SUNDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2008
You f*****g what?
Sweet holy f**k, do these people think that we are f*****g morons or what? There can be no other explanation for this piece of shit (reported by the BBC without any qualification, naturally).
Patrick at the UK Libertarian Party blog has found a chart helpfully showing just how effectively the government has "reduced debt".
Silly Patrick! That graph must be upside-down because this way up it looks as though... well... it kind of looks as though debt has increased—massively—over the life of the NuLabour government. T'choh! I must be reading it wrong.
Nope. Debt has definitely increased over the last ten years. But this does not compute...
... for, apparently, the government can afford to put us even more in hock because it has "reduced debt over the past 10 years". And these innumerate lying f****rs are in charge of the banks now?*
F*****g hellski: we're all screwed.
* Given that the government borrows from banks (in the form, usually, of government bonds) and that the government is now in charge of the banks, does this mean that the government will now be borrowing from itself?
The government says it can afford extra borrowing because it has reduced debt over the past 10 years.
Patrick at the UK Libertarian Party blog has found a chart helpfully showing just how effectively the government has "reduced debt".
Silly Patrick! That graph must be upside-down because this way up it looks as though... well... it kind of looks as though debt has increased—massively—over the life of the NuLabour government. T'choh! I must be reading it wrong.
Nope. Debt has definitely increased over the last ten years. But this does not compute...
... for, apparently, the government can afford to put us even more in hock because it has "reduced debt over the past 10 years". And these innumerate lying f****rs are in charge of the banks now?*
F*****g hellski: we're all screwed.
* Given that the government borrows from banks (in the form, usually, of government bonds) and that the government is now in charge of the banks, does this mean that the government will now be borrowing from itself?
Labels: disingenuous c***s, economy, liars, stupidity, thieving bastards, what the f**k?
Posts
6 BLOGGER COMMENTS:
Computer says yes?
I suspect that he's on about debt as percentage of GDP which has indeed fallen since 97.
Anyway, you can bet your bottom dime that the figures will shortly be far, far worse than they were in 97.
UK banks only hold a small fraction of government bonds. What banks do is deposit short term with the BoE, which promptly lends it back to them. In any rational world, the BoE would lend it back at a handsome mark-up, but not even that is true any more.
Technically, the Gorgon is correct. He has no debt. He doesn't owe a penny.
We do.
Now he's going to borrow more money in our names. Rather like that identity theft thing we're all being warned about.
"There can be no other explanation..."
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=1996,39140985&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&product=REF_SI_EB&root=theme0/si_eb/tsieb090&zone=detail
51.3, 49.8, 46.7, 43.7, 41.0, 37.7, 37.5, 38.7, 40.4, 42.1, 43.1, 43.8.
That's UK debt as a % of GDP 1996 to 2007 respectively, so that's why they can say it's gone down.
I was having problems explaining to some friends of mine today that there are only 4 real ways of governments raising extra money:
1) Raise taxes; political suicide at the moment
2) Sell nationalised industries off; they can't do this as there's effectively nothing left, at least not that could be sold off in a hurry and besides who would buy?
3) Borrow via gilts; looks like the next issue may end up undersubscribed (the first time in a few years) as, with all this recapitalisation of banks the international markets will soon be awash with government debt, let alone that issued by crackpot new labour!
4) Run the printing presses; hello zimbabwe!
They couldn't see the problem with no. 4... Sometimes I worry about my friends knowledge of economics! And this is from supposedly intelligent people.
They also didn't understand the issue with the re-capitialisation of banks, i.e.
* Government borrows money from the market (mostly from banks) at a market rate of interest, as it can't afford to fund this through current taxation (although we'll be paying off the interest)
* Government then buys shares in the banks to re-capitalise them
* The banks then loan this out to US, the tax payer, charging interest on this
* At some point in the future, when the market stabilises, the government sells the shares, almost certainly making a loss
* The Tax payer is well and truely shafted
POST A COMMENT