Remainers are refusing to accept the new 50p coin

... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times

JNugent

2020-02-06 16:17:38 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

:-)

Vidcapper

2020-02-11 07:12:08 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

:-)

Bet they didn't complain about the 50p's that were issued to celebrate
our *joining* the EEC... :)

--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-06 17:02:50 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

Byker

2020-02-06 17:32:52 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since
I've been given a 50-cent piece as change:

Loading Image...

They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-06 18:06:19 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any cash
(e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-06 18:17:40 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any cash
(e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

I tried that, but then the Lions’ Father Christmas decorated charity lorry
came round last December playing carols, and I felt a bit guilty about not
having any change. Fortunately the wife had a £1 coin.

Now I get a little cash back from the supermarket just to have for
emergencies.

Byker

2020-02-06 22:03:43 UTC

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any cash
(e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

I tried that, but then the Lions’ Father Christmas decorated charity lorry
came round last December playing carols, and I felt a bit guilty about not
having any change. Fortunately the wife had a £1 coin.
Now I get a little cash back from the supermarket just to have for
emergencies.

I carry $50 with me, just in case credit cards aren't allowed...

Pamela

2020-02-06 18:30:43 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest.Â I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any cash
(e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

I'm the opposite. I use cash whenever possible.

Farmer Giles

2020-02-06 18:36:14 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any cash
(e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Col

2020-02-06 18:39:35 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

--
Col

Farmer Giles

2020-02-06 18:44:28 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave it
to others.

Col

2020-02-06 18:47:24 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave it
to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

--
Col

Farmer Giles

2020-02-06 18:50:59 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

Possibly, but that's not the reason.

Anyway, I'll sit this out for a while now and enjoy others attempting to
give their reasons.

Farmer Giles

2020-02-06 21:46:08 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need
any cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never
have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot
easier to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of
banknotes to get you through the week.

Possibly, but that's not the reason.
Anyway, I'll sit this out for a while now and enjoy others attempting to
give their reasons.

As I thought, very few - if any - have a Scooby Doo. Even the resident
Babbler hasn't even contributed so much as a 'ROFL' - his usual try-on
when all else fails.

I may give an explanation at some point, but letting others waffle on -
or otherwise pretend to be too busy to respond is far too much fun, just
yet, to intervene.

JNugent

2020-02-06 23:44:45 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

Credit cards are *supposed* to get the holder into debt. That's the
whole point of them. I use two credit cards all the time and pay off the
balance in full every month.

But does a debit card get you into any more debt than a chequebook might
have done?

You can only use either one with abandon if you have an overdraft
arranged. And overdrafts / overdraft facilities are hardly a result of
modern technology. AAMOF, the overdraft is the forerunner of the credit
card by many decades.

Roger

2020-02-07 09:00:16 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

Credit cards are *supposed* to get the holder into debt. That's the
whole point of them. I use two credit cards all the time and pay off the
balance in full every month.
But does a debit card get you into any more debt than a chequebook might
have done?
You can only use either one with abandon if you have an overdraft
arranged. And overdrafts / overdraft facilities are hardly a result of
modern technology. AAMOF, the overdraft is the forerunner of the credit
card by many decades.

The forerunner of the credit card was the loan shark who hung around the factory gate on payday.

But most people did not use this as their first line of credit....when payments were weekly and in cash it was easier to 'borrow' a few bob from family or friends for a few days.

Also this is not so easy in a cashless society were the bilk (sometimes nearly all) money goes out in monthly installments or payments.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 09:07:06 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2
.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

Credit cards are *supposed* to get the holder into debt. That's the
whole point of them. I use two credit cards all the time and pay off the
balance in full every month.
But does a debit card get you into any more debt than a chequebook might
have done?
You can only use either one with abandon if you have an overdraft
arranged. And overdrafts / overdraft facilities are hardly a result of
modern technology. AAMOF, the overdraft is the forerunner of the credit
card by many decades.

The forerunner of the credit card was the loan shark who hung around the
factory gate on payday.

Possibly, but buying things on the ’never-never’ was very popular as
well.

Thick catalogues from Kays and Freemans were especially popular with women.

Post by Roger
But most people did not use this as their first line of credit....when
payments were weekly and in cash it was easier to 'borrow' a few bob from
family or friends for a few days.
Also this is not so easy in a cashless society were the bilk (sometimes
nearly all) money goes out in monthly installments or payments.

JNugent

2020-02-08 16:38:02 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash
is responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave
it to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.

Credit cards are *supposed* to get the holder into debt. That's the
whole point of them. I use two credit cards all the time and pay off the
balance in full every month.
But does a debit card get you into any more debt than a chequebook might
have done?
You can only use either one with abandon if you have an overdraft
arranged. And overdrafts / overdraft facilities are hardly a result of
modern technology. AAMOF, the overdraft is the forerunner of the credit
card by many decades.

