BBC Blog Network

User Profile

starry-tigger

Listed below are comments made by starry-tigger between Wednesday, 29th July 2009 and Wednesday, 2nd December 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Shouldn't banks work for us? 00:32am on 02 Dec 2009 I think we should go much further back than Marx to define what value is, maybe to the Stone Age? As 130 leoRoverman puts it, "We need shelter clothing food and warmth for which we have to pay."

The question is, "what do we pay for clothing, food and warmth?" I think the answer is probably measured in time and only time. It sounds obvious, and I haven't read Marx. What does he say about this?

Food takes time to grow, in which case it is the ultimate measure of value I would have thought. When food runs out that's the end, you can't sit around waiting for a potato to grow with an empty stomach, and even time loses its value because you're dead quite soon when not eating. I understand that farmers and agricultural workers come into this, but not as crucially as time.

Sorry if this sounds simplistic. Our planet does seem to be edging us closer to the Stone Age. I do think the environmental crisis is a big factor in the general corruption that we're witnessing, and there's an apocalyptic quality to the behaviour of bankers. Buying handguns is the latest symptom. If our climate makes it impossible to grow food in the seasons that we've been used to, or if world harvests fail because of unexpected weather patterns, then the greatest asset you could have would be a new world to go to where things are growing as usual. Even a store of baked beans in your bunker isn't going to do much good.

We are facing the ultimate scarcity which is no planet on which to live! How valuable does that make the Earth?
Why did Bank of England keep shtoom? 6:51pm on 25 Nov 2009 "They were so bruised by the run on Northern Rock, which began after I disclosed a year earlier that the Rock had asked for emergency loans from the Bank, that they felt that they had to take advantage of new legislative powers to keep such loans secret."

Robert, how do new legislative powers get passed? Did the authorities pass secret laws to make secret loans?

The whole business stinks. We need to question our dependence on banks. How would our world fall apart without them any more than at present with them? It seems that either we have democracy or banks. As many people on this blog have said many times, is it so difficult to have smaller banks and better regulation so that we can also have democracy?
Why did Bank of England keep shtoom? 9:12pm on 24 Nov 2009 This disclosure by Mervyn King is indeed fascinating and rather ghastly. It says so much about the financial system, that secrets on this scale have to be kept!

I find it even more fascinating that the secret is out now. Any thoughts on why now, and not earlier, when the loan was repayed? Or is this information strictly for the (very very rich) grown-ups?
Hester: fast recovery "dangerous" 09:10am on 12 Sep 2009 How sweet, Mr Hester has parents. That's so reassuring, he must be ok then!
What RBS's results say about QE 4:44pm on 24 Aug 2009 @ 521 empowers: "I can't bear the bull I heard."

I totally agree with you, and with economaniac @ 527, and DenseSingularity @ 530.

The garbage being spewed out at 9am on Radio 4 was just too ridiculous.

"Shortsellers are born, not made."
"Are you brave or just good at what you do?"
"It was really those with rare financial skills who became rich beyond their wildest dreams."
And so on ad nauseam.

Where is the reporter who can check statements being made by the individuals they are interviewing? Why the lack of facts ? Do we really have to swallow everything they say without any deeper investigation? Talk about a giant positive feedback mechanism! That's the best description of the way the media operates that I can think of.
What RBS's results say about QE 12:37pm on 14 Aug 2009 @ 315 spareusthelies
"Germany and France, (of all countries) exiting recession before the U.K. Before, the U.K that can't be right??"

A good question. I may be completely wrong, but do you think the reason is because here in the UK we're living in limbo, waiting for a general election?

That's one big factor France and Germany don't have to worry about. Here everyone's holding on to their funds (including the banks), waiting to see what kind of shower will be in charge for the next 5 years.

It's another legacy bestowed on us by Gordon and company.
What RBS's results say about QE 12:23pm on 07 Aug 2009 This credit dilemma is never going to end as long as QE is just a trick with money.

