Boards
Why do governments consistently penalise those who save and bailout the frivolous?
A one off tax of up to 10% in Cyprus on savings which have already been taxed. Anyone who's pissed all their money up the wall benefits. Always the same.
A one off tax of up to 10% in Cyprus on savings which have already been taxed. Anyone who's pissed all their money up the wall benefits. Always the same.
The only way out of the financial crisis is to encourage people to spend money they can't afford rather than play cautious and save it.
This encourages people to spend. Ergo it's a good idea.
On another note, do people who are overdrawn get 10% knocked off their overdraft?
Precisely
Governments in post-Fordist economies don't want you to save...
as ridiculous as negative interest rates.
(^ I this'd this in the assumption it was written with a slightly cynical tone
can I just get that confirmed?)
As David Cameron said, the economic situation is the modern day equivalent of World War II.
These people who sit on all their money and refuse to give what they can to help the nation are no different to the people who refused to help defend the country from the Nazis. To hoard all your money when spending is needed to stimulate the economy is unpatriotic, selfish and dragging our country into debt. Which is ludicrous when all of its citizens could be in debt instead.
what a load of rubbish
I entirely agree.
they don't really benefit, they're just not penalised
although savers would be penalised worse if the banking system collapsed or they ended up with hyperinflation or whatever.
far from saying that this is the only way out.
I'm not entirely sure what I think of this, but it's worth nothing that they are taxing people with over €100k saved at a higher rate. Vast amounts of idle wealth is part of the reason everything is so fucked.
idle wealth?
saving for retirement, when you have no option for creating an income you mean.
no, idle wealth
wealth that doesn't do anything
Guardian references that half of those likely to be hit in the Cyprus tax are non-resident Russians.
what is idle wealth...bank deposits, stock, assets?
3 houses? 4 cars? some leisure watercraft? cars that cost > cheapest houses
and can do 0-60 in under 7 seconds or have a top speed over 100mph
I know that not all 'savings' are not doing anything, but a lot of wealth is 'idle'
calm down, you'll do yourself a mischief.
Surely the buying of fast cars and houses and the taxes and fees are the absolute opposite of idle wealth. (I still have no idea what this terms means)
he isn't far off
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/21/i-agree-with-churchill-shirkers-tax
most cars have a top speed over 100mph
why?
i dont know much about cars
but i imagine that a car that can do over 100mph when pushed can probably do 70mph more efficiently and effectively and safely and with less damage to itself than one that can only possibly do 70mph when pushed.
seems like the sort of thing that would be true
so why would you set the gearing up to enable it to do over 100mph?
again, i don't know much about cars
but i don't think your answer makes sense
gearing a car with a decent engine to only go 70mph would make it hilariously racey at low speeds
I'm pretty sure more children die from idiots driving at 30-50mph than testosterone-drenched thrill seekers doing 120. At least that's what I tell myself so I can sleep at night.
JFC
Are you guys trying to argue that it is impossible to sacrifice some needless top end speed (normally enabled with reduced fuel economy because of bigger engines, or by more expensive increased tech engines) and produce a safe car that is actually fucking fuel efficient at 70 mph?
Of course it fucking well is.
JFC talk about loosing sight,
basically when I mentioned expensive performance cars.
take stock, if you are walking into work today make a note of how many cars can probably exceed 110 mph and consider whether anyone owning these will ever do that, consider the extra cost of these cars and then consider how much of that is wasted/needless money .....just so that they can have a prestige cat.
FFS people its not a difficult concept I am raising here
I wish I had a prestige cat.
barry, yes it is a difficult concept
as i know nothing about cars and have never driven one (YOU SLAYER OF THE ENVIRONMENT!!!!!!!!!!!etc)
all i know is that in general, machines tend to perform best when they're not straining at their limits.
ALSO WHAT IF YOU WERE BEING CHASED BY A MAN W/ A GUN
simples
the money that you save on the cat, you can spend either on a big gun for yourself, or a bullet proof vest (depending upon your general demeanor)
Mainly
because the people who have pissed everything up the wall have nothing upon which the govt can levy tax.
