't it strange how in America, the Democrats are what we would know as Labour and the Republicans represent Conservative America, yet it is the Democrats who want to bring in widespread cuts to reduce their deficit and it's the Republicans who are against it.

"

well... yes and no... the democrats would prefer there not be cuts in social security and medicare, and would prefer to do it solely by tax increases on the rich......

the republican want the cuts in entitlements but steadfastly want no tax increases and would prefer more tax cuts....

and obama is the bloke in the middle who suggests a bit from column a and a bit from column b....

it just happens to be other this occasion the democrats are winning the PR war, while the republicans are playing a very dangerous game of chicken....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Happy ManMan
over a year ago

Merseyside


"Moodys, the debt rating agency, has said it may cut America's AAA rating citing the rising probability that the U.S. will default on it's debts.

Italy are about to announce austerity measures, with Spain likley to follow suit very soon after.

There may be trouble ahead... "

If you want to know what is coming follow Gerald Celente on his you tube channel. Most Americans don't know what is about to hit them. Sadly once it hits them it will affect us not long after.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Happy ManMan
over a year ago

Merseyside

For the last 100 years or so the banks have been operating a pyramid scheme. The scheme if collapsing before our eyes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Happy ManMan
over a year ago

Merseyside


"which actually proves this is a global financial crisis and not just in the uk and not just the fault of labour .... brown....lol you know me wishy never one to miss an opportunity

Well there you are, you mentioned Labour and Brown. Brown blamed the "crisis" on the Sub Prine debarcle and by extension, the Bankers!!

In actual fact, the problems we are facing now and nothing to do with the Sub Prime thing. It is to do with the fact that when New Labour took over, they inherited an almost (relatively speaking) clean plate. Now we have massive debts to pay for the "social engineering" that New Labour tried!

One of the first things they did was sell a sizable chunk of our Gold reserves at much reduced prices instead of waiting for the price to rise to an acceptable level. They raided the pension pots of everyone in the country who had private pensions and borrowed massively to pay for the sweeteners that they offered to everyone and especially at election time!

This current squeeze we are suffering is mostly because of Labours miss-management! "

That is simply not true. The current crisis has been caused by international the bankers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he Happy ManMan
over a year ago

Merseyside


"Dont think it can get much worse in Spain if it does then were all doomed , need to ditch the albatross Euro and revert back to the peseta , Turkey ,Bulgaria and the other non EU full members without the Euro are much cheaper options for holidaying in Europe "

The Euro is finished and countries will be going back to there original currencies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

BLAME THE BANKS - for the countless bonus

that got

there the 1s that put the country into rescission in the 1st place

an yet there getting away with it

its high time they should be investigate to

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We'd shag em.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We'd shag em."

There is always somebody who derails threads. We have serious discussion going on and the best you can reply with is you would shag them.

I hate the way the regular forum members come into a thread than start talking amongst themselves with their posts. It should be against the rules.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden


"We'd shag em.

There is always somebody who derails threads. We have serious discussion going on and the best you can reply with is you would shag them.

I hate the way the regular forum members come into a thread than start talking amongst themselves with their posts. It should be against the rules. "

I blame Wishy!!! lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"I disagre the reason we are in a higher position of debt is because brown was forced to prop up the uk and our commitments to european banking system after the collapse, not because of over spending in a social engineering experiment ,we have in fact like almost every other country in the world extended our level of debt to pay for it.

Its not money chucked down the plug hole we have major stakes in the banks we can resell when\if the Global recovery happens. When labour came to power the debt was 49.7% of gdp it is now 54% source(ONS).That after propping up the banks and weathering the biggest global crisis since the 30's to put that debt into context in 1950 our debt was 250% of GDP and reduced carefully and steadily until its level in 79.

Re the gold ,the reason the gold price has gone up is because of the global crisis and no one saw that coming or predicted it (except one professor in Harvard who was ignored),so the americans ,the french ,the germans ,the Irish they were all like rabbits in the headlights when this unprecedented crisis hit ,so we have a 4% increase in gdp-compared debt ,not money gone, but recoverable and with that debt we saved the banking system from collapse (dont forget we were 30 mins from the cash points running dry ....small price to pay i say,compared to previous debt levels,fairly manageable over the long to medium term ,and that is why our bond interest rates still remain low and are comparible with the german rates.