The forerunner of the credit card was the loan shark who hung around the factory gate on payday.
But most people did not use this as their first line of credit....when payments were weekly and in cash it was easier to 'borrow' a few bob from family or friends for a few days.
Also this is not so easy in a cashless society were the bilk (sometimes nearly all) money goes out in monthly installments or payments.

The credit card has more than one function, but one of the most valuable
is that it allows the cardholder to make purchases without the risk of
accidentally losing, or being robbed of, cash. It also allows the holder
to leave his balance in the bank virtually untouched, no matter how many
days or weeks it has been since the previous payday.

Roger

2020-02-07 08:52:12 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave it
to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.
--
Col

Of course most payments are now done monthly, which is also a problem for people with money management problems.

It's odd how banks can make business out of running people into debt, but they are not able to have a system where they make money out of avoiding people getting into debt.

JNugent

2020-02-08 16:35:52 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

Well you can't spend a £20 note you don't physically have!

Is that an attempt to answer the debt point? If so, you need to leave it
to others.

Without credit cards/debit cards/overdrafts etc it would be a lot easier
to get into debt than if you simply relied on a bundle of banknotes to
get you through the week.
--
Col

Of course most payments are now done monthly, which is also a problem for people with money management problems.
It's odd how banks can make business out of running people into debt, but they are not able to have a system where they make money out of avoiding people getting into debt.

Will avoiding losses by not lending to people who are poor lending risks do?

I'm sure the banks do that, to some extent at least.

m***@btopenworld.com

2020-02-09 12:22:50 UTC

Post by Roger
It's odd how banks can make business out of running people into debt, but they are not able to have a system where they make money out of avoiding people getting into debt.

Will avoiding losses by not lending to people who are poor lending risks do?
I'm sure the banks do that, to some extent at least.

Of course they do! Bad debt is of no value to any institution which is why they all attempt to rid themselves of it for instance by selling it off at a discount .

It's why institutions like credit reference agencies exist

At the same time, benks rely upon debt creation in order to generate their profits.

Credit and debt are vital ingredients of the modern economy.

If I underspend my income then there might well be someone somewhere and probably is who can put my surplus to useful work. For instance how may people reading this, now live in their own home through a mortgage which they paid off years ago? That's just part of the common good that banks and savers contribute towards society. The banks serve as a broker between the saver and the lender. The savings of the former are safeguarded whilst the latter derive the advantages of actually using a property that otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy outright and saving the lender the rent that he would presumably have to fork out anyway. Paying rent can be a mug's game.

Of course debt can be abused and mismanaged. One on holiday I met guy who had mortgaged is house to pay for the same holiday that I was on. Four weeks later that holiday would have been over. The debt he had incurred to buy his holiday would be with him for years after the happy memories of the holiday had faded.

The answer to the housing problem is not for governments to "build" countless thousands of houses and then give away their tenures to those who would let them go to rack and ruin before demanding a repeat performance. It is to allow people to borrow the means to provide a home for themselves with a view towards forgoing future consumptions to provide the 'rent' for the money that they would *need* to borrow. Just as those who went before them did.

That is just one way in which debt can serve the common good. Another is to fund the start up of a business, buy a means of transport to get to work, improve property and so on. Most of what you see around you today, was funded through debt

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-06 18:41:56 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why, but I'm also something of a miser. :-)

Farmer Giles

2020-02-06 18:48:05 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-06 19:10:36 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Okay, I probably don't actually. I generally assume it's because one's
money is abstracted (i.e. you don't see it any more, so you don't think
about it). If you'd care to suggest something else, I'd be happy to
read it.

Incubus

2020-02-07 10:24:20 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 10:32:45 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago as
quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money for
anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've given
much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of weakness
in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a suggestion here
that there is a subtler reason for it.

Incubus

2020-02-07 10:44:57 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

All debt increases the money supply under the current system.

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
I tend to put it down to the exploitation of weakness
in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a suggestion here
that there is a subtler reason for it.

I don't know whether the fiat system is what FG had in mind (I know he is one
of the few here who is aware of it) or whether there is something specific
about going cashless he is referring to. I do know that all transactions, no
matter how small, are charged at a percentage that ultimately gets passed onto
the public by the banks.

Farmer Giles

2020-02-07 10:53:28 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by
central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.

Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf. It
is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it out of
nothing.

The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I don't
know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would know that
in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought things in cash.
That is the reason why the increasing use of credit cards, etc, has
increased personal debt.

