Benchmark gilt down

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I am getting sick of these so called market makers "blackmailing" the country into making a decision based on the premise that the Tory Toffs are right and the Loony Labs are wrong

The deficit will be cut whether it be a Tory pact, a labour pact or an IMF arm up the back!

How can a strong, determined, deficit-cutting government be formed out of the present mess?

I am sorry to say, in my opinion, Britain's financial state is going to get worse - a lot worse and pretty quickly at that.

I just hope I'm wrong!

Mike - Londoner living in Barcelona.

"This will make for a tricky auction of £2.25bn of gilts - think of it as the government borrowing £2.25bn - later today."

We haven't got a government.

Uncertainty about the level of deficit and how the incoming U.K. government will tackle this must be behind this fall.

After the crisis in the Eurozone, there is no doubt that the international markets are concerned.

An unstable U.K. government will only result in the markets looking elsewhere. The massive package of bail-out money announced in the Eurozone will attract investors.

The different political parties now need to put aside their 'tribalism' and think of the long term future of the U.K. economy.

Otherwise we may see the IMF having to step in and support not only the Euro, but also the GBP.

Come on Mr Peston don’t hit us with those negative waves, at least people are still prepared to buy it.

All this kicked off because of a €100 billion or so that the Greeks owe, but the average working Joe and Jane weren’t very keen on paying.

And the odd thing is, the ECB et al reckon if they default, the whole system could crash.

In fact it is apparently so serious that the ECB has launched a €750 billion rescue fund to make sure the whole thing doesn’t collapse.

Unfortunately the ECB don’t actually have €750 billion, and they’re relying on member states to loan it to them.

But the member states don’t have it either, and they’re hoping to borrow it from ‘investors’.

Now the ‘investors’, who apparently do have some money, are going to lend it to the member states in the full and complete belief that their money’s safe.

Which it would be of course if the average working Joe and Jane was prepared to bust a gut and suffer severe austerity to pay the debt off.

Unfortunately the average working Joe and Jane in the various member states haven’t actually been consulted about all this by their respective politicians.

Which isn’t wholly surprising of course.

Because if they had, it would have been perfectly clear that the average working Joe and Jane had absolutely no intention of working their bottoms clean off, whilst suffering severe austerity to satisfy the politician’s promises………e.g. Greece

Which in turn tends to suggest that ultimately they’re going to have print an awful lot more money, to make good the politician’s promises to pay.

And the funny part of all this is:

There are currently a whole load of very intelligent and sensible people actually trading these politician’s promises to pay, in the full and complete belief that they’re actually worth what they say they’re worth.

Because the plain truth is that no one has actually got the money to satisfy these debts or even the slightest intention of busting a gut to earn it.

Perhaps it’s me but it does seem a little bizarre.

It will be a government for a short while whoever forms it, History tells us all that. But with all the bickering going on, how long will it go on?
I am sure that there will be other reasons for the market to fall, but then go up. As always someone will make money and these days get slated for doing so.

2. At 08:40am on 11 May 2010, PetersKitchen wrote:
I am getting sick of these so called market makers "blackmailing" the country into making a decision based on the premise that the Tory Toffs are right and the Loony Labs are wrong

Do not blame the markets. Labour has bankrupted the country! Anyone out there think differently, please leave and never come back. Forcing a left wing coalition on a country is a recipe for disaster. Bet you work for the public sector, or do you claim benefits that the private sector pays for?

Borrowing more when you are 3 tn in debt? As we have borrowed so much already, the lenders (who may be getting the money from us as QE in the first place!) have to prop us up otherwise their asset base will become worth less ( or indeed worthless!).

The effective rate of interest is too low, and will increase possibly quite soon, and this is what is being indicated, no matter what the hapless bunch of politicians do, even if they are connived with by the Bank of England.

Remember: this is the Bank, and its Governor, that gave us the worthless money in the first place! We have money now that is worth less than it has ever been in the 350 year history of the Bank - absolutely insane and cravenly cretinous! They are the agents of economic destruction.

So the clock is ticking.

The ball is in the lib/Dem's Court but the events yesterday suggest that they could easily get it wrong. There is no credible way in which they could do a deal with Labour.

The third party, to hold the balance, must be willing to work with either side: and given the outcome of the election, whether you agree with them or not, the Tories have the ascendency and the only sensible thing for the Lib/Dems to do is give them a go.

There are three good political reasons why this is in the Lib/Dem's interests:

(a)If they cannot do a deal with the Tories, that would be the strongest possible argument against PR. After all, if Labour is the only party the Lib/Dems can deal with then under any PR system we would be left with a lib/lab pact in perpetuity.

(b) The next Government is going to be hugely unpopular, and in five years time an unpopular Tory Government fighting a still unpopular Labour opposition would offer opportunities for the "third" party.

(c) The Lib/Dems can and should indicate some "red lines" on things that matter to them (where they would vote against the government) but they should not be trying to leverage their position to force through policies the the general public may not like. That will come back to haunt them: the Lib/Dem's poorer than expected showing is due to the fact that, after the First debate, the Tories challenged them directly on immigration (amnesty) and Europe (the Euro) and this neutralised the Tory - Lib/Dem swing.

As for the markets: they want any Government that is "strong" enough to reduce the deficit. The Lib/Dems can let the tories get on with cutting without being tainted since, for the most part, spending cuts do not require Parliamentary approval: and can promise to support any tax changes provided they are "fair".

"Simples"

To Peterskitchen.
If i borrow money (the deficit) from my bank (the markets) they have a right to expect me to have a credible plan to pay it back. Right now the UK has no such plan so the markets are obviously a bit nervous since we are going to ask for another £2600000000 of borrowing today.

We have to be aware that to cut the deficit will require the new government to make deeper cuts than Margret Thatcher’s 1979 government and will be very painful. A new government will have to have to show considerable strength when these cuts start to affect the population and the markets are concerned that they will be tempted to water down the medicine. The Nationalist parties, which a Lib/Lab pact will rely on, will try to prevent cuts to their budgets which will mean bigger cuts or larger tax rises in England making this government unstable. So it is very important what sort of pact we have.

I hope there is a lib lab pact so that Gordon Brown has to finally come clean about the mess he has got the country into, and what is required to repay the debts.

4. At 08:50am on 11 May 2010, MrTweedy wrote:
"This will make for a tricky auction of £2.25bn of gilts - think of it as the government borrowing £2.25bn - later today."

We haven't got a government.


What an excellent observation Mr Tweedy, I nearly spilt my mug of tea when I read that.