Because they're generally boring bastards?
Piss it up the wall, man. No point in getting to 65 and having £100k sat in the bank when you can live on a tenner a day. Enjoy your life, suffer your retirement. Makes infinite more sense than doing it the other way round.
~£87k, rather modest savings for most.
No need to live on a tenner a day either way.
tbf i dont really have any problem taxing people like that if they have 100k in savings
they shouldn't have taxed anyone with less than however much it takes to put a deposit on a 4 bed house in the city or something though.
not from a moral standpoint, anyway
sets a pretty dodgy precedent and might not be a good idea in the long run, though
Governments don't consistently do this, do they?
yes.
could argue that consistently low interest rates here do that
(not a govt. decision, I know, but politically motivated for sure)
Perhaps going slightly off topic; it all depends if you have a saver or a
spender mentality. Spenders obviously stimulate economies. Governments love those guys. I however, am a dull saver and am very frugal. The level of borrowing that people did in The UK during the late 90/early-mid 00s is shocking. I lived at home with my parents during my 20s trying to keep up with London house price inflation. I did eventually move out and now own my flat mortgage-free due to my dull saver mentality. I however, didn't enjoy my 20s as much as I would have if I spent as I could have. My saver mentality now does allow me a lot of piece of mind on all things financial. I think the main thing is to realize that there should always be a balance between spending and saving i.e. having fun and being sensible for a rainy day. A bloke at work was moaning about payments on his interest only mortgage, yet he'd recently bought an ipad on 17% APR. You can understand the level of contempt I had for his predicament.
people without savings are not necessarily frivolous
why would you want to attribute lack of money to fault?
unless they'd had a bad run on the gee gees
or stock market
or choice of firm or livleyhood to work at
we both know i don't mean that and you can clearly understand that in most cases those with zero saved are frivolous with money.
no i do not understand that most people with zero money saved are frivolous
it merely means that their outgoings very nearly match their incomings (possibly due to one, or both, of these having changed to their detriment and therefore outside of what they had planned), whatever is left might be used to purchase some form of salve for themselves or their family, human relations with dependants could easily demand the small amount of money left over to be spent to maintain relationships rather than go towards some pitifully small saving fund
some people do not necessarily have as much control over their income
as others do, some people may find it relatively simple to increase their income to cover increased costs, others do not. It is not always possible for all to be able to predict the exact outcome of all their life choices, it is also not always possible for people to predict increases in taxes or rates or costs or removal of benefits or exemptions as these things are rarely even or steady
Im sorry if i have misinterpreted
but the word frivolous is normally used as a word that implies negativity or fault
if you mean it as just being that they do not care as much about money as other things
then i suppose that that is ok, i guess someone could take a job that was worthy but paid less than a job that paid more but was of little human worth, and that in this case the person could be said to be frivolous with money, it just not normally the way the term is used.
actually going back to the op, i was right to interpret the 'frivolous'
as being meant to be negative, cos you reinforce the interpretation with the 'anyone whos pissed it up the wall'
Glad you came along, as usual deliberately missing the point and saying the same things over and over and over....
:( well actually i dont think im deliberately missing it
perhaps I am actually not as clever as you imagine me to be. I can be quite thick in some ways
or maybe ive just gone off at a slant, perhaps an aspect of what you said was of more significance to me
whereas it was another aspect that you thought was more significant
ok.....ill have another go
perhaps if we disregard the group of peeps who hav not saved but are not bad.
If we just take the 'bad' people who havnt saved cos they have spent it on gambling and booze and druks and prostitution and videogames and foie gras and other needless consumables........well the point is that these people have not money that the gov can take.......WHAT do you want to happen to them to stop them 'benefiting' from their society not collapsing? Do you want the society to collapse becuse it would at least include this "bad group" in misery?
