D.Tel: Issues - then hides - scary bank numbers.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 20 Feb 2009, 14:14

Of course I did...

You being unable to understand the point does not invalidate the point.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » 20 Feb 2009, 14:20

DominicJ wrote:That 19trillion is not created magicaly by the banks, its money they owe to their depositors.
If its not paid back, the banks cant give you the money in your savings account or current account. Because they dont have it.

But is this right? If Europeans have x trillion Euros in their savings accounts surely those in charge of the Euro printing presses can cover that, if required? Rather than bank default (and mass panic) wouldn't it only require a bit of overtime for the printers on time and a half? The Euro would effectively be devalued, of course.

I'm deliberately simplifying, but do expect our cash savings to drop in value. Hard assets much more of a wealth preserver.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 20 Feb 2009, 14:47

Technicaly, yes, legaly, no.

Her most Britianic Majesties Government have (and are considering using) the right to order the BoE to print a stock of notes and hand them over.
Or the electronic equiviliant, they dont physicaly need to print them, unless people actualy want to hold the bits of paper.

The Austrian government, who's proper name eludes me, cannot do the same with the ECB.
It is possible that they will change that, but when Austria suggested it recently, Germany screamed no.
Madness of course, if Austrias banking system fails it will bring the Euro down with it, but, to paraphrase Ambrose, Germany fears national bailouts like a vampire fears sunlight.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » 20 Feb 2009, 14:57

DominicJ wrote:Germany fears national bailouts like a vampire fears sunlight.

Perhaps, given their history, Germany should also fear the middle classes having their savings wiped out. (though that could happen by hyper-inflation as well as bank default).

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 20 Feb 2009, 15:01

DominicJ wrote:Food, I'm beginning to worry about you, you'll be ranting about Bilderburg soon.

We dont live in an unregulated world, your friends the socialists are the ones who have allowed banks to lend 95% of deposits on 125% mortages, they've even promised to pay everyone back with everyone else money if it all goes wrong.

Now be quiet until you have something relevent and factual to say, theres a good chap.

Absolute class. Well done. Dom, you should be a comedian.

Oh. You already are.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 20 Feb 2009, 16:24

Emord
Perhaps you could provide a fact based rebuttle?

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 20 Feb 2009, 17:45

DominicJ wrote:Her most Britianic Majesties

How many queens have we got now?

skeptik · Post by **skeptik** » 20 Feb 2009, 18:42

biffvernon wrote:
DominicJ wrote:Her most Britianic Majesties
How many queens have we got now?

Um.. Peter Mandelson, Simon Hughes, Mathew Parris... spring immediately to mind. I'm sure people can think of plenty more.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » 20 Feb 2009, 19:28

skeptik wrote:
biffvernon wrote:
DominicJ wrote:Her most Britianic Majesties
How many queens have we got now?
Um.. Peter Mandelson, Simon Hughes, Mathew Parris... spring immediately to mind. I'm sure people can think of plenty more.

That'll keep the lawyers busy!

Mean Mr Mustard · Post by **Mean Mr Mustard** » 20 Feb 2009, 19:46

DominicJ wrote:Emord
Perhaps you could provide a fact based rebuttle?

Seems the forum has two trolls now?

SunnyJim · Post by **SunnyJim** » 20 Feb 2009, 21:32

DominicJ wrote:Emord
Perhaps you could provide a fact based rebuttle?

Tw*t.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 20 Feb 2009, 23:33

Mean Mr Mustard wrote:
DominicJ wrote:Emord
Perhaps you could provide a fact based rebuttle?
Seems the forum has two trolls now?

Nah just the one, it's the same bloke

RGR doesn't seem to know that some people (even in the USA) are so poor they can't afford stuff (eg solar PV etc), and that for various reasons this is an undesirable state of affairs, while DomJ doesn't seem to realise that some people are so rich they don't "do" rules-and-regs, that it is an excess of the free market that has brought this about, and that it is (for various reasons) an undesirable state of affairs. Interesting symmetry.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 23 Feb 2009, 09:58

Ben

Perhaps, given their history, Germany should also fear the middle classes having their savings wiped out. (though that could happen by hyper-inflation as well as bank default).

Its a common thought that the 1920's hyper inflation brought the Nazis into power, it wasnt.
Hyper inflation was well under control by 1923, when Hitler attempted a coup.
It was the 1930's deflation that led to Hitlers rise.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » 23 Feb 2009, 12:52

DominicJ wrote:Ben
Perhaps, given their history, Germany should also fear the middle classes having their savings wiped out. (though that could happen by hyper-inflation as well as bank default).
Its a common thought that the 1920's hyper inflation brought the Nazis into power, it wasnt.
Hyper inflation was well under control by 1923, when Hitler attempted a coup.
It was the 1930's deflation that led to Hitlers rise.

It's an interesting period. The hyper-inflation was so extreme decent middle class people would have had their life savings wiped out. The hyper-inflation would have been another trauma on top of The Great War and the supposed injustices of Treaty of Versailles.

Yep, I know there was currency reform at the end of '23, but much of the damage would have been done. I'm sure there were other ingredients as well that ultimately led to Hitler's rise, including a prolonged economic slump throughout the 20s and beyond.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 23 Feb 2009, 14:11

As a long term measure it was certainly a factor, it broke what little support Weimar had from the wealthy.
It wiped out all savings, from the few hours pay saved by the poor to the fortunes of the aristocratic landed class.

I may have jumped the gun on my ealier comment some what, pre coke, it read a little differently