|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 6, 2010 21:18:25 GMT
Wow! The stock markets really got slammed today.
The market is speaking loud and clear. The Euro zone is in serious trouble. I don't think the market is going to allow it enough time to heal. As a result the Euro will not make it.
This capitulation will cause the Greek bailout to get passed by tomorrow but it barely got done. Too many countries with too many private interests need to come together to make this happen. Many of whom are in bad shape themselves. What happens when Spain or Portugal needs a bailout? Do you think Germany will put up the money to bail out all of the weak Euro economies.
The Euro zone will be dismantled. The uncertainty will negatively affect the US market in the short run but will help it in the long run because money will flow to US equities as a safe haven dollar play.
It's time to pay the piper for the liberal socialist leaning welfare state governments that have dominated the EU. Look for them to be replaced shortly with responsible and conservative Capitalist governments who will have the daunting task of cleaning up the liberal mess. This is serious business.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 7, 2010 8:03:08 GMT
death to the eu..though its passing will be painfull its not only spain and portugal BUSH its also italy and ireland as it became clear the conservatives had not won outright majority..the markets wobbled in the early hours....the euro is down again.....and the asian markets werte wobbly yesterday and merkle of germany is openly speaking about the possible demise of the eu...saying its fighting for survival the germans are not happy with the greeks and certainly not happy with the unrest... it is all very serious stuff
|
|
|
Post by clemiethedog on May 7, 2010 10:58:46 GMT
Closed 300 pts. down, recovering from a 1000 point loss.
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on May 7, 2010 14:30:59 GMT
Bushman is right. The Greek bailout is probably not enough, even for the Greeks, and yet one cannot see Germany and the other Euroclub members doling out yet more money to them; let alone Portugal, Ireland, or Spain if the need arises, as is likely. All they have done is gain a little time. The Euro was set up with promises of firm monetary disciplines, and no member state was supposed to have a deficit of more that 3% of GDP. ALL the above nations have deficits well above that level, and at the head of the lot is the UK, with a deficit of 12%, and a hung parliament.
I know that we are not in the Euro (thank God), but a lot of supposedly wealthy nations are now in deep doodoo, and some nasty medicine is on the way. As for the Euro members club, the pressing need is for all member states to get the public deficits down to the 3% figure, and that way the currency might survive. Whether the citizens of these countries will see the need, and accept the medicine without rioting, is extremely doubtful. We could yet see one or the other default on their payments, and if that happens the Euro experiment fails.
People do not yet fully realise the seriousness of the situation.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 7, 2010 15:07:17 GMT
as some one on the goggle box said..we[uk] are months if not weeks away from BEING GREECE and rioting will not make the reality go away...we have to buckle down..we had the good time now its time to pay up and endure the bad
one LARGE reservation i have..is that those whose greed and utter stupidity caused this will get away without paying up....the bankers..those who thought they could live on credit cards and were totally irresponsible..the politos who allowed it..those who thought the housing market just there so they could exploit it well chucks have come home to roost...if we are lucky we may just keep the hen house to roost in...if we are unlucky..greece will look like a picnic
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 7, 2010 15:12:26 GMT
and it proves one thing...in regard to the euro one size does not fit all... and greedy people and welfare rights do not balance an economy....the right to retire at 53 and live off the backs of others..welfare for those who dont pay in is a rock round our necks...unlimmited portions of the population who put nothing in the pot have ultimately to be paid for by a diminishing portion of those who pay we have all brought it on our selves we thought we could have it all for virtually nothing...and NO ONE CAN HAVE IT ALL.....FOR NOTHING
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 7, 2010 15:35:10 GMT
The problem is though, as the Greeks found out to their cost, ‘Austerity’ measures come at a price. Calling for ‘cuts in waste’ are all very well, but remember, one man’s waste is another man’s livelihood. The Greeks found that once they cut spending, they found their deficit actually rose because their economy slowed when spending slowed.
When people say ‘cut Government spending’ are do not just mean civil service jobs; those cuts will affect everybody. Cutting Government spending will inevitability mean that tens of thousands of private sector jobs will go to the wall. Okay a bit mundane, but even paperclips keep the stationary suppliers in work.
Cameron says there are areas in the Country that are ‘too reliant’ on public spending. That may or may not be true, but cutting government in these areas will bring the whole infrastructure round our ears. Take a few thousand of the payroll and the local ASDA suffers too remember.