It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 11:11:46 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by
central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago as
quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money for
anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've given
much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of
weakness in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a
suggestion here that there is a subtler reason for it.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.
Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf. It
is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it out of
nothing.
The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I don't
know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would know that
in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought things in cash.
That is the reason why the increasing use of credit cards, etc, has
increased personal debt.
It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

I did 'sort of' know that (as far as I am able to understand it). I am
aware that there is much more money in imaginary computer system
balances than there is available to hand out should everyone want to
withdraw it. I was paid in cash for the first months of my employment,
but I never really had a sense that even paper money was worth anything
anyway, since it explicitly identifies itself as a 'promise' :-) I felt
that metal coins did have value, because it occasionally crept into the
news that things like copper coins were worth more as scrap metal, so
they had to keep making them smaller. I think I realise that credit
cards (which I have never had) facilitate this in the banks' favour; but
I've always regarded my debit card as harmless enough :-)

I'm under no illusions that banks are there for our benefit. I
currently pay £5 a month for my bank account, but only because I get
about £7 in cashback and interest. If that balance should change, I'll
move to a different bank; but eventually, I expect it will be like
playing whack-a-mole.

Farmer Giles

2020-02-07 11:19:01 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by
central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago as
quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money for
anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've given
much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of
weakness in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a
suggestion here that there is a subtler reason for it.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.
Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf.
It is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it
out of nothing.
The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I
don't know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would
know that in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought
things in cash. That is the reason why the increasing use of credit
cards, etc, has increased personal debt.
It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

I did 'sort of' know that (as far as I am able to understand it). I am
aware that there is much more money in imaginary computer system
balances than there is available to hand out should everyone want to
withdraw it. I was paid in cash for the first months of my employment,
but I never really had a sense that even paper money was worth anything
anyway, since it explicitly identifies itself as a 'promise' :-) I felt
that metal coins did have value, because it occasionally crept into the
news that things like copper coins were worth more as scrap metal, so
they had to keep making them smaller. I think I realise that credit
cards (which I have never had) facilitate this in the banks' favour; but
I've always regarded my debit card as harmless enough :-)
I'm under no illusions that banks are there for our benefit. I
currently pay £5 a month for my bank account, but only because I get
about £7 in cashback and interest. If that balance should change, I'll
move to a different bank; but eventually, I expect it will be like
playing whack-a-mole.

I'm sorry, but I think you're missing the point entirely.

It is about money creation - and how it is created and by whom. We have
a debt-money system, and the amount of money in circulation corresponds
to the amount of personal debt in society. When we move to a completely
cashless society - and we are rapidly getting there - personal debt must
increase even more than now. That was all my point was about.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 11:49:24 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt,
by central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago
as quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money
for anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've
given much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of
weakness in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a
suggestion here that there is a subtler reason for it.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.
Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf.
It is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it
out of nothing.
The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I
don't know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would
know that in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought
things in cash. That is the reason why the increasing use of credit
cards, etc, has increased personal debt.
It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

I did 'sort of' know that (as far as I am able to understand it). I
am aware that there is much more money in imaginary computer system
balances than there is available to hand out should everyone want to
withdraw it. I was paid in cash for the first months of my
employment, but I never really had a sense that even paper money was
worth anything anyway, since it explicitly identifies itself as a
'promise' :-) I felt that metal coins did have value, because it
occasionally crept into the news that things like copper coins were
worth more as scrap metal, so they had to keep making them smaller. I
think I realise that credit cards (which I have never had) facilitate
this in the banks' favour; but I've always regarded my debit card as
harmless enough :-)
I'm under no illusions that banks are there for our benefit. I
currently pay £5 a month for my bank account, but only because I get
about £7 in cashback and interest. If that balance should change,
I'll move to a different bank; but eventually, I expect it will be
like playing whack-a-mole.

I'm sorry, but I think you're missing the point entirely.

Economics is not a good subject for me, I'm afraid. I've tried, but
it's too abstract. And (being something of an oddball) I don't know
enough about people and behaviour. But I'll try to remember your points
- it may explain something I notice in future.

Post by Farmer Giles
It is about money creation - and how it is created and by whom. We have
a debt-money system, and the amount of money in circulation corresponds
to the amount of personal debt in society. When we move to a completely
cashless society - and we are rapidly getting there - personal debt must
increase even more than now. That was all my point was about.

