Boss Radio

Someone just said it on TV. I think they meant 'Quantitative easing'.

It means 'Inventing money'.

I think.

It's money, Jim, but not as we know it.

It's electronic money and doesn't really exist in the real world, it's just there for the banks to use to start them lending money to each other again. I do find myself worrying though, that they might get it mixed up with the real money. What if they then lend it to me? Will I get into trouble for spending money that isn't really there?

The real danger with this scheme - and it's one which the-powers-that-be are hoping that the-people-who-watch-out-for-this-kinda-stuff are not going to notice (But I suspect that they will) - is that other nation's financiers will think that this money is a bit real, they will imagine it in terms of suitcases full of money, and they will realise that this means that the pound is now worth less because there are more of them to divide into the total wealth of the United Kingdom, and they will devalue it.

This of course gives me an idea that I would really like to see as an experiment, seeing as how everything which is being done to fix this crisis is experimental anyway. It goes like this.

Bring forward next year's Domesday Book (You probaby know it as 'The Census'). Give everyone of post-school age who is mentioned therein a million quid of real, freshly minted notes. The pound will immediately devalue, but that won't matter because it will, at worst, only half in value, meaning that everyone will now have the equivalent of half a million quid.

If we are to believe the statistics... ...then 90% of our wealth is owned by 10% of the population, so 90% of the population will be much better off, and the richest 10% won't be, but they'll still be stinking rich beyond the realms of anything that can be ethically justified so we really don't care much about them, do we?

The important thing is that 90% of us will start spending money. Some will be sensible and will remain fairly solvent, others will simply hand the lot over to the top 10% who will rapidly become every bit as rich as they were in the first place.

Most important of all. I will be better off, and so, incidentally will you in all probability.

Will you tell Gordon or shall I?

Back in the days of the Thatcher (I used to call her a madwoman, but now she has dementia it's not PC to call her that any more. There's ironic for you. And I was right all along... ) unemployment quadrupled and the Labour Party urged the Conservatives to spend the money that they were wasting on unemployment benefit on buying jobs so that the people could earn the money and produce product, the Conservatives resisted this, they felt that that way socialism lay, and that it would be better to give more money to the rich so that they could either set up new businesses and employ people or at the very least spend it. Instead they simply trousered it.

So bearing that in mind the Conservatives are now urging the New Labour Party to spend the money that they're wasting on unemployment benefit upon buying jobs so that the people can earn the money and produce product. New Labour are, however, resisting their exhortations, believing that that way Old Labour lies. Instead they feel that it would be better to cut taxes to put money in the hands of the people which they may then go out and spend. Of course tax cuts always favour the rich, and as they have already demonstrated, whatever they do do with it, they won't spend it...

Meanwhile, for years now the Conservatives have been claiming that the only reason New Labour's monetory policy was so successfull was that they were simply continuing with the Tory's monetory policy, conveniently forgetting that while they were in power the country was simply going through a seemingly endless session of depression - slump - depression - slump. Now that the New Labour miracle has expired and we are heading back into depression again, instead of saying "See? We knew this would happen if you kept on following our monetory policies", the Conservatives are saying they would have done things differently.

The only thing I know for sure is that whoever is in, the money's going to be shovelled at the rich and it's going to be the ordinary working stiff who's expected to pay for it.

The current credit crunch crisis is certainly keeping a lot of forums busy. It's enlightening to read some of the strange views people have on the subject, and I dare say they think the same about me. Fortunately I wasn't a member of most of the forums I visited so I couldn't get involved or I might have been going without food or sleep for the last couple of days.

Read more...

"Go'n geddit, with your good credit" - The Tower of Power.

I've just been watching a TV programme about credit. If ever proof were needed that there's very little worth watching on TV these days that must be it. You may wonder why I didn't just come upstairs and get online. In truth it's nice and warm down there and mum wanted the company (Although with a huge white cat one her lap I have no idea why she'd need any more company...).

The programme was a look into just how bad the credit problem has become, both worldwide and here in Britain. As part of this they issued their own Cr. card with a really tempting startup offer, but terrible terms in the small print. Within an hour they'd signed up 12 new customers, none of whom it would seem, had read the small print. At this point a credit expert (Oh good grief... ) came on and said "You see, nobody ever reads the small print."

Er... Hello? Yes they do. Here I am. Surely I'm not the only person on the planet who reads the small print just to be sure I'm not letting the barbarians through the gates? What I wouldn't do is read the small print standing in a crowded shopping centre when I had shopping to do. I'd read it when I got home. You can do that you know. You do have time to change your mind, just as the company who are wanting to issue the card have time to change theirs.

So, no points to the programme makers there then, at the very least they should have asked their victims if they would have read the small print later.

Onwards. They picked three people to test how easy it was to get credit. A pretty young blonde girl with a perfect Cr. rating who paid off at least the minimum on her card regularly and used it to withdraw cash on occasion, a lower middle-aged Asian gentleman who confessed that in his wild impetuous youth he had once defaulted on a credit agreement, but whose finances had been exemplory for years, and an older middle-aged lady with premature grey hair who also admitted to being a little lax at paying off her cards.

The blonde, it transpired, was only in part time employment, earning just £400 a month, and yet when applying in banks, in person, her blondeness apparently guaranteed her a card instantly. Most issuers didn't give her too much credit on the cards, although one did give her £3,000, but by the end of the day after she'd applied for a little more credit over the internet she had more credit available to her than she could ever hope to pay off short of getting a full time job on TV.

The guy on the other hand couldn't get credit to save his life. Whether it was his one default or his Asianness that disallowed him will probably never be known, but after he applied to a couple of those circulars touting Cr. cards that drop through your letterbox on a fairly regular basis he was offered some credit, though nowhere near as much as the blonde.

The credit business's only success was with the other lady who, much to her distress, was completely unable to get credit anywhere.

To be honest, the only thing that surprises me about this is that it wasn't expected. The industry is aimed at suckers. I was offered a card whilst out shopping. Naturally I signed up, I find it's the best way to get it all over and done with without my feeling guilty for being rude to a fellow citizen who's only doing his/her job. Besides they probably get a commision for the 'sale' even if I subsequently withdraw from the offer, which I almost always do after reading the small print.

I was declined.

There's nothing wrong with my credit report, no reason why I shouldn't have been issued with the card, except one. I always, without fail, pay off my card in full every month, and I always withdraw from any agreement with clauses that don't appeal to me. (That's two things - The Man with the Hat)

I'm pleased to report that the blonde was no sucker. She cancelled every one of the credit agreements after reading the small print.

That makes two of us then...

___________________________________________________________________________________

Whilst writing this I've discovered that when typing the word 'small' I almost invariably type 'samll'. I am now mentally filing this alongside 'Britian' and 'ypou' as things I must look out for at all times. Please let me know if find any other pissmellings in my ramblings.