I suppose that they could have to go and do free serventish/slavish work for the benefit of society for no dosh as their contribution to helping ....and this would be of benefit as it would reduce the cost of gov spending......but the problem here would be making sure that you only get the bad people, and not those that are already working 60-80hrs a week to just get enough to live on
innit together.
no need to explain yourself this time creaky
Axis otoh...
which part?
Reward the risky punish the frugal seems wrong way round to me.
Creaky's gone off on one about blame and fault as usual..i'm making no judgements just cannot see why the inherently risk averse should be punished.
this isn't a punishment
it's possibly a form of enforced socialism, far preferable to the depthless alternative
you're the only one attributing fault with your grossly entitled plea of 'risky' citizens who've obviously pissed away their earnings on meze and Keo
here's a thing. cyprus isn't very affluent, like anywhere with an economy based largely around tourism. people earn enough to live and eat and all, but those that can save largely do, because they're usually business-owners or hoteliers or shipping merchants or the like - the ones who've benefited most from the power-structure of the island. the ones who should contribute the most to its bailout.
you're looking at this from a laughably narrow perspective
laughably narrow?
Why not raise income taxes then, this is clearly going to hurt those with no prospect of future earnings most.
The idea that only these shipping merchants will be chipping in is ridiculous. As if they, as few as they are, will have any savings in a personal cypriot bank account.
raising income taxes wouldn't result in a sudden windfall for the creditors
you're right that this is abrupt and will hit some harder than others. but there's no completely fair way to do it, and hitting those with plenty of savings hardest is probably the fairest.
plenty, losing 10% of just £87k of all money in a cypriot account. Clearly cannot be justified and frankly can't see it happening and if it does looks like most countries . Imagine this idea being mooted here, there would be outrage and the run on the banks would be disastrous.
is it being mooted here, a country with a completely different economy?
no it's not. play the situation, not the projection. it wouldn't happen here in long while because at the Top Level this country is a free-market right-wing fuckfest and you only have to see how completely useless the Green Party is (a party to the right of most countries' left-wing oppositions) to realise this
however it would be quite a popular measure if the alternative was crushing austerity, work-for-free schemes and a low minimum wage OH WAIT
apologies but just trying to say imagine this happening in anywhere really UK was just an obvious place to start.
Not going to go down well, as pointed out by PO this is a retrospective action and i cannot see this being popular unless it really is all over in which case what would the govt need to money for anyway.
+ Cyprus is a pretty noted tax haven
again, half (HALF) of the people expected to be hit by this are Russian expats
I'm going to presume that half the population of Cyprus isn't Russian, and given so that's a pretty disproportionate % that almost certainly tells you a lot about the kind of people who have money saved there.
what does it matter where they are from. It's the 'taxation' of deposits, of a fairly modest amount that's just plain wrong.
because if 50% of those hit are Russian expats
they're unlikely to be people who will struggle with losing between 6% and 9% of what they have saved.
as L_T said, you have to consider the local context.
They will simply withdraw their funds, or get compensated by their own governments.
In all likelihood it's not going to happen or if it does only take money from those who can not stop it, don't realise it's happening or don't mind paying anyway and raise inconsequential amounts. This is not a good idea at all.
kinda bummed that cyprus is just another oligarch playground now
if it ain't the british army buying up (or uh 'claiming') land
'I
I've gone off on one about blame and fault?
please read your OP again.
people who dont save - "frivolous" - "pissed all their money up the wall"
you call that "not making judgements"?
YOU set the tone of it being about worthyness, you idiot
sorry, my fault.
thats OK, it is true that I might have a tendancy to go off on one along those lines
The situation would appear to be quite obvious
it even tells you in the article
i.e. President Nicos Anastasiades admitted the deal was "painful" but said it was necessary to avoid a "disorderly bankruptcy".
Fair point. There are many on low incomes. There are also many
that are on average or higher than average incomes who basically spend all that they earn and more. I think the average personal debt in The UK (not including mortgages) is around £6K. I like the German and Chinese mentality towards money. I'll probably get a load of negative replies but I do like Angela Merkel's Swabian housewife approach to money.