Call me cynical but I think the Libs will hitch with Labour not because they are agreed on how to reduce the deficit but to get proportional representation through before another election is called in 8 months tim.

> That would be a fast route to economic and political mayhem.

We had Anarchy in the UK back in 1976. And the 10 years following were
the best ever in the history of music. Let's bring it on - the music scene
is crap nowadays and we need a large injection of mayhem and energy.

Can anybody think of anything worse than a boring, stable government - men
in suits and ties talking about money all day! Give us a break.

There is pressure on banks to be broken up to avoid falling into the arena of "too big to fail".

Should the same principle apply to a currency and it's constituent member states ?

Over the last 20-30 years the small component parts of the global economy - currencies, trade and national economies - are all so intertwined they can no longer offer contra-cyclical conterbalances to one another and the entire economy has become "too big to fail", thus everything has to be saved no matter what the cost. To be paid for by our children.

We all know that EU bubbles never last - but even I thought it would last longer than this....

We are likely to be back to square 1 on Friday - which was after a week of 'routing' - so it's really back to square -1.

The bailouts are getting bigger in magnitude - but the effect of them is diminishing.

If you have ever met a real junkie (and I don't mean seen one on TV documentaries) - then you'll know this is a common phenomenon as tolerance to the drug builds up.

....until eventually overdose occurs.

# 4. At 08:50am on 11 May 2010, MrTweedy wrote:

> We haven't got a government.

That's a bloody good start. If we have no government, they
can't waste my money!

So the market controls and dictates our domestic pilicies as well as our politicians by holding to ransom our currency and the interests they demand.

Proverbs 22:7 "the borrower is servant to the lender"

And the lender will never willingly let the borrower of the hook because the reward is much more than monetary interests, it is servitude.

The Markets do not worry who forms the Government. They worry about whether a Government can lay out a plan going forward and deliver on it.
With this in mind how can a Government that spends the first six months going through a leadership contest be strong and stable. We have a cabinet in May followed by a cabinet reshuffle in September.
I believe it is this that will spook the markets over the coming days.

2. PetersKitchen wrote:
"The deficit will be cut whether it be a Tory pact, a labour pact or an IMF arm up the back!"


The UK needs to invite the IMF in immediately to get to the bottom of what has being going on with the public finances. Despite having largely correct growth forecasts in the noughties the UK consistently ran a deficit and built up debt. Alongside the political deficit of populism (gerrymandering, client-voter problem, benefit society, West Loathian quesion), the lack of clarity on the public finances will come home to roost way before the 'Progressive Alliance' ever open the books for all to see.

All this talk of money will be over in a decade or two. But we have
to live with our basket-case constitution (which led us to this situation,
by the way) forever, unless we fix it properly.

I do wish people would stop going on about this deficit. If they are
stupid enough to lend money to Brown, they deserve to loose it.
We can just go to (say) Canada or France. The Queen's got plenty -
she can stump up. What other use is she to us?

8. At 09:22am on 11 May 2010, openyoureyes wrote:

Do not blame the markets. Labour has bankrupted the country! Anyone out there think differently, please leave and never come back. Forcing a left wing coalition on a country is a recipe for disaster. Bet you work for the public sector, or do you claim benefits that the private sector pays for?

You obviously have your eyes wide shut!

Who was in power when the great US of A ran up trillions of debt? Ultra Conservative perhaps?

Who was in power in France? Spain? Greece? Germany?

I have never worked for the public sector and claimed benefits when I have need to - They are there for a reason.

The majority of the western world have been bankrupted by a monetary system that is flawed - not a political route

Some people are obviously led by what they read on the front pages of the papers.

I have been involved in the election campaign in the North West (for the Conservatives). In this part of the country all levels of the Labour Party are in complete denial about the scale of fiscal consolidation required. It would be impossible for any Lib/Lab alliance to embark on any serious attempt to control the deficit as it would be voted down by Labour MPs from this part of the country (without the support of Conservative MPs of course!).

Hope and pray that there are enough Liberals with the sense to go with the Tories- then at least it should be a couple of years before the market turns nasty.

'Or the gilts drop may have been the gravitational pull of falling German bond prices.'

Just looked at Bloomberg. UK gilts are dropping like a proverbial concrete parachute. Government bonds from Australia, Germany and the US are all rising. Sorry to say, but this looks like a flight to safety FROM UK debt. I voted for the LibDems, but I didn't vote for the economy to be sacrificed on the altar of PR. Nick Clegg et al. need to grow up and get their act together now.

How comforting to learn that the ratings agencies have no immediate plans to downgrade the UK.

The opinion of these paragons of virtue is beyond question, or not as the case may be...

https://www.businessinsider.com/moodys-ceo-dumped-stock-sec-wells-notice-2010-5

I was listening to Business Daily on the World Service last evening, and the interviewee was looking at Japan to default on its debt. I didn't take much notice because I knew that Japan's sovereign debt, which is higher than most other countrie, was mostly financed by Japan itself. But he then went on to say that Japan's savings ratio is lower now than the US.

When are hysterical media "experts" like yourself going to realise that people are getting sick and tired of being told that "the markets" are more important than our democracy ? These "markets" are nothing more than a glorified bookmakers populated by fast-buck merchants and it's high time our lives stopped being dictated by them.

Come on RP, I predict now that the auction of £2.25bn will not be "tricky" but with a little bit more favourable return to the buyer as the sale is taking place while co-alliance governments are being discussed / negotiated.
Finance make up less than 10% of business how about a blog on manufacturing or so other part of business

It's a CDS/option play. There isn't a deficit problem. £400 billion of public sector spending doesn't go on wages and welfare. Cut that bit.

Normally creditors negotiate with borrowers in trouble. Instead the banks and hedge funds run PR campaigns and spend relatively small money on pushing down as asset price. Govt panics and hands over taxpayers money to cover the losses of private banks.

This has got to stop. Break them.

Oh and the pound is 1 cent off a 52 week high against the euro -

Robert says:

"That would be a fast route to economic and political mayhem. So presumably messrs Clegg, Cable, Brown and Darling have a cunning plan to avoid all that."

The first priority is to get power, only after that will there be any thoughts about a cunning plan.

Political expediency rules everything!