Not really related to your point (unless decimalisation was part of some
cultural plan - I will not discount that possibility), but if we still
had LSD I might feel a sort of nostalgic attachment to it. As it is,
for me, cash lost its charm ages ago. Especially when people start
talking about the lack of diversity in banknotes and such. If cash does
disappear, at least that's one argument we won't have to listen to any
more. Perhaps it really is all part of some plan.

abelard

2020-02-07 12:07:39 UTC

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Not really related to your point (unless decimalisation was part of some
cultural plan - I will not discount that possibility), but if we still
had LSD I might feel a sort of nostalgic attachment to it. As it is,
for me, cash lost its charm ages ago. Especially when people start
talking about the lack of diversity in banknotes and such. If cash does
disappear, at least that's one argument we won't have to listen to any
more. Perhaps it really is all part of some plan.

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective

at its height it was approaching 30%

--
www.abelard.org

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 12:12:31 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

Yes, I read that recently in a book by Dominic Sandbrook which is a
history of the times I was growing up in. I never realised they were so
'interesting'. It all seemed so dull and ordinary at the time.

abelard

2020-02-07 12:26:49 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

Yes, I read that recently in a book by Dominic Sandbrook

which one?

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
which is a
history of the times I was growing up in. I never realised they were so
'interesting'. It all seemed so dull and ordinary at the time.

--
www.abelard.org

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 12:31:28 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

Yes, I read that recently in a book by Dominic Sandbrook

which one?

Not entirely sure which one - I've managed to plough through two (out of
three) so far: 'Never Had It So Good,' and 'White Heat'. Lots of pages,
tiny print. Enjoyable, though.

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
which is a
history of the times I was growing up in. I never realised they were so
'interesting'. It all seemed so dull and ordinary at the time.

Ian Jackson

2020-02-07 13:14:38 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

I certainly remember small decimal prices soon rose to look fairly
similar to resemble (at first glance) the old LSD prices. For example,
if something cost 1s/3d on 14 Feb 1971, while being converted to 7p or
7.5p on 15 Feb, it didn't take long before it became more like 13p
(presumably in the hope that most of us wouldn't realise).

But was this a deliberate governmental policy, or simply taking
advantage of the situation? Was there not also profiteering when some
countries adopted the euro - especially Italy, where prices in lire
looked massive (around 2000 to the pound), but very small when converted
into euros?

--
Ian

abelard

2020-02-07 16:24:20 UTC

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 13:14:38 +0000, Ian Jackson

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

i detect no real world difference!

Post by Ian Jackson
Was there not also profiteering when some
countries adopted the euro - especially Italy, where prices in lire
looked massive (around 2000 to the pound), but very small when converted
into euros?

--
www.abelard.org

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 17:02:27 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

I remember a lot of fuss in the press about items which had been 1/11d
suddenly becoming 10p after decimalisation, and nothing ever seemed to get
rounded down.

Of course, a similar trick has been pulled with metric weights. Lots of
canned veg used to be 454g (1lb) in imperial days; but they soon became 450g,
then 440, 425 and 400g after metrication. I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

This is taking inflation masking almost to joke proportions.

Post by Ian Jackson
But was this a deliberate governmental policy, or simply taking
advantage of the situation? Was there not also profiteering when some
countries adopted the euro - especially Italy, where prices in lire
looked massive (around 2000 to the pound), but very small when converted
into euros?

Incubus

2020-02-07 17:21:09 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

I remember a lot of fuss in the press about items which had been 1/11d
suddenly becoming 10p after decimalisation, and nothing ever seemed to get
rounded down.
Of course, a similar trick has been pulled with metric weights. Lots of
canned veg used to be 454g (1lb) in imperial days; but they soon became 450g,
then 440, 425 and 400g after metrication. I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.
This is taking inflation masking almost to joke proportions.

Music went the same way. I used to buy albums on 12" discs and then suddenly
one day they are being sold as 120mm discs. They even increased the size of
the hole in the middle as a further sneaky form of inflation.

Col

2020-02-08 07:59:54 UTC

Post by Incubus
Music went the same way. I used to buy albums on 12" discs and then suddenly
one day they are being sold as 120mm discs. They even increased the size of
the hole in the middle as a further sneaky form of inflation.

Polo did the same thing apparently.

--
Col

Incubus

2020-02-10 11:13:40 UTC

Polo did the same thing apparently.

It's their claim to fame. No wonder they want to further capitalise on it.

Roger

2020-02-10 19:10:13 UTC

Polo did the same thing apparently.

It's their claim to fame. No wonder they want to further capitalise on it.

Now this is getting silly.....

Andy Walker

2020-02-10 19:17:45 UTC

[Increased hole size:]

Post by Col
Polo did the same thing apparently.

It's their claim to fame.

I thought the "claim to fame" was the less-fattening centre?
Now even more less fattening.

--
Andy Walker,
Nottingham.

Roger

2020-02-10 20:28:03 UTC

Post by Andy Walker
[Increased hole size:]

Post by Col
Polo did the same thing apparently.

It's their claim to fame.