? you mean she stuffs it in her drawers :D
It's tricky
What is the system there for? Im unemployed just now and i havent even looked into benefits because i suspect i have too much in the way of savings,. It seems a bit hard given that ive paid about 50k in tax a year for many years. But my need is not a need while i have cash in the bank. If they start supertaxing that though then im fucked and i need to stop playing at being an author/ yoga guru and get the fuck back to work. I think inequity exists at every level if you decide to see it that way, but unless you're on your knees you can probably afford to pay a bit more tax and should do so while being grateful for your relatively good situation.
10% one off tax on already tax deducted income out of nowhere is what this specific example is
100k down to 90k overnight, seems a little unfair, that could be a year's expenditure in your old age.
Out the blue seems unfair, youre quite correct
Seems retrospective, which is contrary to natural justice. People should be able to plan with a degree of certainty. Very harsh, but i guess the government need the money pretty bad.
you announce something like this too far in advance
and you'd just have the run on their banks that they are having, but x10759474 and the entire system would collapse.
which seems to be what they're trying to avoid.
should have done it, THEN announced it
OH EM GEE ORWELLIAN NIGHTMARE FIRST THEY COME FOR 7% OF YOUR SAVINGS THEN THEY BRAINWASH YOU INTO HAVING SEX WITH DOGS IN YOUR OWN HOME
All in all looks like they are forcing non Euro countries to chip in, again.
thats the global market for you
innit together
no it's not.
One country stealing from depositors with no recourse
eh, was there a threadsmash there? My post at 15:22 was in the context of a
response to your post at 15:17
I'll explain here
you said
"Looks like they are forcing non euro countries to chip in"
I responded to that with
"thats the global market for you"
I was relating to the international aspect - because you mentioned non euro countries......so i said global, because that would encompass non euro countries as well.....i then quipped 'innit together' as a mirror of an earlier quip of yours, paradying that of Camerons.,,,,because we are indeed all within that which is 'Global'
which is why i am somewhat puzzled by your then going back to talking about just the smaller aspect of cyprus and its invertors, after you have opened it up to multiple non euro countries.
I honestly am not misinterpreting what you say (see a little bunch of posts further up), I honestly do not understand what you mean sometimes
it's not the global market is it though, what's being traded here?
It's the forcing the arms of other countries to help their citizens in the face of a short term and reactionary response in a pretty desperate position. I am sympathetic but i can't see how this is an appropriate measure.
ah now i get you....well, i guess the gov thought that would get the money needed in the
timespan that it was needed in, as opposed to tax hikes (as you mooted above in some post) which would not generate the dosh in the time needed.
I guess if you see investors as if they are exactly that....they are investing in the bank, and rather than getting a dividend they are getting something -ve, because of the problems with the banks.
depositors are investors now?
I dont know, are they?
I was suggesting that every now and again authorities and institutions redefine things because it then reflects the 'change' in approach that they are involved with.
Have you noticed how some "animals who drink water" have now become "'customers' of water companies"?
and lo and behold
someone down there \/ has just said that the bbc has said that they will be compensated with shares in the bank. A neat trick, but not that suprising
" a neat trick"
used in the sense of trinity commenting on the ghost twins being able to dematerialise into the floor........it does not imply support of the action
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21820237
that's nice of them
surely this is a clear message to everyone everywhere to withdraw ALL their savings from their banks immediately
are you not in favour of one-off tax levies on savers in noted tax havens?
not particularly
The UK banks under the FSCS are fine. The FSCS guarantees savings in each
institution for up to £85K. If you're lucky to have £86K in a bank account; move a grand into another.
oooh no people are now starting to get worried that there might be chains of consequences :D
like "oooer! if it happened there then this means that no guarentees are cast iron" it might cause a run on banks in other countries as investors get scared that they might have to get ready to withdraw at the slightest hint (in other countries)
its strange that people only postulate the extreme when they are right up face to face with it, and that any consideration of the extreme otherwise is regarded as madness.....because they think they are so sensible I guess, because they are in the middle of the herd
it's not that strange really.
well it is strange from my povs
People's inability to see potential outcomes
never surprises me.