£1.2tr of debt was not incurred solely by propping up the banks, if it was we could discount most of it as we can realistically expect to recover the vast amounts doled out to the banks in addition to a healthy profit on those funds when they are eventually sold back to the private sector.

£1.2tr is the true figure of our national debt and it was racked up by the Labour govt of Blair/Brown promising gold-plated pensions and trying to spend their way through each successive election. Would the Tories have done any different if they'd been in power between 1997-2010? Probably not actually, because a set of conditions already in place on a global scale were always going to lead us to where we are now regardless of which party was in power at that time. Brown's mistake as chancellor, and then as PM, was that he didn't limit our exposure to a long foreseen European crisis, nor did he curb the banks in deals made on American toxic debt. He should have and he admitted as much during the election. I don't think he was as bad a chancellor as we're now spoonfed to believe, but he was incredibly out of his depth as PM, and I think those crucial three years with him at the helm could have made the level of financial hardship we're now experiencing a lot less hardhitting had someone else been Prime Minister, he just didn't have the gravy for the job in my opinion."

Our European commitments were signed up after the the EMU was agreed to under the Maastricht agreement on the Tory watch in 92.

1.2 trillion sounds dramatic but it is in fact normally discribed as percentage of gdp wishy (but i think you know that already

The percentage of that debt has always averaged around 49.7% regardless of government wishy ,it is currently projected to be 59.7% at the end of this year where it lept 8% for 2 years due to the international crisis.In fact the lowest rate in the last 60 years was 25.27% in 92 under the tories and 29.33% under Brown.So you see wishy the most of the debt the Con Dems quote is structural debt we have always had,and even our average is madeup of periods of 250%+ of gdp

Incidently the reason it is quoted as % of gdp is because GDP fluctuates.In 92

our low GDP % was when our GDP was 622.08 b in 2010 it was 1453.62b ,which is why that 1.2 trillian figure looks dramactic ,but actually isnt and is why our rates remain low.

So can we please stop the murdoch inspired lies re brown and his spending frenzy which is in fact total bollox ,they will be saying he was the antichrist next.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *omnlynneCouple
over a year ago

milton keynes

just heard in the NOTW that gordon brown is actually the anti christ........

on a serious note browns failing was spending 10 years coveting and plotting to get to be PM only to prove in 3 he wasnt up to the job.

as regards the global crisis we are in there are many factors to bear but most of the blame is inherrently to be placed at the door of the banks and commodity/currency traders who have basically played roulette with our hard earned cash and to a vast degree are still doing it.

nothing changes except the poor man pays for the rich mans excesses......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"There will be no return to boom and bust"

- The Prudent Chancellor

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Exactly right there will be no return, welcome to dickosien times again,nothings really changed since tudor times...the rich get richer,the poor get poorer,we should be left into no illusion as to where its all going....the only good thing today is we are educated,where as back then we wernt.....but beware even that can change in a couple of decades,then god help us all.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

The

rich

get

richer

(yes, compound interest rates take care of that and without interest on capital the rich would simply take their money elsewhere and then the economy would collapse.)

~

the

poor

get

poorer

(how exactly does one create wealth from nothing? Does one work hard? save hard? strive to better oneself? Ok, I accept that, but then doesn't that sort of person belong in the category above?)

Now, here's some maths:

Subtract all those 'poorer' folk, who aren't really poor cos they've bettered themselves, from the total of 'poor folk' and we're left with a bunch of people who are permanent drain on everybody else who, via birthright or hard work, have made a life for themselves.

Of course the rich get richer - it's called W.A.G.E.S. E.A.R.N.E.D.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No,we wouldn't

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"The

rich

get

richer

(yes, compound interest rates take care of that and without interest on capital the rich would simply take their money elsewhere and then the economy would collapse.)

~

the

poor

get

poorer

(how exactly does one create wealth from nothing? Does one work hard? save hard? strive to better oneself? Ok, I accept that, but then doesn't that sort of person belong in the category above?)

Now, here's some maths:

Subtract all those 'poorer' folk, who aren't really poor cos they've bettered themselves, from the total of 'poor folk' and we're left with a bunch of people who are permanent drain on everybody else who, via birthright or hard work, have made a life for themselves.