I thought the "claim to fame" was the less-fattening centre?
Now even more less fattening.
--
Andy Walker,
Nottingham.

I think there's a hole in your argument.

Roger

2020-02-07 17:34:19 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

I remember a lot of fuss in the press about items which had been 1/11d
suddenly becoming 10p after decimalisation, and nothing ever seemed to get
rounded down.
Of course, a similar trick has been pulled with metric weights. Lots of
canned veg used to be 454g (1lb) in imperial days; but they soon became 450g,
then 440, 425 and 400g after metrication. I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.
This is taking inflation masking almost to joke proportions.

I don't thing you can ascribe that all to metrication mark down!

Also because there is often the same trick being used in other countries, especially as products and packaging are often std. thesedays.

But speaking of things getting smaller....I'm convinced there is a lot less meat in Frey Bentos pies these days.....

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 17:57:59 UTC

decimalization was used to cover a massive inflationary
objective
at its height it was approaching 30%

I remember a lot of fuss in the press about items which had been 1/11d
suddenly becoming 10p after decimalisation, and nothing ever seemed to get
rounded down.
Of course, a similar trick has been pulled with metric weights. Lots of
canned veg used to be 454g (1lb) in imperial days; but they soon became 450g,
then 440, 425 and 400g after metrication. I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.
This is taking inflation masking almost to joke proportions.

I don't thing you can ascribe that all to metrication mark down!
Also because there is often the same trick being used in other countries,
especially as products and packaging are often std. thesedays.
But speaking of things getting smaller....I'm convinced there is a lot less
meat in Frey Bentos pies these days.....

I haven’t had one of those for years. Maybe I should get one just to ruin
my nostalgic memory of them.

Ian Jackson

2020-02-07 20:49:52 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

In the past couple of years, I've noticed that Heinz baked beans (and
some of their other beans) do seem to have got rather watery. Branston
baked beans are far tastier, larger and far less runny.

--
Ian

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 20:59:56 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

In the past couple of years, I've noticed that Heinz baked beans (and
some of their other beans) do seem to have got rather watery. Branston
baked beans are far tastier, larger and far less runny.

Yes. I love Branston beans.

They have a great thick dark sauce.

Byker

2020-02-07 21:10:31 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

And 6-oz. cans of tuna are now 5-oz....

abelard

2020-02-07 22:21:07 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

And 6-oz. cans of tuna are now 5-oz....

soon they'll be empty and cost twice as much

--
www.abelard.org

JNugent

2020-02-08 16:44:00 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

In the past couple of years, I've noticed that Heinz baked beans (and
some of their other beans) do seem to have got rather watery. Branston
baked beans are far tastier, larger and far less runny.

Yes. I love Branston beans.
They have a great thick dark sauce.

We can agree on that.

Incubus

2020-02-10 11:11:26 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

In the past couple of years, I've noticed that Heinz baked beans (and
some of their other beans) do seem to have got rather watery. Branston
baked beans are far tastier, larger and far less runny.

Yes. I love Branston beans.
They have a great thick dark sauce.

Ah, the wonderfully rich, vibrant and diverse world of baked beans.

I'm starting to prefer the Sainsburys ones.

Incubus

2020-02-10 11:10:15 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I see certain varieties of Heinz
beans are now down to 390g.

In the past couple of years, I've noticed that Heinz baked beans (and
some of their other beans) do seem to have got rather watery. Branston
baked beans are far tastier, larger and far less runny.

That's because they are Virgin beans. Wait until they have been around for a
while.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 13:29:50 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country
yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy
-2.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the
bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have
any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from
cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by
central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago as
quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money for
anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've given
much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of
weakness in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a
suggestion here that there is a subtler reason for it.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.
Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf. It
is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it out of
nothing.
The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I don't
know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would know that
in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought things in cash.
That is the reason why the increasing use of credit cards, etc, has
increased personal debt.
It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

<snip>
I'm under no illusions that banks are there for our benefit. I
currently pay £5 a month for my bank account, but only because I get
about £7 in cashback and interest. If that balance should change, I'll
move to a different bank; but eventually, I expect it will be like
playing whack-a-mole.

That sounds like a Santander 1-2-3 account to me.

If it is, you should be aware that the 1.5% interest rate, on balances up to
£20,000, will be falling to 1% from May; which means you would need an
average of over £6k in there every month just to break even without the
cashback. I believe the cashback rates might be changing too, but I can’t
remember the details.

I have opened a Marcus account with Goldman Sachs which currently pays 1.35%,
and once Santander put their rates down I will start moving money across, and
I might put more in Premium Bonds which is a gamble frowned on by
‘knowledgeable experts’ but I have averaged 2% winnings over the past few
years (even though I have won nothing higher than £100 in individual
prizes).