Two Bank managers sit there in the tense Bond Auction
If they 'buy' the £2.25bn Debt of the Government they will do the entry in their balance sheet :
Debit Government Loan £2.25bn
Credit Government Current Account £2.25bn

That'll cost 37p in accounts clerk wages !
The Government will transfer the ownership of this current account to £100K per year/3 day per week quango managers and other recipients.
To service these current accounts - provide cash point machines, cheque facilities will cost the banks say an extra 0.1 % of the £2.25 bn.
If these current account holders use this money to buy Imports then the Current accounts will come into the ownership of say the Chinese via
one of their bank accounts and then they'd pay an Inter-Bank Interest of 4% last Aug or 0.5% now.
So the two bank managers need to charge the Cost of Servicing Current Accounts + Inter-Bank Interest to Chinese Banks and then add some profit for themselves.
The bods who end up with the money - the Chinese, the Net Exporters will earn £90 Million per year for 10 years at 4% - This is the price of Net Importing 'Cheap Goods' from China. If we added Import Duties to cover this perpetual Interest charge as well as an amount to cover the cost of the Dole for the workers these 'cheap' products made Unemployed then they might not be quite so ‘cheap’ after all.
If we didn't have this Uni-Trade and had instead balanced trade then this 4% Inter-Bank Interest £90,000 Million per year would go to other UK banks and you'd have to ask why ? - How much 'Work' / value-add have they done to earn this much money from typing some numbers in a computer ? It's more like a lot of rich people are walking through the Desert and someone finds some water then charges a fortune to the rich thirsty people to drink it - it's just market cornering it's not value add.
NEFS - Net Export Financial Simulation is a far better way to base a financial system on but in the meantime sorting out this 'cheap at the point of sale, ruinously expensive in the long run 'cheap' Imports from Uni-Traders needs to be sorted out.

There have been a number of comments re a lib lab pact and what this may mean to the markets. Let us get a few points clear.

1) A Conservative / Liberal pact will have a strong majority enough to ensure stable government. Also to the markets perhaps the steadying hand of Vince Cable as Chief Secretary to the treasury to keep young George in hand would be seen as a positive point.

2) As I am sure people have pointed out elsewhere a Lab/Lib pact does not have a majority and will rely on an virtually every one else. We can count the DUP out of any Lab / Lib pact and with even both nationalist parties plus the independents and Caroline Lucas from the Greens ever vote is on a knife edge.

3) Let us not rule out the fact that if you add the Conservatives and the DUP together noting that Sinn Feinn do not attend the conservatives only need the acquiescence of the SNP on confidence votes. The SNP have been relying on a similar reciprocating deal with the Tories in the Scottish Parliament to stay in power.

4) Whilst the Tories did not get a majority this time many many seats that labour hold are on wafer thin majorities now including Ed Balls.

The markets are acting purely rationally and I would be surprised if they don't continue to do so.

"Anyone out there think differently, please leave and never come back"
(openyoureyes)
Well that's a nice sentiment; and the rightists always go on about the 'thought police'! It takes an unfeasibly big divorce from reality to blame the left and not the markets for this crisis. Peeing in the wind.

"13. At 09:36am on 11 May 2010, Dempster wrote:
4. At 08:50am on 11 May 2010, MrTweedy wrote: "This will make for a tricky auction of £2.25bn of gilts - think of it as the government borrowing £2.25bn - later today."
We haven't got a government.
What an excellent observation Mr Tweedy, I nearly spilt my mug of tea when I read that."
Thanks Dempster, it bears repeating. If we had a government they would have passed another 10 Acts of Parliament by now.
In the circumstances it's all talk and no do. GREAT.

Also in addition to my previous post the one remaining seat to be elected is a very safe Conservative seat.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/e68.stm

If we add this seat to the Conservatives total and the DUP we get 315 seats and Labour / Liberals also total 315. I could imagine the Conservatives and DUp being a more homogenous block than Labour and the Lib Dems.

Also Douglas Alexander seems to refute any deal with the SNP. Anyone know what has happended to the price of gold this AM?

With the speaker not voting and 5 Sinn Feinn absentees then 323 is the magic number.

A rhetorical question but, why does the market never seek left-wing 'medicine' for the economy (e.g. complete nationalization, socialism, etc)?

And, why do apparently 'socialist' politicians never suggest such 'medicine'?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Has anyone else noticed that every time there are bad retail figures there is always a 'credible reason' put forward for it - which doesn't indicate a decline in credit / wages / purchasing power?

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10105542.stm

This tie it's consumers 'concerned about the election' - previously we have had 'snow' (like there aren't indoor shopping centres), 'early easter' and 'ash clouds'.

What will the next excuse be? - the current inclement weather in May has caused consumers to go into hiding?

Once you see the patterns - the lies become more and more obvious.

The truth is the consumer (who is also the worker) is currently under attack from the political and financial elite who are rapidly diminishing their wages through inflation, currency devaluation (you didn't think that 0.5% base rate was 'free' did you??), pay cuts and redundancy.

It's the same old Marxist surplus value theory, coming around and around - the consumer is the worker, the worker is the consumer.

Workers spend money in the Economy and produce demand - Capital accumulators do not - they accumulate capital - that's their definition.

The money supply is not increasing despite the QE and base rates - why? because the banks are taking that cash and depositing it all in sovereign debt where they can get a 'risk free' return. Any danger of that being affected and hey presto - some government (or union) decide to bail them out - again, and again, and again.

Make no mistake - the Capitalists are foolish as they currently sow the seeds of their own downfall through their greed.

Despite the media dis-interest - the crises of 2008 are still going strong.
The credit crisis still exists - but it's not in the headlines because it's affecting small business and first time buyers, and not giant banks with political mouthpieces.
The economic crisis is still ongoing - growth is a mirage caused by Government stimuli.
The sovereign debt crisis is still ongoing, nothing has been solved and bailouts are meaningless for countries who face huge deficits and a population refusing austerity measures
The currency crisis is still running, many people missed yesterday the effect on Japan of the Euro bailout as their bond yields rose sharply and currency fell. The US's concern for Greece has no genuine sympathy - it's merely the fall of the Euro causes the dollar to rise - causing them problems - it's all self interest folks.

In addition to this it looks like we're heading for a political or constitutional crisis as our 'non-Government' realises compromise and coallition are alien concepts to the Boo-ya crowd.

All we need is a commodity and energy crisis and we will have all crisis on the go at once - it's like plate spinning with our destiny.

Well I bet the french are loving the falling Euro, especially the traders who are actively shorting the Euro. Guess we are next :-)


https://www.zerohedge.com/article/european-banks-now-feverishly-betting-against-euro-bailout-fails-gold-surges

Why are the ECB and the IMF putting the interests of creditors (institutional investors, hedge funds and banks) who over-extended themselves to un-creditworthy sovereign borrowers ahead of the interests of those taxpayers who fund the IMF and ECB? Since when is more lending the solution to too much debt?