Surely that's only if banks crash though?
Not if the government passes a law taxing 10% of all bank savings?
prl
Thats enough Cprl Jones
;)
This is why I don't keep my money in an EU bank account. I don't know why anyone would really.
I understand that people with savings in Spanish bank accounts are withdrawing/moving their funds in as a pre-emptive measure before it happens to them too. Not sure if enough people have done it/will do it to have an impact, but it's certainly possible.
it's already having an impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21823432
totally ridiculous idea
:')
pretty surprised how most propel in this thread seem to think this is fine
it's pretty outrageous really.
it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Like in Greece and Spain and Ireland, is this going to cause bank runs?
They're fine with it because they'll never be affected by it.
Either because a) this will never happen in the UK or b) if it did they're too poor for it to make any difference to them.
Empathy has never been DiS's strong point...
hmmmmm empathy ;D
it would affect people tho
if they did do it here. Maybe a DISer has £15,000 in savings, maybe saving for a deposit on a house or something, next day BOOM! - you've lost a grand. It's shocking.
Yeah, but everyone needs to pay their fair share.
The NHS, the police, road upkeep etc doesn't just happen by magic.
how do YOU define as a fair share?
I think that everyone is a bit confused on this. I think that it needs some clear simplicity for people to understand, and I think that you would be capable of simplifying things to a great degree
That's the great thing about a 'fair share of tax', Creaky.
It can mean whatever you want, whenever you want.
:D
It's really awful isn't it.
I know that Cyprus is a different country and economy and all that, but i'd be really fucking gutted and angry if it happened to me.
Is there any news about what would happen to business accounts?
I have never been on a protest in my life, and doubt I ever will.
But this would make me seriously consider it.
i thought you didn't believe in protests?
desperate times, desperate measures.
I don't.
But it is problematic to allow theft to go unchallenged.
i think i'm entirely the same.
Taxing again money that has already been earnt is not the same as raising tax rates. It's damn unethical.
A few people seem to be jizzing themselves at the "rich" getting hit, but it's going to be poor and middle class people who really get stung.
it would still be unethical, though much more pallatable if there was a higher threshold on the levy
if, for instance, only those with €100,000+ in cash savings faced having to pay
but anyway, it's a total cock up and the fact that the EU, IMF, Cypriot banks & Government can just agree between them to confiscate cash from the populace is going to frighten a lot of people far beyond the island's shores
totes
will be very interesting to see what the consequences of this are
The problem is that I think this is a time when the concept of solidarity means something.
Even if it feels kind of okay (or at least less bad) for the rich only to be penalised here, it'd still create a precedent where it's okay for governments to tax money twice and to take saving directly from bank accounts and that's pretty scary - especially as you might legitimately get people who've recently sold a house and are now renting or something similar so aren't necessarily super-rich - simply happen to be going through a period where there's money in their accounts.
The thing for me is the precedent absolutely should not be established - whoever it hits.
Totally agree with this
it seems very very dangerous to me
the recent windfall thing can be taken care of in administration
and once you put that to one side it's hard to argue against the fact that anyone in a tax haven with 100k+ in cash savings has benefited either directly or indirectly from the asymmetric ethics of tax paradises
but yes, the real problem here is the dangerous precedent shown that international organisations can just conspire to swipe money - although it isn't really /that/ far from the powers we normally accept them having in controlling interest rates and printing new money via 'quantitative easing'
troubling
I'm assuming that once this is over, everyone that has money in this banks is going to instantly witdraw *all* of their money
and move it somewhere 'safer' to ensure it doesn't happen again, causing a far bigger problem. Or at least a much larger problem than any benefit gained form the temprary cash grab.
And similar, no one is ever going to save their money with these banks again, ensuring that they've pretty much fucked themselves over forever more.