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 14:21:07 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country
yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy
-2.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Money used to be backed by gold. Now it is created through debt, by
central
and private banks. Fiat currency is nothing more than an enormous
pyramid
scheme and those who pretend otherwise either haven't understood how money
works or are hiding the truth from the public.

I have a vague sense of that, but I thought the discussion was about
personal debt. Apart from my mortgage, which I repaid decades ago as
quickly as I was able to, I have never actually borrowed money for
anything, so the causes of personal debt aren't something I've given
much thought to. I tend to put it down to the exploitation of
weakness in the face of temptation :-), but there seems to be a
suggestion here that there is a subtler reason for it.

Not really, Incubus has it - but I knew he did anyway from previous
discussions.
Ninety-seven percent of the money in circulation is borrowed into
existence - you may not borrow it but someone has to on your behalf. It
is borrowed into existence through bank lending - they create it out of
nothing.
The other 3% is cash and coins, which is produced by the government.
Fifty years ago, for example, that percentage was much greater. I don't
know if you were around at the time, but if you were you would know that
in those days most people were paid in cash - and bought things in cash.
That is the reason why the increasing use of credit cards, etc, has
increased personal debt.
It is built into the system, and is inevitable - and not necessarily
about personal profligacy.

That sounds like a Santander 1-2-3 account to me.
If it is, you should be aware that the 1.5% interest rate, on balances up to
£20,000, will be falling to 1% from May; which means you would need an
average of over £6k in there every month just to break even without the
cashback. I believe the cashback rates might be changing too, but I can’t
remember the details.
I have opened a Marcus account with Goldman Sachs which currently pays 1.35%,
and once Santander put their rates down I will start moving money across, and
I might put more in Premium Bonds which is a gamble frowned on by
‘knowledgeable experts’ but I have averaged 2% winnings over the past few
years (even though I have won nothing higher than £100 in individual
prizes).

Good guess :-) Yes, I had a letter from them a few weeks ago. I'm only
expecting this to go one way, assuming it was a honeypot sort of thing.
As soon as it isn't worth it, I'll move.

Col

2020-02-08 08:03:12 UTC

Post by Keema's Nan
I have opened a Marcus account with Goldman Sachs which currently pays 1.35%,
and once Santander put their rates down I will start moving money across, and
I might put more in Premium Bonds which is a gamble frowned on by
‘knowledgeable experts’ but I have averaged 2% winnings over the past few
years (even though I have won nothing higher than £100 in individual
prizes).

Premium Bonds are surely a good bet in low inflationary times at least.
I get a fairly regular flow of £25 wins but I did once win £500.

--
Col

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 13:04:12 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2
.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

As soon as I left home and started work, I applied for a credit card. I
bought as much on it as was possible and didn’t even pay the balance off
each month on many occasions. How irresponsible am/was I?

As far as I was concerned, the payment of 25-30% interest on outstanding
balances was the price I paid for the convenience of being able to pay back
whatever amount I could afford each month.

I regulated my spending by having a low credit limit, and every time they
increased it, I decreased it again to something less tempting for potential
large purchases.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 14:23:32 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2
.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Some people are happy with debt, and I suppose it's okay as long as you
don't lose track of it. Personally, I need to know that there is more
comping in than going out.

Post by Keema's Nan
As far as I was concerned, the payment of 25-30% interest on outstanding
balances was the price I paid for the convenience of being able to pay back
whatever amount I could afford each month.
I regulated my spending by having a low credit limit, and every time they
increased it, I decreased it again to something less tempting for potential
large purchases.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 16:51:54 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since I've been given a
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy
-2
.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the
bank...

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

Some people are happy with debt, and I suppose it's okay as long as you
don't lose track of it. Personally, I need to know that there is more
comping in than going out.

Yes. I should have said that I worked shifts with various amounts of overtime
all my life, and so my monthly pay was never the same two months running.
Therefore the system worked for me, although the credit card companies did
rather well out of my interest payments as well.

My big problem was when it came to a mortgage, because few banks would accept
much of my overtime or night shift/weekend pay/allowances as guaranteed
income.

Byker

2020-02-10 20:28:36 UTC

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Some people are happy with debt, and I suppose it's okay as long as you
don't lose track of it. Personally, I need to know that there is more
comping in than going out.

Payday loans are putting loan sharks out of business:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=payday+loan+debt+trap

Tall Henry

2020-02-10 20:57:03 UTC

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Some people are happy with debt, and I suppose it's okay as long as you
don't lose track of it. Personally, I need to know that there is more
comping in than going out.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=payday+loan+debt+trap

Payday lenders ARE loan sharks, kyker!