The only explanation is that the ECB and IMF think that if the creditors need to face up to the possibility of taking a hit, then there will be "contagion" - in other words, the whole system will risk implosion (Lehmans style) if investors don't know who is exposed to how much toxic Greek debt and therefore whether they are creditworthy counterparties. The world economy, on this reading, cannot stand another credit freeze.

OK, but now that they have bought time, what I don't understand is why the ECB and IMF don't work on a debt restructuring plan, which ensures that those creditors who have made such poor lending decisions take a hit under the terms of a restructuring in which the debts of these over-leveraged countries are written down by, say, 50%?

€1.5 trillion sounds a bit more manageable than €3 trillion. But whatever the number, what we need to figure out is how much debt the Eurozone can bear assuming a ten year growth outlook of approx 1% per year, not 3-4% per year. The rest needs to be written off.

There is a limit to the amount of austerity which will work in Greece - after a certain point, the deficit will spiral out of control as unemployment, strikes, civil unrest and tax dis-incentives to labour destroy an already vulnerable economy. And more importantly there is a limit to the amount of austerity German taxpayers will bear on behalf of 59 year-old Greek pension claimants. Once the Greek taxpayer has shouldered as much of the burden as is realistic to bear, I don't see why international taxpayers are being asked to foot the rest of the bill. I am not suggesting a creditor doesn't 'deserve' to be paid back - it's his contractual right and it's the borrower's fault for failing to honour his debts. But once the borrower clearly can't pay anymore, it's the lender, not taxpayers, who should be in the firing line - it's called "risk", and it's the flip side of yield. We need an international debt restructuring plan to go hand-in-hand with this €750bn breathing space which taxpayers are underwriting, and sovereign creditors need to be re-introduced to the idea of risk.

In other words, investors perceive the risk of lending to the British government to have increased reasonably significantly compared to the risk of lending to the German government.

Well doh!

19. At 09:52am on 11 May 2010, puzzling wrote:
Proverbs 22:7 "the borrower is servant to the lender"

And the lender will never willingly let the borrower of the hook because the reward is much more than monetary interests, it is servitude.
-----------------------

This sums up the nature of this system - SLAVERY.

I hope everyone reading this realises that this present political mess is what naturally results from a PR based system. Look at Belgium, how many governments in the last 5 years? How many failed coalitions? We need decisive government and that means first past the post with fixed term governments who have limited power. Simple.

Proportional representation shouldnt mean that the third party gets the deciding vote. That isn't a 'fair society'.

The tories had the most votes (though not mine), it wasn't even close- they have the most seats by a stretch. Under a PR system their position wouldn't be undermined, they have no reason to want to avoid PR in that sense. They have every reason in the sense that notwithstanding their apparent success and popularity, they may not form a government. That just can't be right and it is political meddling of the highest order by the Lib-Dems and Clegg to assist in avoiding that. As is forcing Brown to resign, as is demanding a PR vote. Get your house in order and make your decision Lib Dems. Limit your horse trading as its starting to get messy. Oh, and bear in mind that whatever decision you make you're going to be part of the most unpopular and unsuccessful government/coalition in a generation given the pending cuts you're going to be a party too. So much for the TV debates, out of the frying pan...

Regarding UK bonds- this is no surprise and I think it is going to get a lot worse before it gets anywhere near better. Dempster sums things up quite nicely above. We need some serious action on the deficit almost immediately to reassure the markets. Those who think we should then resort to civil unrest probably dont have a mortgage on a variable rate- we should put up and shut up for the next 5-10 years. If you want a pipe dream go on a gap year or request a sabbatical, this is going to get messy.

I hope this truly puts into context any thoughts of joining the Euro. Madness. At least we can de-value the pound and run to the IMF direct without wasting time skirting around the issue with the ECB and our European 'allies' who have a vested conflict of interest, wanting to protect their own economies and exposure to our problems as they will with Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Italy etc etc. This is but the start. The irony of Europe- a collection of sovereign states, it is not one state! The bonds situation is not assisted by Lib-dem dilly dallying. Where's Vince? What does he have to say on the matter now? All too easy to be critical but when you have the deciding vote and can't make up your mind...bit more tricky!

Get on with it Lib Dems.

re comment number 2---if we hadn't put ourselves so far into hock then they wouldn't be able to blackmail us so effectively..... in a way they're the conscience we are failing to find in ourselves...

You can't blame someone for deciding not to lend to us; me , you or the Uk government...or if prepared to lend; to tell us they want more interest back in return..that's what markets are. What's the alternative? Tell foreign nationals and companies they HAVE to give us money and give us it now.....?

Re a point about Robert Peston's attempt to thread through the potential reactions of markets, and the copunter-reactions of a Government labelled Lab-Lib, Con-Lib, Rainbow, Con minority or whatever---it's plain that we'll need another election possibly October, and that will be even plainer by mid-June....

That's my hostage to fortune....

Robert, you said:

'The government was trying to borrow £2.25bn for repayment in 17 years. Investors offered to lend some £5.6bn.'


So did the government take the whole £5.6bn on offer or only the £2.25bn that was currently required ?

Does anyone think that borrowing is going to get cheaper over the next 2 to 10 years ?

The government needs to be borrowing

a) as much as it possibly can
b) for the longest period possible
c) as cheaply as it can

and it needs to be doing it now, cuz sure as eggs is eggs, when they need the money in the future it is going to prove to be a lot more expensive.

The average Joe & Jane in Greece decided that they weren’t happy suffering severe austerity whilst busting a gut to pay off a few hundred billion Euros of debt that the politicians had taken on board on their behalf.

Now the EU politicians reckon that the average Joe and Jane in Greece are just being awkward, and that other average Joe’s and Jane’s won’t be. So they decided to raise around €750 billion of debt and spread around everyone else to sort out the problem.

But there could be a catch, I reckon the average Joe and Jane in Greece aren’t a great deal different than the average Joe and Jane anywhere else.

Because let’s face it: who in their right mind would want to suffer austerity whilst busting a gut to pay off a shed load of money that you hadn’t agreed to borrow in the first place.

So we’ve got lots of politicians still going round making promises to pay on behalf of those who likely have absolutely no intention whatsoever of coming up with the money. Which means they’ll probably end up printing it of course.

It would have been simpler just to print the money and give it Greece in the first place.

And the irony of all this is that those ‘in the know’ are still buying and trading government bonds in the full and complete belief that the average Joe and Jane are actually going to happily agree to live in austerity and bust a gut trying to pay them off.

Perhaps they will, but I’ve got this sinking feeling that it’s not going to be the case.