Of course the rich get richer - it's called W.A.G.E.S. E.A.R.N.E.D. "

Also known as I.N.H.E.R.I.T.E.D. W.E.A.L.T.H

Ask George Osbourne

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

see wishy has kinda stumbled on the whole tax problem in America at the moment...

which is that the rich pay in proportion are paying a lower amount of tax to their wages/profits then the poorest do...

for example...the tax loopholes they want to take out concern oil/ energy companies and big business where at the moment they pay little or no tax.....and when you get the likes of warren buffet only paying 8-10% as a tax rate when the lowest play double that.... saying the system isn't right then the republicans are trying to fight a fight that most aren't with them on.....

but the republicans are fighting it because there fundraising base is big business, oil companies and rich people...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Also known as I.N.H.E.R.I.T.E.D. W.E.A.L.T.H

Ask George Osbourne"

Not every rich person in the UK has inherited it, and you know that. I could research self made millionaires and produce an inexhaustive list of a couple of thousand at the very least, but I'll give you one - Duncan Bannatyne, a man who at the age of 15 wanted a bike and upon being told by his mother that she couldn't afford it he went and asked for a paper round to fund it's purchase. The newsagent told him that if he could get a list of a 100 homes that wanted a paper delivered he could have the job. He knocked on 150 doors and got the 100 names - three months later he bought the bike.

Bannatyne received his OBE partly in recognition for his work with charities such as Mary's meals. In Romania where over a ten year period he has funded several projects, notably Casa Bannatyne in Târgu-Mures, a hospice for orphans with HIV and AIDS in which he invested £80,000. In March 2008 established the Bannatyne Charitable Foundation with a personal injection of £1,000,000.

On 19 May 2008 Bannatyne added his support to the launch of the Geared for Giving Campaign at the House of Commons to encourage UK business leaders to set up and promote a Workplace Giving scheme to benefit UK registered charities with tax effective donations through employees pay.

On 29 August 2008, Bannatyne appeared on television programme Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, raising £20,000 for charity NCH.

He became President of the charity No Smoking Day in October 2008. The charity runs the annual health awareness campaign - helping people who want to stop smoking. In November 2008 he was voted "The Most Admired Celebrity Charity Champion" by Third sector magazine.

Bannatyne is a trustee of Comic Relief and on 27 November 2008 he travelled to Ethiopia with other trustees of Comic Relief. On Saturday 29 November they visited Debre Zeit; Bannatyne said "the most significant part of that day for me was when we were shown that people are taught how to sow vegetables so they can grow them in their own homes, in addition to the training programme the project supplies seeds and tools so that they can become self sufficient".

In August 2010, he agreed to become Patron of PC David Rathband's Blue Lamp Foundation, a charity established by the Northumbria Police Constable David Rathband who was blinded by gunshot wounds in the 2010 Northumbria Police manhunt.

Duncan Bannatyne is a supporter of the Conservative Party.

I think he deserves the interest he gets on his £430m fortune, he's E.A.R.N.E.D. it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

It was you who tried to give the impression that the rich earned their wealth, when in fact most of the real money in the wealthiest UK families is 'Old Money'.

The same names crop up time and time again over generations, even over the centuries, 'Old Money' is the base of most of the major wealthy families here in the UK....and you know that.

For every pound that people like Bannatyne has there are countless more pounds tied up in families like the Duke of Westminster,....maybe you should get back on Wikipedia and research where the real money is in the UK.

The 1,000 wealthiest families in the UK in 2010 had an accumalative wealth of over £280 Billion....the ones at the top tend to be families who made their wealth in the days of Textile Mills and heavy manufacturing.....not health clubs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People with wealth may get more wealthy, but there's no evidence to suggest that across the board, poor people get poorer. For all the noise politicians make, you'd imagine there was, but there actually isn't.

Put it this way: if you think 'being fair' is about equality, then you'll be pissed at the state of affairs. But if you think 'being fair' is about meritocracy, you won't.

Incidentally, it's very very hard, and plenty of studies prove this, to keep hold of wealth within a family. Colloquially, this is quite recognizable as the:

1 Generation Earns.

1 Generation Rests Easy.

1 Generation Wastes.

Then the cycle begins anew.

On the other hand, poverty can become a helluva lot more intractable, and the No.1 long term reason this occurs, is high taxes. High taxes cause higher unemployment in the long term.

