BBC Blog Network

Listed below are comments made by BasaltRocky between Tuesday, 17th March 2009 and Thursday, 30th July 2009.

• «Newer
• Older»

• BT: A blacker pension hole 3:16pm on 30 Jul 2009 As an Actuary, it seems to me that those above, who are saying that a pension scheme deficit can be washed away amongst all the other reported-accounts detirus, are the same people who made lots of money inflating today's credit-crunch bubble and then wondered why it ended with a bang (or it would have done, if the Government wouldn't have bought a couple of years time before the real mega-crunch comes).
  
  But since those same people made and are still making lots of money (and got the rest of us to carry their bill), they can't be so stupid, can they ?
• West Brom BS to be rescued 5:28pm on 11 Jun 2009 So when Robert Peston, two months ago in his blog on 30th March 2009, stated:
  
  The rest of the building society sector is in pretty good shape.
  Barring an economic disaster, no other substantial building society is expected to need rescuing in this way. So it remains the case that the UK's building societies have weathered the recession better than our commercial banks.
  
  (link here at: Robert Peston's BBC blog - How Dumfermline fell)
  
  can we then take a single word of Robert's blogs seriously.
  
  A wise man admits their mistakes, and learns from them to become wiser.
  A fool carries on regardless.
  
  OK, Nationwide seems to be able to carry on without problem for now, but with Brittania being forced to merge with Co-op, and other problems across the sector, the statement that the rest of the building society sector is in pretty good shape seems (and remains until retracted) as if it were a distorted piece of incorrect propaganda.
• Should we save building societies? 5:57pm on 12 May 2009 BUT ROBERT ,
  
  You said only last month that no more building societies were under threat !!!!!
  
  No apology, no reference to your mistake, no reasons given for the change.
  
  Others have accused you of being a Government propoganda mouthpiece. With a record like this, why do you lend credence to their views ?!?
• Not so stressed 4:54pm on 07 May 2009 Quote: 'It can withstand more-or-less any shock, other than the kind of economic Armageddon which would give us rather bigger things to worry about than the health of Lloyds.'
  
  Robert,
  
  You are doing it again !!!
  
  This is the kind of childish muddled thinking that got us into this mess.
  
  So when the 1 in 10 event (Armageddon economic shock) happens that pushes us over the edge, we loose stability and are doomed !!! It is possible to play the game so that when the 1 in 10 event occurs, we are safe, but that requires, it seems, too much prudence.
  
  And 9 times out of 10 these events do not occur. But play the game long enough (on average 10 times, and with almost certainty 20 times), and the 1 in 10 event will happen !!!!
• The end of a retailing era 10:49am on 31 Mar 2009 Thanks Robert, for a timely article reminding us of our situation's reality.
  
  You state: there is the strong probability that taxes will have to rise after the next election, as the new government tries to put some kind of brake on the rise and rise of public-sector debt - which will squeeze households' disposable income.
  
  Probability ???
  Certainty !!!
  The only probability is whether taxes are going to be in your own language eye wateringly-high or whether they are going to be mind bogglingly and crucifiably-high.
• How Dunfermline fell 10:53am on 30 Mar 2009 Quote: 'Total losses on these impaired assets are expected to be in the range of £60m to £100m, according to an independent assessment for the Financial Services Authority that has been carried out by KPMG.'
  
  Robert,
  KPMG and the other three big auditors have been valuing assets at ridiculous multiples of their worth for about five years now.
  
  The crash and depression we are now entering could only have taken place if the large auditors had built the bubble by valuing assets at stupidly high prices.
  Which they did.
  It is primarily their fault (and then the regulators).
  
  And as it would damage their reputation (and lead many banks into immediate bankruptcy), these large auditors today continue to value assets at ridiculously high levels as anyone can see by looking at their current practice (only waiting for inflation in a year or two to come and spare their thieving blushes).
  
  So telling us that KPMG values the losses at only a maximum of £100 million, to anyone with eyes in their head, is no comfort.
  
  
• How Dunfermline fell 10:42am on 30 Mar 2009 Robert Preston - Quote:
  'Unless you believe that the FSA is run and staffed by reckless numpties, it's reassuring that the City watchdog believes that Barclays should be able to withstand more-or-less whatever the enfeebled global economy throws at it, without crumbling.
  And, I suppose, if the economy were to perform even worse than the hypotheses for this financial war game, well we'd be worrying about a good deal more than just the health of Barclays. '
  
  
  Whoa, here we go again.
  Robert, like an Ostrich, you are saying that Barclay's must be OK, as if things go wrong enough for Barclay's to be hit we may as well just give up.
  
  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  
  But this is the exact thinking that got us into our current terrible position in the first place !!!
  The thinking that, don't worry, we can keep increasing debt, because if the strategy ever stops working then we will have such a cataclysmic catastrophe to worry about that we need not worry about it !!
  
  And here we are, that is exactly what happened.
  
  So how can you repeat this same drivel that Barclays must be OK because it is inconceivable to think that more bad news might be around the corner ?
• Barclays may reject Asset Protection 8:32pm on 29 Mar 2009 Robert Preston - Quote:
  'Unless you believe that the FSA is run and staffed by reckless numpties, it's reassuring that the City watchdog believes that Barclays should be able to withstand more-or-less whatever the enfeebled global economy throws at it, without crumbling.
  And, I suppose, if the economy were to perform even worse than the hypotheses for this financial war game, well we'd be worrying about a good deal more than just the health of Barclays. '
  
  
  Whoa, here we go again.
  Robert, like an Ostrich, you are saying that Barclay's must be OK, as if things go wrong enough for Barclay's to be hit we may as well just give up.
  
  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  
  But this is the exact thinking that got us into our current terrible position in the first place !!!
  The thinking that, don't worry, we can keep increasing debt, because if the strategy ever stops working then we will have such a cataclysmic catastrophe to worry about that we need not worry about it !!
  
  And here we are, that is exactly what happened.
  
  So how can you repeat this same drivel that Barclays must be OK because it is inconceivable to think that more bad news might be around the corner ?
• We are the monolines now 3:38pm on 23 Mar 2009 Thanks for the post Robert.
  
  Well said.
• Goodwin's tax break 3:49pm on 17 Mar 2009 So we have:
  Linklater's, advising Government-owned-RBS, and charging them up to £900/hour
  arguing with
  Slaughter & May, advising the Government, and charging them up to £900/hour,
  !!!??!!??!!
  These two legal firms, between them, are likely (after all their senior legal opinion) to bill how much for this ? Up to £1/2 million ? Up to 1 million ? Much more ?
  
  So we the tax payer are paying these city lawyers huge sums to sue us.
  At least some rich lawyers will still have fortunes to be able to afford a loaf of bread in a couple of years, when Sterling is worthless and taxes for the common man are at painful levels.
  And this rip off is actually only a minor rip off compared to some other current ones !!??!!
  
  
  
  

• «Newer
• Older»

BBC.co.uk