Peeler

2020-02-10 21:36:08 UTC

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 12:57:03 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous

Post by Tall Henry

Post by Byker
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=payday+loan+debt+trap

Payday lenders ARE loan sharks, kyker!

To a poor idiot like you, yes, Retardovic!

--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"Paedophiles are still a long way from being widely accepted."
MID: <rlMUE.676067$***@usenetxs.com>

Roger

2020-02-07 10:56:52 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)

Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 11:12:40 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)
Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Are you coming out as a Marxist? :-)

Roger

2020-02-07 11:27:24 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)
Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Are you coming out as a Marxist? :-)

The problem with the hour standard is that it reeks of Marxism; and yet it is no more Marxist than the concept of the minimum wage.

I think many people instantly think it means everbody gets the same wage; it doesn't.

The concept is that money is pegged to the basic wage; it makes no assumption about how much people actually do get paid (twice the basic wage, 2/3 of the basic wage etc).

Advocates say it fixes inflation and also offers that utopian dream of a fixed exchange rate between countries: An hour of unskilled labour costs the same throughout the world; richer countries have more higher skilled workers, poor countries have more menial labourers or unemployed.

Instead of manipulating lending rates to lowwer exchange rates to make countries more competitive, countries compete on the quality of jobs.

abelard

2020-02-07 11:34:18 UTC

Post by Roger
The problem with the hour standard is that it reeks of Marxism; and yet it is no more Marxist than the concept of the minimum wage.
I think many people instantly think it means everbody gets the same wage; it doesn't.
The concept is that money is pegged to the basic wage; it makes no assumption about how much people actually do get paid (twice the basic wage, 2/3 of the basic wage etc).
Advocates say it fixes inflation and also offers that utopian dream of a fixed exchange rate between countries: An hour of unskilled labour costs the same throughout the world; richer countries have more higher skilled workers, poor countries have more menial labourers or unemployed.
Instead of manipulating lending rates to lowwer exchange rates to make countries more competitive, countries compete on the quality of jobs.

1)nothing can be fixed in a universe that is dynamic...
fixing is a delusion

2)the interest rates are fixed via the money supply,
not the other way around

--
www.abelard.org

Roger

2020-02-07 11:42:10 UTC

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 12:34:21 PM UTC+1, abelard wrote:

1) In most physical caluculations we regard time as being constant ;-)

2) Central banks are one and the same thing.

Mark Devon

2020-02-08 09:39:48 UTC

((nothing can be fixed in a universe that is dynamic...
fixing is a delusion))

In terms of the universe and maths etc. I think we have to have things that are 'fixed' in order to consider reletavities. For instance we have 'constants' in maths/physics/chemistry etc.

In terms of people and opinions some people are 'fixed'... .for instance some people never alter in thinking all socialists are liars.

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-08 13:39:47 UTC

Post by Mark Devon
((nothing can be fixed in a universe that is dynamic...
fixing is a delusion))
In terms of the universe and maths etc. I think we have to have things that are 'fixed' in order to consider reletavities. For instance we have 'constants' in maths/physics/chemistry etc.

I think you mean 'stationary' here. Not required at all in relativity.
In fact, I believe it's impossible to even demonstrate that something is
'fixed' in this sense. Constants (like Pi, or Euler's number) are
something else.

Post by Mark Devon
In terms of people and opinions some people are 'fixed'... .for instance some people never alter in thinking all socialists are liars.

Well, this is just human nature :-) It's hard enough to get someone to
even question their beliefs, never mind to accept they are wrong.
People don't like to think of themselves as being wrong. Why would they?

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 11:56:51 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)
Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Are you coming out as a Marxist? :-)

The problem with the hour standard is that it reeks of Marxism; and yet it is no more Marxist than the concept of the minimum wage.

Well, I don't know about 'reeks'; but it did cause me to make a rather
simplistic joke :-)

Post by Roger
I think many people instantly think it means everbody gets the same wage; it doesn't.
The concept is that money is pegged to the basic wage; it makes no assumption about how much people actually do get paid (twice the basic wage, 2/3 of the basic wage etc).
Advocates say it fixes inflation and also offers that utopian dream of a fixed exchange rate between countries: An hour of unskilled labour costs the same throughout the world; richer countries have more higher skilled workers, poor countries have more menial labourers or unemployed.
Instead of manipulating lending rates to lowwer exchange rates to make countries more competitive, countries compete on the quality of jobs.

Well, it is an interesting thought. I actually think Marx's theories
(as far as I can understand them, which isn't far) were interesting,
although it seems that he was unable to imagine that Capitalism could
evolve to protect itself. I'm not sure that he would approve of what is
done in his name.

