April 1st Glass Box.

Comments

Sign in or register to comment.

• Previous
• Next

• 1. At 5:01pm on 01 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  HEADLINE: Groucho Marx on the Glass Box tonight.

  Complain about this comment

• 2. At 5:18pm on 01 Apr 2009, Big Sister wrote:

  Where's Dr. Hackenbush when you want him?

  Complain about this comment

• 3. At 5:34pm on 01 Apr 2009, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

  17:34...
  
  Was that someone letting off steam? Or Eddie or Nils heaving a big sigh at the state of the world?

  Complain about this comment

• 4. At 5:36pm on 01 Apr 2009, MrsEffingham wrote:

  Hello Rog.

  Complain about this comment

• 5. At 5:41pm on 01 Apr 2009, funnyJoedunn wrote:

  DMCN (1)
  
  Your wrong, its Alistair Darling.

  Complain about this comment

• 6. At 5:46pm on 01 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  fJd 5, Don't call me darling!

  Complain about this comment

• 7. At 5:57pm on 01 Apr 2009, DI_Wyman wrote:

  Sequin come out of the closet!

  Complain about this comment

• 8. At 6:21pm on 01 Apr 2009, Charlie wrote:

  
  
  The BEST "Glass Box Picture", EVER..!
  
  

  Complain about this comment

• 9. At 6:59pm on 01 Apr 2009, Frances O wrote:

  "I don’t care to belong to any glass box that will have me as a member"
  
  Or words to that effect. I gurgled the quotation and found many variations.

  Complain about this comment

• 10. At 7:09pm on 01 Apr 2009, gallantSocrates wrote:

  
  
  Has Nicolas Sarkozy seen the Light or is he terrified of the shadow of the Guillotine?
  
  Brian V Peck

  Complain about this comment

• 11. At 9:20pm on 01 Apr 2009, Thunderbird wrote:

  Am the only one who noticed that petrol has gone up today?
  
  Clever Mr darling for doing it on April fools and G20 day......
  
  Discuss

  Complain about this comment

• 12. At 9:26pm on 01 Apr 2009, Lady Sue wrote:

  Hmmm, T-Bird, well spotted. It certainly slipped past me.
  
  How much by?

  Complain about this comment

• 13. At 10:58pm on 01 Apr 2009, Thunderbird wrote:

  Sue, I have no idea by how much it slipped by you.........
  
  As for petrol; 2.2 pence

  Complain about this comment

• 14. At 11:43pm on 01 Apr 2009, Frances O wrote:

  No discussion needed, Tbird. Bury bad news.
  
  Sort of the opposite of the iPM question.

  Complain about this comment

• 15. At 09:18am on 02 Apr 2009, Lady Sue wrote:

  T-Bird, *chuckles*. Thanks. Perhaps they'll get to it today.
  
  Frances - loving your Maloprops.

  Complain about this comment

• 16. At 09:40am on 02 Apr 2009, Big Sister wrote:

  The petrol increase was one announced a while back. Perhaps they thought we'd be fool enough to think it was a joke?
  
  Tbird - I can see this price rise affects you deeply. Of course, it depends what model you are, but I'm guessing you only 'do' about 15 miles to the gallon?

  Complain about this comment

• 17. At 10:23am on 02 Apr 2009, U13879388 wrote:

  The government is giving 1.6 billion to Nationwide to cover the inbalance between its assets and liabilities in taking over Dunfermline.
  
  Peston says that the 'bad loans' have been accounted as having a 10 percent failure rate, overall.
  
  But markets wouldn't touch them at that rate of discount.
  
  Saying the accountancy cost to the tax payer is just 10 million seems to me to be wishful thinking.
  
  
  
  Anyway, are these experts talking about one thing or two?
  
  1.4 billion seems to be the amount of liabilities needed by the new bank to match 900 million of toxicity and 500 million of social housing loans. (Its this 900 that will surely fail at a rate closer to 45 percent rather than the ~15 percent that gives the 10 percent rate overall)
  
  So why do all reports talk of 1.6 billion to Nationwide, when the toxic bank is supposed to be separate ('Nationwide can't run the social housing loan business')?
  