Cameron says he can find 6 Billions in cuts, well good luck to him on that, but so far his record says otherwise. During the first debate, Cameron identified 400 uniformed police officers, ‘shuffling papers in HR’. Of course ‘Human Resources’ covers a lot of things, one of which, being training. These officers have jobs training new recruits in various aspects of police work. Does Cameron want to stop that? Does he intend to to replace them with civilians? What about a recruitment freeze? If there is a recruitment freeze will that remove front line officers from the streets?
If the Clegg/Cameron roadshow does start rolling, I hope Vince Cable gets a prominent role in the treasury.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 7, 2010 15:52:30 GMT
and greedy people and welfare rights Wait a minute, mouse. Welfare payments do not go into a huge skip and set on fire. That goes back into the direct economy, and right at the heart of the economy too. That money supports thousands of local shops in some of the poorest areas of the Country, which in turn, gets spent again and again... You want to cut welfare benefits? On you go, but don't be suprised to find more shops boarded up and make sure your pension scheme sells its Tesco shares first, not sure what you buy instead though. The welfare budget is 130 BILLION QUID, which sustains millions of jobs throughout the Country. How many more people should you make unemployed?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 7, 2010 16:30:32 GMT
and greedy people and welfare rights How many more people should you make unemployed? Don't worry Gordon's already made a start - check out FE
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 7, 2010 22:21:56 GMT
Some of those countries really depend on tourism to make their economies run. When you visit the Amalfi Coast or the Gold Coast in Spain or the Greek Isles you won't see much of anything aside from tourism.
So in the course of a few short years the U.S. Dollar dropped in value vs the Euro. In 2001 one Euro was worth 87 cents U.S. In June 2008 one Euro cost $1.56. Europe became too expensive. Americans went to Hawaii instead.
It's not just America. Europe became expensive for other tourists as well.
When your currency is high vs. foreign currencies it means foreign customers can't afford to buy from you. Whether Swiss watches, French wines, or Italian vacations doesn't matter. That's why China has purposely held down the value of her currency.
When the Euro is high vs the dollar it's good for American companies like Hewlett Packard, Apple, etc. Their products are more attractive.
I think the EU now understands that and is trying to bring down their currency. It's now at $1.26 per Euro. But changes in currency valuation don't happen quickly.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 8, 2010 10:33:02 GMT
yes i want cuts in welfare..sensible cuts..and general cuts too i passed a job centre a few days ago so popped in to have a look..all very smart.. carpets ..chairs and desks..computers ..etc etc the woman there told me it was going to be updated...i asked why..she didnt know why...that across the country would save a few millions... same applys to other gov areas..when broke dont decorate and buy new, just a small instance but the same could apply to hospitals and schoold..gov departments etc etc and when broke ever few millions adds up to a lot of millions ..turning off lights would save millions on electricity...turning down the heatings...because if a normal house hold can save 300 a year think of the savings across the entire uk get rid of translators...diversity officers and other non esentials stop printing in a myriad of languages..stop all the fripperies make austerity work from top to bottom.. and i doubt i could make many more unemployed than the gov already have
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 8, 2010 10:54:35 GMT
and i doubt i could make many more unemployed than the gov already have No? What about all the tradesmen and suppliers you are attempting to put out of work? These maintenence contracts are often long term, with penalties for early termination. Where are you going to get the extra millions to cut these contracts from?