18. At 09:52am on 11 May 2010, Jacques Cartier wrote:
# 4. At 08:50am on 11 May 2010, MrTweedy wrote:

> We haven't got a government.

That's a bloody good start. If we have no government, they
can't waste my money!

--

But who's going to save you from the free market?! Or should I take your comment as a witty ironic aside?

Robert, I'm not sure if you've noticed but your writing style has and is becoming increasingly illusive. I hardly understood a word of your recent post due to the high metaphor and idiom content - I couldn't make heads or tails of it.

The markets should not be concerned regarding the main points on Nick Clegg's agenda, since none of them as far as I know involves shirking out of any deficit reductions. Offering cash to minor "rainbow coalition" members however might.

Cameron's best bet is to agree to both the referendum on PR and equal funding for the yes and no campaigns, only to see the public vote a resounding "no" to PR implementation regardless. In other words, the Tories need to get out there and gamble, because to sit tight and not do anything at all is possibly the worst possible thing for everyone in the UK at this time.

Given that Nick Clegg will never have a chance like this again, he'd be a fool not to get the deal done, and he has nothing to lose by digging in his heals for the hard sell.

The future of the country now must lie in the hands of those who can compromise the most at this, eleventh hour. One thing for sure, the markets won't wait much longer for all this horse trading to be sorted out.

Yawn Mr P we can all watch the market prices and investments will go down as well as up thanks to the speculators.

The man in the street is now so detached from this (and is waiting for the tax increases) that you're talking to yourself!

23. At 09:59am on 11 May 2010, PetersKitchen wrote:
8. At 09:22am on 11 May 2010, openyoureyes wrote:

Do not blame the markets. Labour has bankrupted the country! Anyone out there think differently, please leave and never come back. Forcing a left wing coalition on a country is a recipe for disaster. Bet you work for the public sector, or do you claim benefits that the private sector pays for?

You obviously have your eyes wide shut!

''I am embarrased you live in this great country of ours. Do you not dig deeper than the Labour spin? Do you not know we went into this recession with a deficit? Do you not see how inefficient the public sector is? Do you not see how welfare allows abuse of the system? Do you not pay the taxes Labour have introduced (167 increases!)? Do you not remember the IMF coming to the UK after the last time we had Labour in power for a decent spell.?
Who should open their eyes? I am not Conservative. I voted Tony Blair. I am just educated enough to realise that I can be flexible depending on National Interest. Go claim benefits again somewhere else.

#2 Labour don't have the guts or the instincts to cut as required. People like Gordon Brown would happily borrow and print to eternity. Brown still thinks that he was an economic genius who was derailed by sub-prime, rather than a clueless idiot who created then rode a credit bubble for all it was worth based on the ponzi scheme that is the UK housing market.

• Sorry to inform you rich people out there that the Tories in not get in after all the backing form business and newspapers and other TV company’s the people of on Britain don’t want you they remember the 1980,s and don’t trust them. They are the party that damaged the NHS and other parts in the UK. Remember poll tax. Mr David cam would have this back to pay for the monies owed. Who ever gets in will sell the very soul of the nation to get power and when they do we will be stuck with them for years as they will give the monies form bank sell off to the rich yet again and the nhs will see none. The nation was put in the state by the rich and greedy not the labour party. Yet the greed will get this money.

It is about time the libs have a say they been there or there about for years and the people of Britain there time has come. And people will vote for them in 6-12 months time.

Can the last tory person to leave the room, turn off the light bye bye and it wasn’t interesting.

Anyone notice that gold has shot up again today by $20. It is now close to the all time high it hit in December. I think this says it all.

Is it plausible to assume would be investors are taking the 17yr view rther than the short term view of the general observer? It's difficult to see how a Liberal/Labour alliance wih barely an ablity to win a vote would be able to survive 17months if any serious legislaion were needed. From history alone there would appear little preedent for a long term coalition unless forced by extreme circumstane. For the markets the view must doubtless be that the British govenment will get its house in order. Those who have a wish for PR or AV need to gt a grip and realize every election would inevitably result in the hore trading we now see. In that situaton, as now the markets would not only look at the presnt but at the likely future. Surely that's what economics i bout.

38. At 11:02am on 11 May 2010, Gary Tedman

Pardon! What did we just do with the banks then?

22. At 09:57am on 11 May 2010, Jacques Cartier wrote:

"The Queen's got plenty -
she can stump up. What other use is she to us?"

Yeah - instead of blaming the unemployed why don't we blame the other sponging layabouts we have in our society?
Lets make the Queen pay - I mean it's not like she earned it is it?

The revolution has begun.

7. At 09:19am on 11 May 2010, barry white wrote:

" As always someone will make money and these days get slated for doing so."

Maybe it's because the world has realised that 'making' money is not reflective of the activity.

'Extracting money' would be more accurate a description (or did you think bankers had blisters from all their 'hard work')

Re; openyoureyes comment(5) -- You have hit the nail on the head, the trouble is the complaining is being done by those in the public sector and those milking the benefits system. The private sector has suffered trauma and pain due to huge job losses..why should the Teachers/NHS staff etc be immune to job losses? After all I contribute to their wages, its absurd. The only thing labour has done is 'job creation' within the public sector,,,some of the job titles are laughable in the NHS. All these unecessary teaching assistants...are a nice to have but NOT a need to have. It is high time for Britain to cut the jacket according to the cloth...anybody who feels or think otherwise is off the mark and oblivious of the reality of the dire state of the public finances. 850 billion in debt...even paying off 50 billion a year, would take 17 years, and with the population growing and eastern europe/south asia immigrant influx due to previous lapse immigration law, public finances will feel greater strain. I just feel we are bankrupt...its negative...but it seems true when you look at the facts and not what the politicians are saying...

The real Constitutional Shame is not the today's important gilt issue, it is the guilt issue !

AKA The West Lothian Question. Celt-based Members one way street to overbearing influence on ENGLAND.

The BBC reports that the Tories have a majority of 52 over all the other parties in England. (297 seats against 245)

Remember : Stormont, Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembley?
They represent cankers of injustice to political fairness within the whole of the UK.

Where is the Constitutional Decency in that, Sir ?

What do Labour and the Lib Dems have to say on squaring that circle ?

27. At 10:01am on 11 May 2010, bankingballs wrote:

"I was listening to Business Daily on the World Service last evening, and the interviewee was looking at Japan to default on its debt. I didn't take much notice because I knew that Japan's sovereign debt, which is higher than most other countrie, was mostly financed by Japan itself. But he then went on to say that Japan's savings ratio is lower now than the US."

oh that one's been coming for some time. When you look at Japan think 'UK in 5 years' and you wil undeerstand where we're heading.
The difference is we don't have the historical savings rate they have, and therefore our bond market will collapse quicker.

