Is there an answer to the economic conundrum?

[petit_pablo]

My solution.

More affordable housing and banks willing to lend so the young can get mortgages. This would have to be government backed/funded to a degree.

A condition of the new builds would be to use local firms/contractors and suppliers. This would get the local economy moving again and filter down through the supply chain. Once people start spending the economy will start growing again.

To simple? probably.

 

[trollmaster2000]

The real solution is twofold.

Part 1. Issue plc (plc so that anyone can buy into it) companies with licences to bear arms, access to military weapons markets, and carry out attacks upon foreign soil, to sieze assets; a percentage of which would be paid to the government as a 'licence fee'. These groups could also be used to eliminate communists and freedom haters within the country.

Part 2. Nuke a few oil producing countries. Seize their oil production, via private UK firms, using criminals and communists to staff them in radioactive conditoins. They obtain the oil for free and sell it to the UK market at knock down rates.

problem solved

 

[Micilin]

The banks are not interested in the economy. They are interested in their business. Their internal targets are what matters, not the UK's growth. So whther they are better ecnomists than the poster here is largely irrelevant.

It is part of the govts job to provide pressure of some sort (incentives or penalties)so that it is in the banks' best interest to lend to small businesses. That is create conditions favourable for growth.

Communist claptrap.

Every business is in it for themselves, neither newsagents, craft shops, big oil or banks, they make decisions based upon their own needs, not the economy.

Individuals are the same, nobody decides to buy a widget because it's good for the economy or not, they buy it because they want it.

Scuse me if I don't want businesses told by ignorant populist politicians how they should spend their money.

I mean how can everyone so quickly forget that a large part of the banks crash was because of the government encouraging bad loans = and bad bank merges.


.

How is what I said in any way 'communist'??

Two statements that surely you agree with ?

A Bank is run as business, making profit for its shareholders with no obligation to the economy (therefore do not expect anything else).

Govts set up conditions to make it favourable for the banks to behave as they want them to - inflation targets , interest rates, tax rates, export guaruntees etc.

How is any of that communist? I thought that was what every modern govt in the UK has done for fo better or worse

 

[ladylola]

The real solution

Part 2. Nuke a few oil producing countries. use criminals and communists to staff them in radioactive conditoins.

oh trolly an very good idea but one small flaw is that communist heros wouldn't work with the bankers

 

[ellal]

When the banks were bailed out, it was on the express understanding that they would lend money to small firms.

You might want to check that, where was this written?, where was this agreed, who "understood this"?

Just political mumbo jumbo speech.

Really...

Linky Linky

Banks agree Project Merlin lending and bonus deal...

A long-awaited agreement with the largest UK banks on lending, pay and bonuses has been announced.

Under Project Merlin, banks will lend about £190bn to businesses this year - including £76bn to small firms - curb bonuses and reveal some salary details of their top earners.

The Bank of England will monitor whether loans targets are being met.....

HSBC, Barclays, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and Lloyds Banking Group have signed up to the Project Merlin agreement, while Santander has agreed to the lending parts of the deal.

So what was this about.."My bloody head is pounding with flue, yet I still have the sense to google stuff before spouting out my opinion"?

Time for more Calpol methinks...

And then...

Only 2 Scottish banks were bailed out, so why would the other banks be under any obligation to loan more?

Because all the banks benefit from the historically low rates that the BofE is giving them?

 

[trollmaster2000]

The real solution

Part 2. Nuke a few oil producing countries. use criminals and communists to staff them in radioactive conditoins.

oh trolly an very good idea but one small flaw is that communist heros wouldn't work with the bankers

I never said anything about giving them a choice!

 

[pred]

My solution, devalue the pound and large pay rises for the workers, if they are earning £50K per annum instead of £25 they are back in the housing market SIMPLES

 

[subman101]

My solution, part 1 - seize all lands and properties owned by religions. Sell off their jewellery, and convert their large buildings into hostels for the homeless and needy.