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 8, 2010 14:37:47 GMT
and i doubt i could make many more unemployed than the gov already have No? What about all the tradesmen and suppliers you are attempting to put out of work? These maintenence contracts are often long term, with penalties for early termination. Where are you going to get the extra millions to cut these contracts from? oh in that case do the job and issue no more contracts..seasy some one has to be out of work..seriously,,no more contracts and the trades men and supliers would have to look elsewhere... these gov finded premises that i saw were very adequate and in no need of updating...just because we have been throwing money around like water doesnt mean we have to continue to do so when times are hard luxuries are out of the window..concentrate on necesities a good example was election night when the bbc threw an expensive party for slebs on a boat...totally non productive and wasteful...much better to have spent the monies elswhere on programes with a re-sale value...dunno how much it cost but with food and drinlk thrown in it wouuldnt be cheap there are ways of making vast savings....right across the board i know of a school for children with disabilities....individual taxis fetch and take the kids home @ around 7-10 pounds a journey.... considerable cost s taken over a year ....get a bus and pick up children at pickup points again the savings would be high...the parents would probably scream blue murder..but so what
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 8, 2010 14:45:27 GMT
some thing else i know of.. a home is being built for 12 disabled young adults...individual rooms each with its own bathroom and kitchen...now we are talking about young adults who cannot and would not be safe bioling water...so why do they need individual kitchens..each of course fully fitted out with fridges etc..that is an un-necessary expence and a total waste of mony it will also have its own gym fully fitted out..shower rooms blah blah utter madness as has been pointed out to the council jobsworths by proffesionals and parents..will they listen...no...money to burn i must add that to build this place..a small wood was cut down..and a pond filled in...on the plans they say they are going to put in trees and a new pond..guess where..yup exactly where they have just cut down mature trees and filled in a pond magnyfy this over the country and you have wasted millions...and its time it was stopped
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 8, 2010 14:51:00 GMT
When people say ‘cut Government spending’ are do not just mean civil service jobs; those cuts will affect everybody. Cutting Government spending will inevitability mean that tens of thousands of private sector jobs will go to the wall. so its ok to cut civil service jobs..but not private sector jobs...thats odd thinking....... we are virtually greece...not this week but coming soon to a town near you...and the sooner we get used to the idea the better..tough times ahead
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on May 8, 2010 19:25:18 GMT
I'm not sure how we can tackle the huge balance of payments deficit WITHOUT serious cuts to public spending AND some tax increases (probably VAT up to 20%). And the public sector, deliberately bloated by Labour, and the source of much revenue for the Guardians advertising, cannot escape some of the pain. We could lose (say) 10% of the public sector, by natural wastage, and they would not be missed...providing the cuts are made in the right areas.
By that I mean we do NOT sack nurses...we cut the NHS admin staff. We do NOT cut front line social services...we cut the smoking cessation officers, the outreach workers, and the plethora of non-jobs created by New Labour. And we take a bloody great axe to the thousands of useless and massively expensive quangos. Did you know that the Ministry of defence, for example, has more pen pushers than it does soldiers? There is plenty of scope for some drastic pruning. So get to it, Cameron!
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 8, 2010 20:26:00 GMT
One problem for all advance western economies is the shift from manufacturing to service economies.
Imagine a self contained island country with a population of 100 workers: 30 farmers, miners, and ranchers; 30 carpenters, electricians, and other tradesmen; 30 technologists including engineers, architects, software developers, etc.; 3 government employees, 1 doctor, 1 dentist, 1 hair stylist, 1 ad agency person, 1 interior decorator, 1 car salesman, and 1 journalist.
Roll the clock forward one hundred years. The little island country still has a population of 100 people but their occupational makeup has changed. Now there are 40 government workers, 3 farmers, 5 tradesmen, 20 technologists, 10 interior decorators, 11 hair stylists, 4 doctors, 3 dentists, and 4 car salesmen.
That's the problem.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 8, 2010 21:22:34 GMT
absolutely 100%..same with the police..get rid of the non police jobs..same with town halls there are so many non jobs its incredible
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 9, 2010 13:59:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 9, 2010 16:10:59 GMT
By that I mean we do NOT sack nurses...we cut the NHS admin staff. We do NOT cut front line social services...we cut the smoking cessation officers, the outreach workers, Ned, you say that but you do not provide any evidence to back that up. You suggest that there is a number admin jobs that the NHS could happily do away with, but surely you recognise that these will still have to be done. If you cut admin staff, then that means you are going to have to remove frontline staff from wards to do the work. Do you really want nurses carrying out routine filling, for example, or do you want her cleaning wounds? Why send a nurse to college for four years at a great cost to us, paying up wards of 20 grand, giving them all the medical expertise and then having working round a filing cabinet that someone on 10 grand could do? Don’t cut nurses, just make them deal with the payroll instead? Really Ned? Is that your clarion call? Speak to any nurse and they will tell you that the biggest bug bear that many of them have is the fact they already have too much paperwork as it is, and you think that the solution is to increase that paperwork? Why pay a surgeon a king’s ransom to determine shift rotas answering phones and all those mundane tasks that a competent practice manager could do? Why take him (or her) out of theatre put them into management courses at great expense so that we can sack his practice manager and increasing his workload, but reduce the amount of time he actually operates on patients? Where is the saving there, Ned? Because, for the life of me, I cannot see it. I am willing to put my neck out here, had that person wanted to be an administrator, then instead of going to university to study medicine, they would have been more than capable of completing a secretarial course.
|
|