They injected 2 Trillion Yen into their economy last week - no small beer, they are getting desperate.

It's what happens when you maintain zombie banks.

comment 38.... Because that ends up as another market anyway...but instead of being controlled by many players it gets controlled by very few... usually called the Politburo---or something like that....and they risk being useless at some or all market functions as they have usually been selected for their skills in Politics, or when things get very bad, being head of the Secret police or Army.

Rather than in Free market capitalism where selection is because of experience in actually running efficient operations designed to create long lasting and broadly founded wealth based on the provision of goods and services wanted by the public.

In free market capitalism you can never imagine a small self selected group of people, utterly divorced from the mainstream, and insulated from the public--- with no experience or knowledge of real value and worth--badly skewing the wealth creation process for nothing more than private greed or short term gain


---er..... can you?

34. At 10:42am on 11 May 2010, Ian_the_chopper wrote:

"The markets are acting purely rationally and I would be surprised if they don't continue to do so."

Rationally?

Well I am a rational man and I have worked out that....

Even if the political wranglings produce a coalition which is perceived as strong, they will have to impose austerity measures far greater than any previous majority Government.
Even if they find the 'small ones' to do that - then are the British public going to accept it?

It seems from the PCU union yesterday - no they won't. It will be Greece mark II as I know I will happily walk out on my job rather than pay increased taxation to pay for the banks largesse (even though I work in one).

If I am prepared to do that, how much will it take for someone who doesn't work in a bank to come to that conclusion.

Once we're all out of work, then we will get bored, and start burning stuff - it's history repeating itself.

Just as in the 80's, we're just waiting for the issue to unite us all - then it was the poll tax - an attempt to claw back some of the money from the poor after the last banking crisis (which is what it was).

It didn't work then and it won't work now - the markets are dumb if they think there is a cat in hells chance of the british public rolling over and footing the bill.

Which is why they will end up losers.

What interest rate did the government have to offer to get investors to lend them money for 17 years?

This intrigues me - people lend money to governments - for 17 years at low interest rates with the only guarantee being that they get their money back at the end.

If the coupon is 3% and we have 3% inflation per annum over those 17 years, the person who lent the money - if they save all the interest they receive - will be in exactly the same position in 17 years as they are now.

Are these gilts index linked? If so, where is the government going to get the money to repay them? Growth? Hmmmm.

45. At 11:39am on 11 May 2010, pawns_or_players wrote:

"I hope everyone reading this realises that this present political mess is what naturally results from a PR based system. Look at Belgium, how many governments in the last 5 years? How many failed coalitions? We need decisive government and that means first past the post with fixed term governments who have limited power. Simple."

I love this line of 'we need decisive Government' - which translated for real people is:

"We need a parlimentary majority so we can force through the austerity measures and any changes to civil rights required to enforce them"

I mean why don't you go for the whole hog and request a dictatorship - for the good of the people of course!

"Proportional representation shouldnt mean that the third party gets the deciding vote. That isn't a 'fair society'."

No - but ignoring millions of votes is?

The longer this political wrangling goes on the better for the man on the street - why? because the quicker the charade of Economic salvation is destroyed the quicker we can get on with re-building society.

53. At 12:01pm on 11 May 2010, openyoureyes wrote: Who should open their eyes? I am not Conservative. I voted Tony Blair. I am just educated enough to realise that I can be flexible depending on National Interest. Go claim benefits again somewhere else.

I do believe you may be another bigot - blame eastern europeans one week, benefit claimants the next

Educated? You probably think you are

Oh of course, Cameron is educated, he was taught that he was "born to rule" -

Go and build another hedge around your assets to stop you looking out on the world while your educated mind is telling you that you are stopping people looking in.

48. At 11:50am on 11 May 2010, Dempster

That just about sums up the idiocy of the markets - do they really think anyone's going to pay back money borrowed in their name?

Parents often don't pay for the debts their kids run up - and they're family - what chance do politicians have?

Ultimately if one doesn't pay, then nobody pays - and then what are markets going to do? They can't punish everyone as there will be nothing to punish anyone with!

#40 WOTW
Yes the retail figure would have been a much better topic for today, but I do feel the negativity in your analysis is almost becoming a caricature of yourself.
Firstly a 0.2% drop in sales is not “bad” at anytime, it certainly doesn’t indicate a death in capitalist economic activity. Any retailer will tell you Easter and Christmas are crucial periods for sales activity.
To be critical of the BBC what does a 2.3% like for like drop mean when talking of the economy as a whole? Its nonsense, it merely reflects new sites and methods of buying are replacing old.
To get things in perspective a 0.2% drop equates to a reduction in customers at the rate of 1 in 500.
Climatic conditions especially Snow and Rain does effect peoples decisions whether they are going to go out shopping or stay indoors.
Price inflation rapidly diminishing wages is surely an exaggeration. The report also didn’t mention margin so I can’t see how anyone can conclude the profit margin is getting significantly worse or better

If I was David Cameron I would openly encourage a lib/lab government, let them try and sort out the deficit, which they will not do, due to the internal squabbling and their ongoing desire to pay benefits and increase the spending on the public sector.

It will all come tumbling down within a year, a new election will be required, the two faced lib dems will see their share of the vote drop dramatically as people understand a vote for the liberals is the same as a vote for labour.

This will allow a tory government to cut the deficit by stopping benefit payments, getting rid of unwanted quangos and cutting paper shuffling civil servants. it will also mean PR is finished.

53. At 12:01pm on 11 May 2010, openyoureyes wrote:

"I am embarrased you live in this great country of ours. Do you not dig deeper than the Labour spin? Do you not know we went into this recession with a deficit?"

So the role of Government is 'insurer for the free market" then? The Government should be on a continual austerity track just in case the markets fail again?
We had a deficit of 40% - and after the banks failed it was nearer 80% - you seem to forget that in you 'digging through spin'.

"Do you not see how inefficient the public sector is?"

Do you? - do you have any idea, or do you simply ask the tabloids? - how do you measure 'efficiency' by the way - no let me guess, with money.
Doctors save lives, they don't make money - they are totally inefficient and should all be got rid of!!

"Do you not see how welfare allows abuse of the system?"

Have you ever considered why there are unemployed in the first place? Unemployment is mainly a capitalist economy 'feature' - without welfare to alleviate the unemployed you tend to get regular riots as people "don't like dying"

"Do you not pay the taxes Labour have introduced (167 increases!)?"