Unless there's some clause in the legislation/regulation that is allowing the government to do this that says that are not allowed to move their money even after the event, but i'm not sure it's possible for that to be upheld in practice.
highly likely
but it depends who people blame
are they gonna blame their bank? the Govt? The IMF ? the EU?
all or some of the above? who knows but it's certainly not going to help customer confidence
does it matter who they blame?
it won't be motivated by retribution, it'll be motivated by fear no?
^This,
plus it becomes almost irrelevant. Placing blame and seeing heads roll may be cathartic, but it won't solve the problem, and it won't stop people moving their money.
yes
but they wont be burning their money
they'll be moving it
and where they move it to and the effect of that move will depend in large part where they conceive the robbery to have taken place and who they feel they can trust (if anyone) in the future
I think no matter who they blame they'd want their money out and somewhere safer if they can get it there.
The problem is there's now legitimate reason to doubt that any bank account is truly safe...
Incidentally I do think all this, along with various other financial things over the recent years, really means there's an urgent need for a sensible discussion about the EU, the Euro and the financial direction and pressure it puts on other countries.
I can't imagine it'll be at all possible to have that debate without jingoism, nationalism and anti-jingoism and nationalism getting in the way...
Questioning the EU/Euro?
You must be one of those vile Little Englanders I keep hearing about.
BBC says the taxpayers will be compensated with shares in the banks
So if someone withdrew all their money they'd just be harming themselves.
If the banks are a bit fucked and nobody wants to invest in them, I suspect those shares won't be worth very much...
+ if the vast majority of people hit by this are ordinary Cypriots
with 3k or 4k that'll lose 180 or 240€ they might be happier to walk away rather than be given some worthless IOUs
:D I knew it
they've decided to 'see' depositers as investors
that is sneaky as fuck
Best to get out first then
quantitative easing is far more deceptive tho, this is just blatent
i'm not sure people really accept QE, i just think most people don't know about / understand it.
something I don't understand here in this Cyprus thing. Isn't this going to cause a run of the banks?
if it goes through won't people withdraw their cash (after having x% swiped off it) - out of anger or fear of it being repeated, and if it doesn't go through, won't they leave the banks anyway out of fear that it might be brought in at a later date?
am i missing something here?
maybe the EU/Govt/IMF/Banks - let's call them The Cartel from here on in
figure that people wont just stick their money under matresses - that if they withdraw they will reinvest elsewhere; stock market, currency, new car, home improvements, whatever - and as such the stimulating effect on the economy from that + the 10 billion loan will cancel the negative effects of the run
maybe The Cartel are just carrying out an experiment here and the Cypriot folk are the Guinea Pigs
then again, there are Turkeys everywhere that always vote for Christmas
yeah i can see that
this stuff confuses me
yes there is the danger of that
But the reason that this leader is taking dodgey decisions is because ALL the decisions open to him are dodgey and bad outcomes.
So whilst criticising this action, consider the alternatives that he had and consider the consequences of those alternatives.....I think that you will find that they all end up bad.
One might ask such questions as should his priority be for cyprus stability in the short term, or should he allow cyprus to have worse problems in the short term so that everyother country (including his own) do not have even worse problems in the future (especially considering if he decides to let cyprus hurt now even more, it does not guarentee that other countries, including his own, will not hurt more in the future, because not alol countries will behave exactly the same).......this aspect of the dilemma is a problem of having nationality
so basically
they are fucked?
well there are still choices that the rulers of us all can still make to determin how f*****
they will be.
