Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:46 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Regarding the "old chestnut" about the banking crisis, again I ask, do you dispute it occurred?
Or did Gordon Brown pull the rug from under banks right across the Western economies?

You mean when he calculated that Abbey, A&L, and B&B were completely worthless, and handed their assets and ongoing business to Santander, thanking them for helping keep those business afloat. This rendered shares in those companies worthless.

12 months later, Santander's annual accounts stated they made a E4bn profit, which consisted of an operational loss of E12bn, plus a transfer of E16b net assets from the 'acquisition' of Abbey, A&L, and B&B" ....... Worthless eh?

For those who don't know, the shareholders of all of those companies are still pressing for legal action against the then government for compensation - however, according to a government statement last month, "All files pertaining to the valuation and transfer of B&B assets to Santander were accidentally destroyed during the parliamentary changeover in 2010" .....

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:28 pm  

BogBrushHead wrote:

You mean when ...

I don't think that was what either El Barbudo or Him were meaning.

I think that they were referring not to what happened after the onset of the financial crisis, but what caused the financial crisis in the first place – hence mentions of Lehman Brothers etc.

The matter of how Brown handled the immediate aftermath is still up for debate, although some analysts have suggested that Brown's actions after the crisis hit, and the speed of them, possibly avoided the situation becoming worse – maybe even up to a full-scale depression.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:14 pm  

BogBrushHead wrote:

You mean when he calculated that Abbey, A&L, and B&B were completely worthless ...

No.
I was, as Mintball said, referring to the banking meltdown of 2008.

As it happens, your description doesn't appear to tie in with Abbey's agreement to merge with Santander in an £8bn deal in 2004 or Santander's takeover of Alliance & Leicester's for £1.3bn in 2008 or the £150m that Santander paid for B&B's savings accounts and branches after B&B went absobloodylutelytitsup.
It sounds like you would argue that the valuations that were made were less than they were worth ... but those were the deals and share values can go down as well as up.
I'd suggest that's worthy of a thread of its own if you want to debate it.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:14 pm  

BiffasBoys wrote:

Let's all blame Lehmann Brothers. No hang on let's do what every Labour politician has done and blame the bankers. That old chestnut. Sorry, I meant scapegoat. Where is Gordon Brown these days?

Why shouldn't we blame banks and financial institutions for a banking and financial crisis?
Will you please answer the question, do you think the Labour governments policies caused Lehmann Brothers to fail?

BiffasBoys wrote:

debt/gdp ratio =-fiscal policy = credit rating = cost of borrowing

no it doesn't. it really doesn't.
the yield rates ARE the cost of borrowing. All debt to GDP ratios and credit ratings are are indicators for those willing to lend.

BiffasBoys wrote:

You seem to want to avoid the fact that current rates are 3% - double what you quote on 10 year bonds. Doesn't suit your argument?

I didnt avoid it at all. In fact I specifically mentioned that rates had risen. Talking about not suiting your argument, when was the last time before 2012 that rates were at or lower than 3%?

BiffasBoys wrote:

Instead of just quoting selected newspapers reports, why not use actual statistics?

Ok. From Q2 2010 to Q2 2013 public sector employment fell by roughly 650,000.
The percentage of people in employment who work in the public sector is at the lowest since records began.

BiffasBoys wrote:

Has the U.S model worked? In what regard?

In the regard that the economy grew significantly, retail sales went through the roof. As did industrial production, business confidence, exports, balance of trade, and wages. Whilst unemployment has fallen by around a third.

BiffasBoys wrote:

What demand was filled?

The demand gap in, partly, consumer spending. Post crash consumer spending fell by around $200bn. It is now $700bn higher. It also helps bridge the gap for businesses. Post crash capacity utilisation fell by 15%.

BiffasBoys wrote:

This fascination with the U.S is bizarre. It's similarity to the UK economy is?

Why? Because it doesn't back up your argument?
It's similarity to the UK is that it's a first world, developed, democratic, capitalist country with an economy that suffered from the financial crash and is largely dependent on consumer spending that took a radically different approach to the crisis.

BiffasBoys wrote:

That is absolute tosh. The net effect was zero & it cost £12bn in receipts. That's why it didn't last.

If the net effect was zero how did it cost £12bn in receipts?

BiffasBoys wrote:

Tax rises aren't ideal, but it doesn't impact greatly & is raising billions.

A tax on consumption in a consumer economy? A VAT rise during a recession is economic madness.

BiffasBoys wrote:

That's brilliant economics. Cut your tax take & borrow more

It's not brilliant. It's basic economics in a recession. Ask FDR.
It's also exactly what the US did.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:12 pm  

Mintball wrote:

I don't think that was what either El Barbudo or Him were meaning.

I think that they were referring not to what happened after the onset of the financial crisis, but what caused the financial crisis in the first place – hence mentions of Lehman Brothers etc.

The matter of how Brown handled the immediate aftermath is still up for debate, although some analysts have suggested that Brown's actions after the crisis hit, and the speed of them, possibly avoided the situation becoming worse – maybe even up to a full-scale depression.

Brown got it badly wrong all round. His dismantling of the regulatory framework & taking away control of interest rate from Bof E created the disaster. He doubled public spending on the back of tax receipts from the banks he cut loose. He then spent our money trying to cover his mess up when the crash hit.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:25 pm  

Him wrote:

Why shouldn't we blame banks and financial institutions for a banking and financial crisis?
Will you please answer the question, do you think the Labour governments policies caused Lehmann Brothers to fail?

Who was it that created the framework the banks worked in? Who was it who took interest rate control away from the B of E so they remained artificially low & didn't rise to take the heat out of the economy?

no it doesn't. it really doesn't.
the yield rates ARE the cost of borrowing. All debt to GDP ratios and credit ratings are are indicators for those willing to lend.