  Is it because the 1.6 is for Dunfermline's 'good' business that lost liability counterparts (funding loans) in the credit crush?
  
  Before the programme moves on to its next parcel of Ponzi posts, could Nils tell me please,
  1. Is the default rate on the 900 million, as announced by the FSA's appointed accountants, a reasonable guess? How did they arrive at it?
  2. Why is there a 200 million gap between the 1.6 billion 'promised to Nationwide' and the 1.4 billion the toxicity bank seems to need?
  Is it 'cos in total we're in for 1.4 + 1.6 billion with 1.6 billion going to Nationwide over and above the anti-toxic funding?
  3. If 1.6 billion IS going to Nationwide directly to cover 'good' business acquired from Dunfermline that seems to suggest that the other building societies' 'good' business is similarly troubled. Is it?
  4. The FSA thinks not. What is the reputation of the FSA at the moment among the cognoscenti?
  5. ARE there ANY cognoscenti at the moment?
  
  

  Complain about this comment

• 18. At 10:26am on 02 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  BS 16, They thought the get the petrol rise through (announced some tiime ago) while everybody is paying attention to the G20 meetings or the Home Secretary's escapades.

  Complain about this comment

• 19. At 10:29am on 02 Apr 2009, Big Sister wrote:

  David, so you're now telling me that Jacqui Smith's husband didn't watch sex films paid for by the tax payer - that it was simply a smoke screen to cover the rise in fuel duty?
  
  Incredible but true?

  Complain about this comment

• 20. At 10:31am on 02 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  Is Jack Straw turning his false teeth around in his mouth or sucking on a mint during PMQ? Whatever it is, it is disgusting to watch and he should stop it or move where we don't have to watch. Aaaaand, he keeps sticking his tongue out as well. (It shows how interesting PMQ is that I notice this.)

  Complain about this comment

• 21. At 10:36am on 02 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  BS 19, No, as a bonus, he got to watch the films. And, we paid for them. Smith and hubby will now put in a claim for the petrol rise as well, but on a separate bill.

  Complain about this comment

• 22. At 11:14am on 02 Apr 2009, Thunderbird wrote:

  BS / DM I guess they was high-octane films...
  
  
  Also can everyone not forget that petrol tax went up when VAT went down (Temporally) I wonder what will happen when we are back at 17.5%
  
  

  Complain about this comment

• 23. At 12:16pm on 02 Apr 2009, philtblog wrote:

  22 -That's a question for the petrol companies, isn't it? When VAT went down presumably the petrol companies should have passed on the saving to us. I don't know whether it coincided with the big fall in Oil price which led to the fall in petrol prices... This tax rise was from the last budget but postponed because oil prices were high to when they were presumed to fall lower again - 1st April. Whilst this coincides slightly with G20, and was reported on the news and Today yesterday, one can't help but wonder whether all the blather and rubbish about adult movies has detracted from an important bit of news...

  Complain about this comment

• 24. At 12:55pm on 02 Apr 2009, Thunderbird wrote:

  Yes petrol would have gone down when VAT went down if Mr Darling hadn't of but tax up at the same time. My point/question is will he reverse that rise when VAT goes back to 17.5%. Unfortunately I guess no one who can ask.....will

  Complain about this comment

• 25. At 1:49pm on 02 Apr 2009, philtblog wrote:

  The two taxes are seperate things. VAT and fuel duty were independent of each other then and will be again now so, no I doubt fuel duty will go down when VAT goes up, nor should it. The only question is whether petrol companies passedon the saving to us and if not whether they will pass on the loss when VAT rises again.

  Complain about this comment

• 26. At 4:34pm on 02 Apr 2009, David_McNickle wrote:

  HEADLINE: Michelle puts arm around Liz II and Liz reciprocates. Phil invites Barry to arm wrestle.

  Complain about this comment

• Previous
• Next

View these comments in RSS