Every single Government ever increases taxes - it's just that some are better than others. I do admit though that the Tories were able to reduce taxes by selling off all our nationalised industries - giving the impression of less taxes but without impacting services - guess what though - it didn't last and now we have nothing left to sell (except the Tote and the Royal mail)

"Do you not remember the IMF coming to the UK after the last time we had Labour in power for a decent spell.?"

Ah the old right wing argument of 'you cannot trust Labour with the Economy" - well the last time we were in recession was under the Tory Government - fortunately the sell off i mentioned above avoided IMF intervention - but there was a price, there is always a price.

"Who should open their eyes? I am not Conservative. I voted Tony Blair."

I think that makes you a conservative - the whole NU Labour experiment was a failed Labour-tive ideology, in that somehow you could marry the private sector and growing public service in some wonderful wedding. Well PPI (which I believe was originally a Tory idea) was the perfect example of that - and where is it now??

"I am just educated enough to realise that I can be flexible depending on National Interest. Go claim benefits again somewhere else."

So you got educated - private was it? - or did you take your state education and then moan about the public deficit.

Weak arguments, very, very weak.

Why don't we have English independence then England would be much better off under a strong Conservative government. England already props up Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales and don't forget the largest bailout's were for RBS a scottish bank, scotland is happy to hold the english ransom it is about time they took responsibility for their own mess.

56. At 12:25pm on 11 May 2010, Averagejoe wrote:

"Anyone notice that gold has shot up again today by $20. It is now close to the all time high it hit in December. I think this says it all."

I did try to warn everyone - but they simply don't listen.

There is a good bullion place on the Strand - get down there today before a queue forms!

Post 56 thanks for the note re the price of gold.

Gold and Swiss francs seem reasonably safe at the moment. As per the Euro, Sterling or the US dollar get ready for a bumpy ride. No doubt someone with some inside information will make a fortune over the next few days.

The more this all goes on with the uncertainty and wild swings in share prices and huge borrowings the more I see the financial markets as like Fagin in Oliver. They are merely "reviewing the situation".

The markets need to be closed down until the practice of shorting equities, futures and currencies etc. is made illegal.

RE: #45 pawns_or_players asks us to compare the political mess in Belgium due to PR elections and membership of the Euro.

I would point out that GDP per head for Belgium is $43,533 and for UK it is $35,334 (Wikipedia data).

Perhaps a political mess and Euro membership would be good for us also.
"Decisive Governments" tend to look after their vested interests rather than the collective interests refelected by "Consensus Governments".

# 59. At 12:38pm on 11 May 2010, writingsonthewall wrote:

>> 22. At 09:57am on 11 May 2010, Jacques Cartier wrote:
>> "The Queen's got plenty - she can stump up. What other use is she to us?"

> Yeah - instead of blaming the unemployed why don't we blame the
> other sponging layabouts we have in our society?

Steady now. The Queen does a great job by appearing to do nothing
at all - it takes some doing, that does.

However, she has got a large stock of our money stored up that we gave
her for being the Queen. It's time we got at that dough, at used it
to pay down the debt. She's already 80 odd, and she can't take it with her.
She might as well do the right thing. We could sell Buckingham Palace
to (say) the Japanese, who seem to have a thing about it. Or it
could be made into a TV studio. Or an old folks home - oh, it's already
one of those!

40. At 11:23am on 11 May 2010, writingsonthewall

You don't expect the retail marketing team to have grasped economics do you WOTW?

61. At 12:43pm on 11 May 2010, ishtiaq ahmed wrote: ???

In the 1980's there was no such thing as society
now you allude that there is no such thing as welfare because if you claim you are a scrounger
Now there is the big society

Lets hope the cuts dont mean someone you love dies in a waiting room waiting for treatment or will you by your way out of the cuts?

Pathetic

Agree with post #2.
Am also sick to death of financial/money markets' 'blackmail' of democracy?

Looking at Euro-zone and globally; it appears that the above 'markets' have played ducks and drakes with real peoples' money/pensions and real peoples' governments?

These money/financial markets have been exposed (some still on trial) - and yet 'bailed' out of jail to continue their unacceptable behavior?

QUESTIONS that we would like Robert Peston to answer are:

1) In your occupation; spending SO much time with the big money boys, do you feel overwhelmed by the pessimism and dream of a money market ASBO?
2) Are you, Robert, fed-up with reporting so much bad financial news?
3) Will you Mr Peston, report some positive financial news - you know it's out there and you would love to - yes you would?
4) All females in our family think you look sooo handsome, but are fed-up, AND now deeply irritated and impatient with your constant stream of gloom?
5) Come on Mr Peston, questions may be rhetorical? BUT women make stuff; families and spend the money that makes the world go round - give them some good news - pleeeease?

It's just getting so boring.

All the money in the world is being sucked up by just a few rich folk. The rest of us are being given crumbs dressed in posh looking consumer goods made for pennies by a worker treated terribly. THe squeeze workers, farmers and now countries.

It is a monumental coup creating a new Lord and Master of the Land, unelected, naturally.

This is a democracy. The voters of this country have employed the politicians we decided to employ and fired the ones we don't think are up to the job.

May I suggest that each poster here send off at least one demand/complaint each week to you MP. Ask you neighbours to do the same. We need to be very loud and remind our MPs that they work for us not the he who would be Lord and Master. MPs are there to do our bidding. That is the first step in securing the democracy each and every one of us has. We are the bosses and it is for us to keep them busy. We should not be usurped by the market dodger and dealer.

The second step is to show up at the demos. The MPs will only realise they answer to us and not the markets when we remind them of their newly signed job contracts. As long as they behave like children they will be vulnerable to the whim of the toddlers playing market gambling with the fabric of European societies.

This is our democracy after all. It does not belong to the market gamblers.

One sentence in a BBC report that overseas investors are the main buyers of these gilts. We never get any detail on who these investors are and apparently no record is kept of overseas holdings.

Can some keen reporter please find out why UK govt debt is so popular?
The main reporting conlcusion always seems to be "Phew, no panic yet. Lets move on to the political circus"

I don't buy it.
Is it the banks? Do gilt holdings assist them with their balance sheets?
Is the whole financial system still being he;d together by future taxpayers money?

Who remembers the headline 'The last one to leave the country turn the light out' referring to the possibility of a Labour government? We must remember that Labour have been rejected by the voters of this country. If they were to share power with any party it would be a disgrace to the voters. I have owned my own successful company for 25 years. Should the Labour party stay in power in any form, I shall leave this country - that's a promise!

