Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
So, what do you want to know?
You buy goods and firms pay their employees. They spend their wages, which firms use to pay their employees and so on.
If firms reduce their workforce and people save instead of spend, there are less transactions.
The money supply is determined by the Bank of England base rate. This has not changed since 2008 (or something). There is no less money now than since it was changed to 0.5%. Instead, it is flowing between employers and employees less frequently.
The UK specifically transferred the responsibility to alter the interest rate base rate from HM Treasury to the Bank of England. It was believed the base rate was manipulated by the Government for their own selfish purposes.
So, it is alleged, the Government would cut interest rates (make it cheaper to borrow, increase spending) at a time before it sought re-election.
Growth in industry and spending is neither linear or exponential. It ebbs and flows as the economic populace adjusts its behaviour. We are like a flock of birds or a shoal of fish; activity contracts or expands naturally as we eagerly watch what others are doing.
and I get what they mean (I think); that it isn't tied to gold or whatever and that countries tend to be in ludicrous amounts of sort of abstract debt. What I want to know is if countries actually owe that money to anyone really, or if everyone could just ignore it and reset to zero.
Smash the system etc.
There are net borrowers and net lenders. Resetting every countries' balance to zero would affect them in different ways.
There is a campaign to make this allowance for the developing world. Many have debts they are unlikely to ever repay. Cancelling the debt would relieve the burden of interest payments. It is money that might be better spent elsewhere, such as infrastructure projects.
Could probably work them out myself but you seem like you're good at explaining.
Please God Macra owners drive faster than their Micro brethren.
More of a statement than a question, granted
Yes: it's a racist plinth
I only got the joke after I typed it.
Anything that increases consumption, government spending*, investment and exports, or reduces imports.
*reducing taxation is also a valid policy.
Whatever it is, it doesn't appear coherent.
They ruled out a cut in VAT.
The effects of HS2 spending will not be felt for some time
WHILE explaining CoCos to a layman?