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense, I mean, you expect a tax on alcohol, on cigarettes to reduce consumption, yeah? Well, then a tax on human labour does precisely the same thing.

Having a large public sector can temporarily stall the effects of high taxes, but ultimately it comes back to you, which is what we're seeing today. It's not about the recession caused by a credit crunch, what we're seeing today is unconnected to that event.

The state in the UK consumes more than 50% of GDP in taxes. Every % increase in taxes causes a geometric fall in wealth creation. This is a fact, expressed aptly by the Division of Labour principal which a child can understand, but it seems the majority of people don't get it at all.

Labour supporters should stop thinking about the semantics, the names of things. If a corporation controlled 50% of the UK's GDP, you'd be rightfully pissed. It's no good. It's a single point of failure.

Lastly; if you sold every house in the UK, it wouldn't pay for our national debt. We owe almost 400% of our GDP, that's 4 years of all the wealth created in the country, to foreign governments and institutions. That's just our foreign debt!

If the state decides to start nationalising more, and heighten taxes, then I'm leaving for sure. I'm young, arrogant and have no dependants, so you better believe it.

I wasn't even born when this government debt started to mount up! Not my problem.

Even the so called anarchists in this country apparently support bigger government. It makes me ill.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Who cares how they made their money, they were the entrepreneurs of their times and I don't feel their descendants should feel any shame in how their ancestors acquired their wealth. Sure, you could argue they made it on the sweat of the common man working long hours for little pay but those issues have been addressed now and it doesn't happen like that in this country today - hence Bannatyne's involvement in health clubs I guess lol.

The aristocracy is peppered with the names of fools who've lost their family fortunes and I don't see the Tories rushing to help them out. Similarly, the rich people of Lloyds Names didn't get much support from rich Tory chums when asked to cough up after a series of disasters a decade or two ago. And rightly so.

I wonder, do you feel sympathy for all those rich Jews whose property was confiscated by the Nazis? I watched a programme recently where a Jew went back to the home that was stolen from his father decades before and the family living there now had believed that their grandfather had owned it for years. They were shocked to be told the truth but refused to hand it back. Poor old ex-rich Jew eh?

Would we want that over here? Should we strip the rich and reallocate their monies to whoever wants a piece of it?

Sounds an awful lot like fascism to me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It was you who tried to give the impression that the rich earned their wealth, when in fact most of the real money in the wealthiest UK families is 'Old Money'.

The same names crop up time and time again over generations, even over the centuries, 'Old Money' is the base of most of the major wealthy families here in the UK....and you know that.

For every pound that people like Bannatyne has there are countless more pounds tied up in families like the Duke of Westminster,....maybe you should get back on Wikipedia and research where the real money is in the UK.

The 1,000 wealthiest families in the UK in 2010 had an accumalative wealth of over £280 Billion....the ones at the top tend to be families who made their wealth in the days of Textile Mills and heavy manufacturing.....not health clubs

"

Indeed, there are very wealthy families who manage to keep money for a while.

There just aren't very many of them.

You need to back up your assertions with some evidence. The Rothchilds, the usual suspects and then who?

http://www.richest-people.co.uk/the-top-100/

I see a scattering of royalty types (state welfare recipients? lol), but you know what else?

I see lots of Irish, Indian/Asian names in there. They certainly didn't have uber-wealth 100 years ago!

"There are now more women millionaires aged between 18 and 44 than men, according to figures from the Inland Revenue."

!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Thanks for that. Saved me doing it lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

psst.. that link isn't allowed though, so you may wanna repost without it as I suspect your post may be removed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"psst.. that link isn't allowed though, so you may wanna repost without it as I suspect your post may be removed."

yes

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"psst.. that link isn't allowed though, so you may wanna repost without it as I suspect your post may be removed.

yes "

ditto.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

tut tut tut wishy,once more your tunnel vision,does not allow you to see the big picture.

the recession was global,excepting one.

i have asked this before,but your unwillingness to give an answer.

speaks volumes.

did commumism win.

i dont expect an answer.

the truth would,only contradict,every political belief,you have ever given.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

I'm sorry, you've lost me. What are you expecting an answer to and I'll try to give you one.

Communism is inherently flawed as it requires someone at the top telling everyone else what it is to be a good communist. Socialism is just a step or two down the same ladder, imo.