It's not all doom and gloom, there's sure to be some expanding businesses in the future.

It could be a great time to invest in any company making guillotines or gallows. You could also look at creating a Molotov Cocktail delivery service and the rioters are going to need transport to attend their events.

There's a hugely underexploited global market for these coming!

Meanwhile, back in the UK, those involved in the political process fill their boots, being paid (or very magnanimously, declining to be paid) GBP20,000 for one nights work.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/8674891.stm

Never mind, seems like there will be another opportunity to earn this fee with the inevitable election re-run within a year.

Banksters and their Pols continue to ruin this country.

68. At 1:12pm on 11 May 2010, PetersKitchen
You are funny. Do you call yourself peterkitchen because you spend your days in the kitchen claiming all the benefits your great leader has offered you. I work! I took a 20% pay cut to see the public sector get bigger in the last year! We cannot afford this. Do you believe we should wait for the IMF or will you cheer at that? Find a lovely socialist country and go and live there.

I’m not a socialist or a capitalist, in fact I’m not an anything ‘ist’ to be honest.

But one thing doesn’t seem to stack up to me is the likelihood of everyone saying:

‘Isn’t it just truly awful all this debt, we’ll knuckle down, live in austerity, and work like fury for little personal reward till it’s all paid off’

I just can’t see it somehow, it just doesn’t strike as being all that likely.

Who is going to happily agree to work their hearts out for 3/10 of sod all for the next ten years, so that all these politician’s promises to pay can be honoured.

The Greeks clearly aren’t that keen, what makes everyone think the rest of us will be different.

The serious market players appear convinced that Gilts are a safe investment. They expect a deal to be reached.
Some opinions are expressed that this deal is in doubt. Assuming these opinions are backed with money, can the Treasury make money from the doubters ?

"Do you not see how inefficient the public sector is?"

At 12:37pm on 11 May 2010, Squarepeg wrote:

"...38. At 11:02am on 11 May 2010, Gary Tedman
"Pardon! What did we just do with the banks then?"...."

It was the private sector banks that begged and got a bail out from the public sector, did you miss that?

Yes Squarepeg, they sort of nationalized the banks, with the emphasis on 'sort of': i.e. the public takes the debt risk (it is 'socialized'), but won't get any benefits (as we will see), if there are any (unlikely). It is pseudo-socialism of the Blair/Brown variety, or it could, I suppose, be called state capitalism as there is nothing socialist about it in fact.

72. At 1:24pm on 11 May 2010, writingsonthewall wrote:
53. At 12:01pm on 11 May 2010, openyoureyes wrote:

Wow. A true life communist? You spend all day on the computer (I admit being bored enough today also). What system do you want? Liberal; give everyone everything? Communist; why bother working? Or do you want a flexible system? Maybe you are too educated?
My parents voted Labour and I voted Blair. Sorry the 'experiment' didn't work. Let's go back to 'power to the people'. Wait, we already do have it. Especially if you can claim housing benefit, unemployment/incapacity benefit and have a couple more kids for the fun of it. How many you got?

Post 65 WOTW re the markets acting rationally the point I was trying to make was the markets are acting rationally in their own interest rather than anyone elses.

The last ten years have shown that banks and the various other financial institutions in the City, Wall Street, Paris, Hong Kong et al will act in their own best interest and the rest of us can go hang.

There is uncertainty at the moment and as such people will make "gambles" on the likely outcome.

If you are trading other peoples money and taking a commission on every deal then you want the uncertainty to continue as the longer it goes on the more there will be swings and the more money you can make.

Over the last 24 hours it would appear with Gordon Brown agreeing to stand down and Peter Mandelson angling for a Lab/Lib deal that the number of possible outcomes has increased and this increases uncertainty into people's minds.

Do you really expect the money markets to act any differently than they have?

I am not defending it merely saying it is happening.

By the way WOTW, what is your mate Peter Mandelson thinking?

Last seen post 1.36pm It's not 3.07pm.
Got through to HMRC in under an hour today.
Efficiency is improving all round.

and the message is: the markets only like democracy when it produces the result they want. When it doesn't, its teddies out of the pram time!

Screw the markets and the criminals that run them. If they hate the democratic process so much then maybe its time we closed them all down.

I think we should all just ask ourselves this one simple question:

Would you agree to work your heart out for 3/10 of sod all for the next ten years, so that all these politician’s promises to pay can be honoured?

Now if the answer’s ‘Yes’, then there isn’t a problem, but if the answer’s ‘No’, then there probably is.

The funny thing is, all these politicians are going merrily forward promising to pay ever increasing amounts of money, whilst all those Plebs who actually have to pay it are quietly muttering, ‘You’ve promised, you pay it, coz I’m not’.

I just don't think there's a meeting of the minds on this somehow.

#59. At 12:38pm on 11 May 2010, writingsonthewall wrote:

"The revolution has begun."

No, it hasn't.

At 64 e2toe4 said - "er…can you?" …
that's pretty funny.

But (I think) all governing systems (so far in history) are types of tyranny, democracy included, though democracy is the only one that pretends not to be.

Maybe the pretence is worth something, but it can also cause a lot of problems, as the British electorate know very well, especially these days.

I take your point, but I think the market is right-wing because it is capitalist. Yet capitalism doesn't think, cos it ain't alive (so it can't 'think rationally'), hence right-wing people think for it, while believing their poor brains are 'fiercely independent'. (I include Labour in this idea of 'right-wing btw, and old Labour too).

In this crisis the wage slaves are being saddled with all the debt and the task of paying it off. At the same time the poor productive wage slaves are being made unemployed. So a dwindling workforce is exploited more.

Can they be exploited more? The right-wing think so because the market demands it. But the workforce (both public and private sector) thinks and suffers.

I guess as well as gold invest in myths and illusions, everyone will need them more, in a manner of speaking, if they can afford them, and if there isn't a revolution.

#77. At 1:55pm on 11 May 2010, trevst wrote:

"I would point out that GDP per head for Belgium is $43,533 and for UK it is $35,334 (Wikipedia data)."

But you have (deliberately?) chosen the set of figures that best proves your point. Wikipedia also provides World Bank estimates, in which the two countries are much closer together, as well as estimates of GDP by purchasing power parity (PPP), in which the UK is slightly ahead of Belgium.

Wikipedia also says "Often people who wish to promote or denigrate a country will use the figure that suits their case best and ignore the other one...".

Mmmmm, who is buying UK gilts; good question...

Could it be another government's central bank?

Is it possible? Is that why it's secret? Surely not.