Huguenot

As has always been the case, and yet there's always a tomorrow.

The events and context are entirely unrelated NN. That is such a ridiculous example I really can't be bothered to talk about it. I can only assure you that you don't have any legendary insight into this situation, and I suspect very little understanding of the dynamics at all. You've been listening to too many panic stricken teenage American boys scared of reds under the beds, and you quote them as if they were intellectual giants. Your doom laden pronouncements can only be proportioned by putting them in context, something that you resolutely refuse to do.

I'm not sure what you don't understand UDT? Borrowing is the difference between what you spend and your receipts. The last figures I quoted were for November 2010: total govt. expenditure ?53.9bn, borrowing was ?22.77bn - 42.2% Of that ?53.9bn interest costs were ?4.5bn, so a quarter of what we were borrowing was to pay interest on what we borrowed before. This is credit card junkie stuff. I quoted it a few months ago, I hope you don't mind me using the same figure as an illustration? I could have updated it, but I was simply trying to illustrate a point.

Please just calm down - you seem to have no sense of proportion. Everything for you is black or white, dollar or disaster. I can assure you that we'll still have debt tomorrow, and still have debt the day after. We've already had several 'Minsky Moments' and we're still here. If you haven't noticed the stock exchanges are all down 35% over three years ago. We're all still here. You're just too young NN, we've been through boom and bust so many times it's laughable. It's not the end of the world.

There's nothing wrong with the SDR, nor is it new. It's not recent, it's from 1969. It's a system that allows governments to borrow from each other rather than banks. Americans think borrowing from banks is capitalism, and borrowing from your neighbour is communism. Hence if you read US teenage screamers (which you have been doing, and copying and pasting from them) they keep going on about it as if it's the anti-christ. The Chinese and the Russians are not out to get you. They need markets for their own products, and they need to import resources. They have no interest in collapsing the global economy.

Stop it now NN, you're just copying and pasting silly stuff. There's no chance of banning money - it's just a means to lubricate the exchange of goods and services. You can't go running around wailing and screaming about monsters under your bed any more, you're a grown adult. You need to calm down.

What on earth is this problem about the SDR now? It was invented in 1969 FFS. It's just a way for credit worthy governments to support their spending/debts if the banks go tits up. They borrow off eahc other instead of the banks. It's not rocket science. If you want to understand what this means just remember that 40% of UK annual government spending is borrrowed. If we can't borrow it we're all fecked. SDR covers our arses.

Quite, MM

As a newbie to the forum NN, you probably won't be aware of the extensive discussions we've already had on the strengths and weaknesses of fractional reserve banking. It's possible that you've only just discovered it, that you've read a poor selection of commentaries on it, an extreme set of predictions and are genuinely scared of your life. Your 'forecasts' can't be proven wrong, because they're one set of extreme outcomes that could be derived from an extraodinary set of extreme coincidences. The fact is though that the likelihood of your extreme outcome is about as likely as Yellowstone going supervolcano next week, or London getting hit by a 12 km cheese asteroid bearing the name 'Chuckles' on it's side. In fact the medium term outlook is that US based QE would slowly lead through inflation to a deterioration of the buying power of the US on the world markets (and consequent drop in US living standards) that would coincide with the rise of Asia in line with their populations. It'll be all very gradual, nothing very scary - and we would be wiser to address the energy crisis and climate change thean copying and pasting demented US teenage panic-fests.

@D_C, I'd be very surprised if any of the rioters knew what Trident was. I'd also be shocked if many of them had spent more than cursory glance in the direction of a 'careers advisor'. These kids all had an excellent opportunity for free education, but probably threw it away by torturing teachers. It's a cultural issue. Besides which, I feel a nuclear deterrent is a must-have - we can't put the genie back in the botttle. That's the point about government, you have to make hard choices. I don't believe that cutting Trident in favour of youth clubs would have any effect at all. Either way, no, kids don't have a right to ve 'very angry' or feel provoked if their charity isn't as flush as it used to be.

I don't know much about the 'increasing numbers of young people turning their back on society', the UK has always had an underclass with a penchant for rioting - casuals, skins, football hooligans, mods, rockers, 'angry young men', follow the timeline back... Modern technology allows them better co-ordination and more publicity. Moreover I believe this to be a cultural issue that won't be addressed by throwing money at the problem. However, we've also seen modern tech delivering a more robust social responses, like the street sweepers of Northcote Road. I don't think there's a quick fix, but I'd probably go look for it in creating a sense of national cohesion, identity and belief system that's more allied to the challenges of a modern era - in other words not the C of E or immigrant bashing. As an outsider looking in (from overseas) i'ts particularly apparent that the UK has taken a massive climb down in self-belief and pride over the last decade. The conversations on here are quite miserable compared with the positivity to be found in communities that have much less material wealth or opportunity in their lifetimes than most Brits get in one day.