 

[Micilin]

My solution, part 1 - seize all lands and properties owned by religions. Sell off their jewellery, and convert their large buildings into hostels for the homeless and needy.

Unworkable -- but I'd give it a go

 

[AronSearle]

Really...

Linky Linky

From the article "He said the banks won't be forced to lend if they don't want to."

Doesnt sound like much does it?

Under Project Merlin, banks will lend about £190bn to businesses this year - including £76bn to small firms - curb bonuses and reveal some salary details of their top earners.

I'd be interested in reading the actual contract, rather than hearing the politicians summery of it.

and what's this?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...despite-project-merlin-agreement-6849656.html

Royal Bank of Scotland, which is 83% owned by the taxpayer, is the culprit for the shortfall in small business lending after the other four lenders came forward and confirmed they had beaten their targets.

Oh, you mean it was actually the government owned and run bank that failed, and the other banks that didn't take bailouts met the target.

Colour me surprised

Because all the banks benefit from the historically low rates that the BofE is giving them?

So?

There is no contractual requirement to obtain that low interest rate, "an understanding" can be misunderstood.

 

[ellal]

I'd be interested in reading the actual contract, rather than hearing the politicians summery of it.

But you questioned whether there was an agreement, not whether it had been adhered to...there was an agreement that your 'google search' wasn't up to!

There is no contractual requirement to obtain that low interest rate, "an understanding" can be misunderstood.

You asked why the banks should lend, and I've simply given you the reason why!

Directly or indirectly ALL banks benefitted from the bailout, and continue to do so through those BofE rates and QE...

 

[joinerjohn]

Aron Searle, You seem to spend your time on here questioning peoples sources of information, or arguing about what they've posted. So

What's your answer to the current economic crisis? I'm sure both I and others on here would love to know your answer to it.
All you have done up to now is deride everyone else's answers.. Lets have yours.

 

[joe-90]

He doesn't have an opinion on any subject.

Anyway whatever the solution it needs to be found quickly.

Every month, month in and month out we borrow about the same amount needed to hold the Olympics in London.

Can any nation survive if they borrow the equivalent of the Olympics every single month?

We've got to pay this money back one day - but we never will, we will default on our loans just as the rest of the Eurozone will.

What that means is we live the rest of our lives in poverty.

I don't like that any more than you do - but that is the way it must be.

If we can't stop the borrowing - we go bust.

If we stop the borrowing then benefits must stop too.

So I ask you all again - is there a solution?

 

[LargeWrench]

He doesn't have an opinion on any subject.

Anyway whatever the solution it needs to be found quickly.

Every month, month in and month out we borrow about the same amount needed to hold the Olympics in London.

Can any nation survive if they borrow the equivalent of the Olympics every single month?

We've got to pay this money back one day - but we never will, we will default on our loans just as the rest of the Eurozone will.

What that means is we live the rest of our lives in poverty.

I don't like that any more than you do - but that is the way it must be.

If we can't stop the borrowing - we go bust.

If we stop the borrowing then benefits must stop too.

So I ask you all again - is there a solution?

There is no way we'll go bust so long as the government sticks to its plan. The budget deficit is slowly being reduced year by year. It's not going to happen overnight but come 2016/17 the deficit will have been payed off. That will still leave us with a huge debt but at least we won't be adding any more to it.

The debt isn't much of an issue anyway, all countries run a debt, it's nothing out of the ordinary. Our debt to GDP ratio isn't even that bad compared to many other G8 countries. America's is over 100%, Italy's is around 120% and Japan's is over 200%. In comparison ours is around 66% which doesn't seem to bad eh?

The country is still in the ****, but theres no way we can be compared to Greece or any of the other PIGS'.

 

[joe-90]

Show us some figures then - our borrowing over the past decade for example.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...UK-default-set-to-soar-if-Italy-defaults.html