The evolution of money is an interesting one and we seem to have reached a dead end now. How can money be money in one place ("if the cash is classified by the banks as a customer deposit") and debt in another ("money raised by gilt sales.... and lent to banks in the form of short-term debt securities") etc etc etc?

I don't pretend to understand any of the above, in spite of your attempts to explain it all.

We may have something useful in QE but probably only from a narrow viewpoint, a bit like the International Date Line.

This line marks Greenwich as a starting point for the day and somewhere in the Pacific, halfway round the globe, as the end of a day. For the setting of clocks it's useful but for people travelling it's a nightmare. To quote from Wikipedia, just to give a flavour of the paradox created by this system:

"For two hours every day, at UTC 10:00–11:59, there are actually three different days observed at the same time. At UTC time Thursday 10:15, for example, it is Wednesday 23:15 in Samoa, which is eleven hours behind UTC, and it is Friday 00:15 in Kiritimati (separated from Samoa by the IDL), which is fourteen hours ahead of UTC. For the first hour (UTC 10:00–10:59), this phenomenon affects inhabited territories, whereas during the second hour (UTC 11:00–11:59) it only affects an uninhabited maritime time zone twelve hours behind UTC."

Perhaps we just need to stop pretending that the money system we currently have can be everything to everyone? The International Date Line can be ignored by looking at the sundial in your garden to find out what time it is, but we seem to be stuck with concepts in banking that are all about profit and not about real value, with no alternatives when the system fails.
Barclays: Even the bad times are good 08:33am on 03 Aug 2009 Remove half the opposition players from the football match, take the goalie out of the goal mouth and watch the striker score goals. Lovely game! But is it football?

Barclays is the lucky team this time. Perhaps we should randomly select another bank for the year to ply their trade on such favourable terms?
Who'll be shot when banks misbehave? 7:10pm on 31 Jul 2009 @ 64 ghostofsichuan

I was just thinking of Charles I when I read your post!

The beheading of Charles I was the moment when the concept of the divine right of kings was finally rejected. If we learn anything from history it's that people are always being lied to and conned by their so-called "betters".

For hundreds of years the English endured the Wars of the Roses under the mistaken belief that kings and queens had an unquestioned right to muster armies and tax the nation in endless dynastic feuds. Henry Tudor was the all-time monster who surpassed in arrogance all the others, but he inadvertently sowed the seed that destroyed the notion of divine right when he challenged the Pope. Charles I was the one who paid the price by having his head chopped off by Cromwell.

(Sorry about this potted history, but it's important to see the connections here.)

Soon after this the Bank of England was created (1694) and guess what? The divine rights of bankers was born. The same people who gained from the previous con trick about the divinity of royalty invented the system we currently suffer under. It's all for exactly the same purpose, to keep wealth in the hands of a tiny few "nobles" and "aristocrats". A fractional reserve banking system ensures that we only see smoke and mirrors and think we're getting richer when in fact we're just getting into more and more debt.

"Like the authorities, the MPs are still feeling their way towards a long-term solution..."

Yes, Robert, feeling their way is a good description. After a massive bail out of banks that has been justified with weak arguments and dodgy platitudes, the Treasury Select Committee are currently casting around for some vague notion of who should be responsible for the divine right of banks to steal our money next time.

What we need is another system. Until we get one, everyone should reduce their reliance on banks.
Why men are to blame for the crunch 8:00pm on 29 Jul 2009
I think writingsonthewall @ 107 has identified the real issue here, that it's the RICH who can be blamed for the mess. The super league top earners are able to bully everyone into submission and no-one dares to contradict or question what they say. Only mealy-mouthed sycophants get their approval.

You could argue that the credit crunch was caused because men in banking weren't men enough and didn't face up to the senior bankers who led everyone down the slippery slope to ruin.

Safety records in aviation show that the more stroppy and insubordinate the junior pilots are the better. Quantas has a good record because their first officers aren't afraid to question a captain if they think something is wrong.

If the Treasury Select Committee wants improvements in banking they should reduce the pay of the top layer to weed out the psychopath.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

starry-tigger