No D_C my point was related to LD's comment as follows: "My daughter and her teenage friends were all very angry at having their EMA taken away and fruitless job hunting. When Connexions was closed and the youth provision slashed, they were even more angry." The implication being that 'very angry' people have been provoked. My point was that whilst youngsters can be overjoyed that youth provision has been made available by the taxpayer, they have no right to be 'very angry' when the taxpayer doesn't have enough money to continue the service. They certtainly wouldn't have the right to draw connections between the withdrawal of some youth services, being 'very angry', provocation and looting.

The point I was referring to, AFN, was that for the first time many youngsters will be dealing with adults outside the narcissism and self-indulgence of the family home. Whereas mum and dad have a genetic imperative for much of what they do to revolve around their children, when young adults go and get a job they find for the first time they're judged on their own worth and contribution. There is a valuable lesson in there that when you start off, you should start off by learning to shut up, and acccept the fact that you're on minimal pay because you can't contribute much. If you want to get on, you need to learn how to do that, as your experience grows so will your value - if you don't learn that you end up as one of life's losers. There is no benefit to confusing kids into believing that they're going to be molly-coddled and paid for by other people for the rest of their lives. That's when they go and loot shops. Just like stealing from mum's purse at home.

Sounds most unusual Chick. If the bag was hermetically sealed I suspect the court case will revolve around how they could have survived inside the packaging for so long.. Best of luck!

I didn't write that Ridgley, UDT did.

I would have thought that the New World Order is already serving Foie Gras.

Anyone interested in this I would recomend you look into the purchase of a sandwich board and some permanent markers - and maybe drop a line to Tarot for some moral support.

"Pompous and dull" That was the abuse I knew you'd start on AFN. ;-)

There's significant irony in a highly prejudiced person accusing other people of being highly prejudiced. Pots and kettles, PastaPeggy? People in glass houses etc.

Well, I reckon we should stop selling them that line ;-) I'm not unduly bothered by the new world order (small letters), the ruthless and the fearless still need enablers to make thngs happen. In the UK those enablers tend to be quite placid and largely socialist. Loads of passive aggression. I don't think the social system has broken down, I think we've just got a new generation who don't have personal memories of how bad it can get if you don't look after our checks and balances. The pampered middle classes (of which you are one) comprise around 80% of the population, so if they're collateral damage there'll be no-one left!

Oooh DJKQ, you make me shiver when you're cool! ;-)

That's everybody's life LD. It was my life. I don't know why anybody should have any higher expectations. I don't know why the government should be involved in that, I don't know why there should be payments and starter systems that nark off teenageers when they're not available. There's too much emphasis on job satisfaction and 'career opportunities'. They're teenagers, they get exploited for cheap labour. It's a valuable lesson. What teenagers learn how to do for the first time is how to shut up and do what they're told for minimal return. Employers like myself are pretty peeped off right now with the generation Y bunch of applicants who are generally full of shite and won't put a proper day's work in. Other people have filled them with guff about how important they are. They're not. They're only as valuable as they make themselves. And that's by putting their time in and waiting for the opportunity. Like everyone else.

"Little minded people who sit at Computer Screens Designing hare brain road plans. They have no concept of the overall picture." To the contrary DF. I suspect it's you that has no concept of the overall picture, and you're only interested in your car, and your right to drive it where you want, to hell with anyone else. "They say it's all in the name of safety!!" Pray tell, who is 'they'? Do you have any idea who created this scheme and why? If you don't, then it would be wiser to find out before putting your opinion in 5th gear ;-) "It's all to do with slowing down the traffic along Grove Vale." Don't think you know that either do you? ;-) "It will just mean more frustration, then others driving like lunatics to get round the busses." Now let's have a little think about that. Who actually needs to take responsibility for driving like lunatics? Could it be drivers perchance?

Still the brightest bloke in politics

"Once you've heard proper St Lucian Patois then there is no contest." Did you really say 'My dialect is better than your dialect'? No Reeeeeaaaaally? Ha ha! Ha ha ha! Come on UDT, bit of winky giggly there, yeah? ;-)