Which country escaped the recession? China?

China ranks second only to the United States in the number of billionaires, according to an annual report of the 1,000 richest people in the country.

The Hurun Rich List counted 130 billionaires in China this year, up from 101 a year ago and none in 2003. America has 359 billionaires, according to Forbes. It seems even China is only communist to an extent.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

(Badly managed) Capitalism has hit the rocks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *drianukMan
over a year ago

Spain, Lancs

I keep reading that all savers and investors are going to be scalped.

Bastard governments. I've worked hard for my savings.

Should I sell my investments and put it all in cash - in institutions protected by the savings protection regime?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow


"I'm sorry, you've lost me. What are you expecting an answer to and I'll try to give you one.

Communism is inherently flawed as it requires someone at the top telling everyone else what it is to be a good communist. Socialism is just a step or two down the same ladder, imo.

Which country escaped the recession? China?

China ranks second only to the United States in the number of billionaires, according to an annual report of the 1,000 richest people in the country.

The Hurun Rich List counted 130 billionaires in China this year, up from 101 a year ago and none in 2003. America has 359 billionaires, according to Forbes. It seems even China is only communist to an extent.

"

it's so refreshing,and it must be hard,for you to admit,someone else was right.

well done wishy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"it's so refreshing,and it must be hard,for you to admit,someone else was right.

well done wishy. "

You've still lost me. I've no idea what you're referring to.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"it's so refreshing,and it must be hard,for you to admit,someone else was right.

well done wishy.

You've still lost me. I've no idea what you're referring to."

He's trolling.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I keep reading that all savers and investors are going to be scalped.

Bastard governments. I've worked hard for my savings.

Should I sell my investments and put it all in cash - in institutions protected by the savings protection regime?"

Hell no!

Learn something about the Efficient Markets Hypothesis, if you don't take risks, you won't get returns. Market Timing does not work. It goes against the Fundamental Principal of Counting in Probability Theory, and against the Theory of Speculation in Finance. 110 years worth of academics have been saying it, you ignore them at your peril. The stock market has the most expensive tuition fees, period.

Invest in appropriate asset classes, then diversify globally/across sectors, then make absolutely sure you're paying as little as possible for fees/expenses. Dodging actively managed funds would be an excellent idea. The only two investment ideas that seem to persistently give results to investor's pockets is Value Investing and Index Investing. Leaving up to a 'professional' is asking for your throat to be cut, you'll be bled like a pig and you'll never know it.

As importantly, if inflation persistently rears it's ugly head, and we have a repeat of the 70's stagflation, then you'll be glad to be in stocks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"tut tut tut wishy,once more your tunnel vision,does not allow you to see the big picture.

the recession was global,excepting one.

i have asked this before,but your unwillingness to give an answer.

speaks volumes.

did commumism win.

i dont expect an answer.

the truth would,only contradict,every political belief,you have ever given. "

notsureifstupidortrolling.jpg

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Since the onset of the industrial revolution and the fiasco of the South Sea Bubble we peasants have been at the mercy of Capitalism. What goes up must come down. Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon kinda sums it up for me......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

There was a very specific set of parameters that allowed The South Sea Bubble to happen.

1) the round trip voyage between South America & Europe could only be done by ship and took three months to complete.

2) lucrative trading ports in South America were controlled by Spain, who allowed just ONE British ship per year to sail from it.

3) communications between Britain, Spain & South America were vague at best and reliable information could not be quantified.

4) the investing public were conned into believing that the South Sea Trading Co had unlimited use of all four ports Spain controlled, again, unsubstantiated.

All these factors led gullible (read: greedy) iunvestors to pile into the shares of The South Sea Trading Co and £millions was generated almost overnight.

Other south sea traders opened up, issued shares, then folded a few weeks later taking investors money with them.

By 1719 the bubble had burst and the shares were worthless, losing investors entire family fortunes, and the directors of the South Sea Trading Co ran for cover.

All of this could only happen due to lack of immediate communication and unsubstantiated reports of unlimited access to an area thousands of miles away, but it is a perfect example of how a crowd can be turned with the promise of luxury and wealth.

'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds' details the South Sea Bubble and is a fascinating read.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds' details the South Sea Bubble and is a fascinating read."

+1 googol!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top