advertisement


Crisis? What Crisis?

Colin L said:
A very interesting overview of the state of the banking system. Written without jargon so even numpty's like me can follow it.
My conclusion from it is that the banking industry carries inherent risks that are currently exposed by interest rate increases after 10 years of historic lows.

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/banking-in-very-uncertain-times/
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see if folks who use smaller UK banks start shifting it out to the bigger boys (particularly over £85K). Of course, that’s how these problems become self perpetuating.
 
Colin L said:
A very interesting overview of the state of the banking system. Written without jargon so even numpty's like me can follow it.
My conclusion from it is that the banking industry carries inherent risks that are currently exposed by interest rate increases after 10 years of historic lows.

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/banking-in-very-uncertain-times/
Click to expand...
Increasing interest rates is a means to widen the wealth gap and only controls inflation by making poor people even poorer.
 
kensalriser said:
We had low interest rates for 20 years and the wealth gap widened.
Click to expand...

The wealth gap started to widen in 1979 and has continued on an upward trend ever since, After 2010 it was austerity that caused greater wealth inequality, not the lowering of interest rates.
 
ks.234 said:
The wealth gap started to widen in 1979 and has continued on an upward trend ever since, After 2010 it was austerity that caused greater wealth inequality, not the lowering of interest rates.
Click to expand...
Ah, well obviously you're the expert. Was there austerity everywhere in the world where the wealth gap also widened?
 
The richest people ever were Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller both of whom lived died in the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth i.e. well before 1979.
 
Spraggons Den said:
The richest people ever were Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller both of whom lived died in the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth i.e. well before 1979.
Click to expand...

Some say it was the Medici family in the late medieval times. They where bankers, but carefully avoided lending money to anyone! Instead they did what banks still do, they transferred money and charged their customers heavily for the privilege. And, yes, they took care of the Popes business.
 
Spraggons Den said:
The richest people ever were Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller both of whom lived died in the second half of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth i.e. well before 1979.
Click to expand...
And? The question was the wealth gap, and that grew dramatically wider after 1979. The actual evidence is clear
 
kensalriser said:
Ah, well obviously you're the expert. Was there austerity everywhere in the world where the wealth gap also widened?
Click to expand...

i am no expert, so no need for the snark. Instead you could support your argument with evidence. It is clear from the first graph that wealth inequality did grow dramatically after 1979 and the second shows that interest rates grew in the same period. Also note the low interest rates that coincide with the interwar years of the ‘Keynesian’ post war consensus

52732157138_fc46c01b8e_c.jpg


52760768662_cf1e504d27_c.jpg
 
ks.234 said:
And? The question was the wealth gap, and that grew dramatically wider after 1979. The actual evidence is clear
Click to expand...

That rather depends on how one compiles and reads the stats. But if Carnegie was worth over 300 billion dollars (adjusted for inflation) in 1920 for example and the average Joe was worth/earning FA squared that I would suggest is evidence of a very big wealth gap indeed and certainly bigger than in the post-1979 era.
 
ks.234 said:
i am no expert, so no need for the snark. Instead you could support your argument with evidence. It is clear from the first graph that wealth inequality did grow dramatically after 1979 and the second shows that interest rates grew in the same period. Also note the low interest rates that coincide with the interwar years of the social contract.

52732157138_fc46c01b8e_c.jpg


52760768662_cf1e504d27_c.jpg
Click to expand...

More biased stats - show us a graph going back to Victorian era….no **** it I want data going back to the Roman invasion before I come to any firm conclusions.
 
Spraggons Den said:
That rather depends on how one compiles and reads the stats. But if Carnegie was worth over 300 billion dollars (adjusted for inflation) in 1920 for example and the average Joe was worth/earning FA squared that I would suggest is evidence of a very big wealth gap indeed and certainly bigger than in the post-1979 era.
Click to expand...

Depends what argument you are making. If you are saying that there was a wealth gap in 1920’s US, then there indeed was. If you are saying it was more significant than 1979, then the evidence does not support that argument.

What is evident is that unfettered economic advantage creates a growing wealth gap. It happened in 1920 US and it led to wealth inequality and economic meltdown, there followed a period of what is broadly called Keynesianism in which wealth inequality was brought down, then in the 70’s when unfettered economic advantage was again brought in, wealth inequality grew again. And we had another economic meltdown.

The evidence of 1920’s USA does not contradict the evidence of 1979, it supports it

52761584229_52472216c6_c.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top