Pretty short-sighted
Even if you agree that's it's fair to raid a savings account at relatively low levels - which a surprising number here seem to - the ripple effects elsewhere aren't worth the amount they'll reap from this.
hmm, interesting
apparently €2bn of the cash in Cypriot banks belongs to UK residents with a total of 37% of all savings belonging to non-cypriot residents
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/18/cyprus-bailout-in-figures?CMP=twt_gu
Not sure what your point is here, spaceman.
not really making an explicit point
just looking at some numbers
Now they've announced that all those with less than €20,000 will be exempt
That's generous of them.
presumably they're going to up the levy on those with €100,000+ savings
to cover the shortfall
this is weird
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21847013
This is seriously fucked up
your Government just voted to take £130million off the poorest young people and in the process completely pissed on the rule of law
wow
oops
wrong thread
but maybe apt in here
oh for fuck's sake
It's not about rewarding the poor and penalising the astute
it's about making sure everybody's only just about got their nose above the water regardless of how they spend their money.
This is a real snake pit
The issue being that this kind of taxation (one off, opaque, unnannounced post taxation) is exactly what tax shouldn't be about and fuels the issues we have with tax evasion. It's like the local baron realising he was broke and sending the tax collectors round with spears in the Middle Ages. I understand the practical arguments for this and those saying yeah but it's scaled but you can't get away from the fact that the principle and the method is entirely corrupt and wrong.
it's the beginning of the dark ages
surely there's a point that your earnings and your savings being subject to tax in the first place negates the need for people to come knocking on your door.
this isn't a one-off tax, it's greed.
question;
is it greedy to take from the greedy in order to help maintain a system of greed?
You don't fight fire with fire
You improve the tax laws and you tighten up the regulation and surveillance. I have no sympathy for Cyprus, they were happy to be this way as it seemed beneficial for them until the walls crumbled.
This is absolute desperate bullshit of the highest order, and the precedent it sets is wrong. It basically says the government can decide at any point just to take a chunk of your money without warning you. I don't care who the victims are and how greedy and corrupt ànd unpleasant they are, this would have really been a crossing of the rubicon.
my GCSE art teacher was in a band called Rubicon
I think what it says is that the IMF can leverage what the fuck it wants out of any failing economy
shit is fucked up
LBC I know you didnt mean it like this but
you say you have no sympathy for cyprus......when you say cyprus what do you mean? the local branch of the bank of cyprus in my home town in the UK (never seen anyone in there)
do you mean the premier? the government? shopkeepers there? someone who farms there? people from overseas who bank there? these are all very different types of entities and they do not/have not all made the decisions that have led to the current situation. "They were happy to be this way" yes some people might have tried to be happy with their lives because there was fuck all they could, as individuals, to change the wider policies and other peoples behaviour.
Yes it is a desperate action, but that is because all consequences of action or inaction are bad......and this is the particular course of bad action that the premier had decided on.
What bad course of bad action or inaction would you have advised them to take and explain how the consequences from that are less bad than this one.
(that last bit is rhetorical, because it is not a clear or easy choice.
question;
is it entirely necessary to maintain a system of greed?
let's hope not
We really need to re-structure how we live as human beings really.
The majority of people don't even live as human beings, just vacuous consumption machines on the periphery with absolutely no connection or regard as to what we are and how amazing it actually is that we're here.
really
really
I'd say we need to de-structure
the problem is that individuals do not always have the ability to do this as
the power of the govs and the consumption machine are almost overwhelming
The Markets™ require you to live in fear, rather than hope.
And they're bigger than you, and the governments, so what they say goes.
Nah son.
10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.
19 Genuflect, and suckle on the teat of salvation.
Revelation 22:18-19
For I testify unto everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, and from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 33 1/3 Revolutions
Yeah that's right, y'all better act like you know
Shit is gettin critical (in all the nations)
Shit is gettin crazy, that's right (all the lands)
Y'all better listen yo shit is blazin G
Shit is blazin, that's right, I'm tryin to let y'all know...