One leads to the other to the other

I didnt avoid it at all. In fact I specifically mentioned that rates had risen. Talking about not suiting your argument, when was the last time before 2012 that rates were at or lower than 3%?

We're not in 2012, we're in the back end of 2013

Ok. From Q2 2010 to Q2 2013 public sector employment fell by roughly 650,000.
The percentage of people in employment who work in the public sector is at the lowest since records began.

Absolute tosh

In the regard that the economy grew significantly, retail sales went through the roof. As did industrial production, business confidence, exports, balance of trade, and wages. Whilst unemployment has fallen by around a third.

No it didn't. The VAT cut did nothing other than cost money

The demand gap in, partly, consumer spending. Post crash consumer spending fell by around $200bn. It is now $700bn higher. It also helps bridge the gap for businesses. Post crash capacity utilisation fell by 15%.

More utter garbage

Why? Because it doesn't back up your argument?
It's similarity to the UK is that it's a first world, developed, democratic, capitalist country with an economy that suffered from the financial crash and is largely dependent on consumer spending that took a radically different approach to the crisis.

None of those points are actually relevant. You really don't know what you're talking about

If the net effect was zero how did it cost £12bn in receipts?

You said it created growth. It didn't. The net effect on growth was zero.

A tax on consumption in a consumer economy? A VAT rise during a recession is economic madness.

Why is it madness? What effect has it had on consumer spending?

It's not brilliant. It's basic economics in a recession. Ask FDR.
It's also exactly what the US did

There you go again with the USA obsession & comparing an entirely different economic structure

.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:30 pm  

Mintball wrote: One in three behind on rent since housing benefit changes. So, an unmitigated success. No actual facts in there. Just a survey from the TUC. The housing benefit bill is £24bn a year & costs each & every taxpayer £700 a year. The spare room subsidy exists in private rented accommodation. There is a fixed amount of housing stock that needs to be allocated according need & to ensure taxpayers money isn't spent unnecessarily.

Mintball wrote: One in three behind on rent since housing benefit changes. So, an unmitigated success. No actual facts in there. Just a survey from the TUC. The housing benefit bill is £24bn a year & costs each & every taxpayer £700 a year. The spare room subsidy exists in private rented accommodation. There is a fixed amount of housing stock that needs to be allocated according need & to ensure taxpayers money isn't spent unnecessarily.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:32 pm  

BiffasBoys wrote:

The spare room subsidy exists in private rented accommodation.

No it doesn't.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:44 am  

BiffasBoys wrote:

Who was it that created the framework the banks worked in?

Which framework? We were talking about Lehmann Brothers. If you mean the UK then it was successive UK governments of both parties.
Can you answer the question please? This is the third time of asking. Which Labour government policy or decision caused Lehmann Brothers to fail?

BiffasBoys wrote:

Who was it who took interest rate control away from the B of E so they remained artificially low & didn't rise to take the heat out of the economy?

No-one. The Bank of England sets the interest rate. They had no need to rise. The economy wasn't out of control. The financial sector was.

BiffasBoys wrote:

One leads to the other to the other

Not necessarily. As I said, they are indicators for investors nothing more. Plus you're not taking into account the relative effect compared to other countries. The UK had warnings and negative outlooks from credit rating agencies in 2009 and 2010. The UK's debt to GDP ratio and borrowing to GDP ratio both increased over this time. Yet the yield rates went down.

BiffasBoys wrote:

We're not in 2012, we're in the back end of 2013

So you don't know then? If you don't know why do you think a rate of 3% is bad? If you do know then just tell us.

BiffasBoys wrote:

Absolute tosh

Why do you say that? Do you dispute the figures? What do you think the official figures actually are then? Because those figures come from what I would describe as a reputable source.

BiffasBoys wrote:

No it didn't. The VAT cut did nothing other than cost money

What are you on about? You really are getting confused aren't you? We were talking about the US economy.

BiffasBoys wrote:

More utter garbage

Why do you say it's garbage? Do you dispute the figures? Or do you not understand them?

BiffasBoys wrote:

None of those points are actually relevant. You really don't know what you're talking about

Well I know that debt to GDP isn't the cost of borrowing. So that's something eh I also know that you're frantically stumbling your way around this like a wasted Stevie Wonder in the middle of an earthquake.
If those points aren't relevant, then what points would be in determining relative similarity between nations economies?
Try answering a question for a change.

BiffasBoys wrote:

You said it created growth. It didn't. The net effect on growth was zero.

You didn't say that. You said the net effect was zero. Which it can't have been if it cost £12bn in receipts. Which is it? Or did you mess that up too?
Either way the IFS, CEBR, CRR and plenty of businesses and directors disagree with you about the effects of VAT reductions and rises.

BiffasBoys wrote:

Why is it madness? What effect has it had on consumer spending?

Consumer spending decreased. It depressed growth by around 0.3% and cost jobs.

BiffasBoys wrote:

There you go again with the USA obsession & comparing an entirely different economic structure

Excuse me? I didn't compare the USA with any other nation in that quote. You were saying expansionary fiscal policy in a time of recession wasn't a good idea. I was saying it is but backing it up with 2 examples.

Re: Bedroom Tax - A Solution ? : Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:25 am  

BiffasBoys wrote:

Absolute tosh

As predicted.


You deny official stats, don't know that yield rate is the cost of borrowing, refuse to accept that stimulus pulled the US out of the mire, think that the entire Western banking crisis was Brown's fault, deny the reductions in public sector staffing, don't accept that supply versus demand affects price, cover your lack of insight with irrelevant questions but ignore questions asked of you ... etc etc ... and, when proved utterly wrong, you respond with "Absolute tosh".


It's over, give it up.