Soldiers of the future
we are approachin with to be Earth's last battle
The war fever's on the rise
The lives of many are in the hands of fate
Armageddon is the destiny we await
In the trenches of the ghettos we meditate
Developin our defense, I'm gettin tense
I hear the bombs of time tickin
As the smoke of fear thickens in the air
I cock my glock and give thanks
For the peace that will exist, when this war is over
Revolutions, revelations will be revealed
Babylon has fallen, now time to build, labwars
When I spit at the government bombs like Saddam hit
Make you flip to the music with your shit half-lit
Harder than time and convicts
Rhymes never be basic, afraid of the dark
twenty-five to the L, no I just can't face it
Need a mill for two passports and face-lifts
Ain't tryin to see handcuffs and steel bracelets
Twisted politics, high speed chases
on the races, locked down places
Prophet of rages, reincarnation as gauges
set to show off in the blazes
Revolution, revelation, resurrection stages
Raw like wild dogs locked up in the cages
And my brain cell with ice picks under the floor
Plottin the war I'll sign a Shakur for sure
Revisited, hear the shorties be quizzin it
Geronimo Platt, politically incarcerated cats
I dwell on all the black males doin time
And got me wanderin who invented motherfuckin crime
Goin in a tantrum lyrical fits
Spread like cancer on tracks that hit
Feel the pulse in the boom in the night song
Rally up all the people like a Farrakhan
Spittin words that'll send em back to Peningon
Hittin cats in the head out in Lebanon
Through the New World order I'ma carry on
Hittin brothers with jewels they can grow on
More than wack videos in a dance song
If you don't believe it so long and so on
So on, prove the player haters so wrong
I don't care who the fuck is out there yeah
My militant mind stay guerilla zone
Shorties feelin me in the chest like a silicone
Get ya home with a honeycomb
Go to any Coast I'ma bet ya I'ma bust chrome
Once again in Terrordome I'll show em
My Mics come equipped with chips and fax modems
Got the facts and rewrote them
2001, 2002, what's it gonna do?
What's it gonna do, gonna do?
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Age was created in the lab
Small pox created in the lab
Beats too marks created on the AB
The futuristic thinks, BIO pass
In nine hundred and ninety eight
we gonna take down the head of state
and demonstrate non-stop resistance
It is time, time for a drastic change.
Time to retaliate and wake up
I've had enough, enough of the lies
enough of the destruction, information and corruption's.
False religions, doctors and puddy compoundin and who gets in trouble?
And I won't stop no, no
No more violence, no, no, no more induses
and no more two-face politicians who stab you in the back
Plus, mother is too long and I'm densing.
And I'll attack and I won't hold back
I'm gonna trouble you, hold you and squeeze you
until the truth is told
You can keep your man-made diseases
and your welfare reform, housing projects
penitentiary, fake genitals that ain't never really included me
Nothin can stop us, not even death (*echoes*)
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars, bulletproofin
Revelations 33 1/3 revolutions
No solutions, labwars...
sorry
i don't listen to hip hop
that's ok
i don't like cricket.
Short term
Yes - probably
It's not greed really
Well the tax isn't. It's an option to stop the country defaulting. It's desperation more than greed
whatever mate.
your facts and figures aren't going to help you build a shack or grow your own veg eh?
Those damn facts, always getting in the way
It's not happening now anyway
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21842966
Will be interesting to see where this goes next
Attempts to undermine/replace the rogue administration and instal interim custodians in 3, 2, 1...
LIBERAL CYNICISM IS SUPER EFFECTIVE!
SELF DEFENCE IS NO OFFENCE!
Realised I was defending this mostly because of the obnoxious false binary in the threadtitle
Then they offered to cut the tax on those with savings under $20k and I was almost in favour again.
But really, this sort of manoeuvre will only be in any way useful if it hastens the withdrawal of funds from the banking system and into community-run credit unions. My support for it was on the offchance that it would permit the redistribution of wealth, or at least delay the rapacious winner-takes-all scenario of a broken economy in a resource-rich land. I now doubt it would delay much. Bandages and stopgaps will only take us so far. But what would happen if the global banking system collapsed to be replaced by local credit unions? Or, better, how could it happen without its military-industrial sidekicks waging tough love on the unruly proles who should be more grateful for their freedom?
this sort of manouevre
is manure and it's not happening on my watch.
Very big of you to have admitted you were wrong.
CAN YOU SEE IT YET?
:-)
x