Roger

2020-02-07 12:09:25 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)
Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Are you coming out as a Marxist? :-)

The problem with the hour standard is that it reeks of Marxism; and yet it is no more Marxist than the concept of the minimum wage.

Well, I don't know about 'reeks'; but it did cause me to make a rather
simplistic joke :-)

I think the worst mistake Marx made was insisting on a single party state; although some would argue that it works in China....but whether it works for the 'proles' is debatable ;-)

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 12:19:50 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

I pay for everything with a debit card now. If I actually need any
cash (e.g. placating beggars, collections at work), I never have any.

Although most people don't understand why, the move away from cash is
responsible for a lot of current debt.

I can understand why,

I could be wrong, but I don't think you do.

You could argue that those who say it is backed by gold haven't understood ho money works either ;-)
Personaly I like the idea of the 'Hour' standard; money is pegged to the cost of one hours work at the minimum wage. But I'm sure economists would never accept that however socialist they are :D

Are you coming out as a Marxist? :-)

The problem with the hour standard is that it reeks of Marxism; and yet it is no more Marxist than the concept of the minimum wage.

Well, I don't know about 'reeks'; but it did cause me to make a rather
simplistic joke :-)

I think the worst mistake Marx made was insisting on a single party state; although some would argue that it works in China....but whether it works for the 'proles' is debatable ;-)

I think it works for pre-industrial societies, since they probably have
too many other things to worry about; but I'm not sure that it would
work in China if it didn't work for us, too :-) I'd guess that when
money stops flowing eastward, something big will happen.

abelard

2020-02-07 11:30:52 UTC

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:24:20 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

Post by Incubus
Money used to be backed by gold.

it didn't stop inflation

agreements on how much the 'coins' could be shaved
were common...
then there was digging up more

one of the world's worst inflations was the purloining of
the likes of inca gold...it is regarded as major cause
of the spanish losing their power

--
www.abelard.org

Dan S. MacAbre

2020-02-07 12:00:44 UTC

Post by abelard
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:24:20 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

Post by Incubus
Money used to be backed by gold.

it didn't stop inflation
agreements on how much the 'coins' could be shaved
were common...
then there was digging up more
one of the world's worst inflations was the purloining of
the likes of inca gold...it is regarded as major cause
of the spanish losing their power

I'm no longer sure that gold has any real value any more. It seems to
be riding high at the moment; but it seems to be as susceptible to
manipulation as anything else. I'm not sure that they couldn't really
just dig up as much as they wanted to, if they had reason.

abelard

2020-02-07 12:12:54 UTC

Post by abelard
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:24:20 -0000 (UTC), Incubus

Post by Incubus
Money used to be backed by gold.

it didn't stop inflation
agreements on how much the 'coins' could be shaved
were common...
then there was digging up more
one of the world's worst inflations was the purloining of
the likes of inca gold...it is regarded as major cause
of the spanish losing their power

I'm no longer sure that gold has any real value any more. It seems to
be riding high at the moment; but it seems to be as susceptible to
manipulation as anything else.

your suspicions re well founded

like the diamond market, it is heavily controlled and manipulated
by central banks(governments)

some estimates are that in a free market it would sell for less
than a tenth of its present price

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
I'm not sure that they couldn't really
just dig up as much as they wanted to, if they had reason.

--
www.abelard.org

Grikkbassturddo®

2020-02-06 19:08:29 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

What the fuck does that got to do with our 50p coin, kyker?

Peeler

2020-02-06 19:15:16 UTC

Post by GrikkbassturddoÂ®Â

On Thu, 06 Feb 2020 11:08:29 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
sexual cripple, making an ass of herself as "Grikkbassturddo®", farted

Post by Dan S. MacAbre
All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

On this side of the pond, it's been years since
https://cdn3.volusion.com/ytrsh.vdgcq/v/vspfiles/photos/2019Pkennedy-2.jpg
They're still being minted, but I have to ask for them at the bank...

What the fuck does that got to do with our 50p coin, kyker?

You fascist dreckserbs got 50p coins? Tell us more about it, Razovic! <BG>

--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"That [referring to the term "consenting adults"] is just an outdated legal
construct. Are you telling me that a 13-year old who spends 15 hours a day
on Facebook is incapable of consent?"
MID: <Og0VE.1298131$***@usenetxs.com>

Byker

2020-02-06 19:59:37 UTC

Post by GrikkbassturddoÂ®Â
What the fuck does that got to do with our 50p coin, kyker?

Get back in the killfile where you belong...

Grikkbassturdder®

2020-02-06 22:27:33 UTC

Post by GrikkbassturddoÂ®Â
What the fuck does that got to do with our 50p coin, kyker?

Get back in the killfile where you belong...

With all jew respect, go fuck yourself, kyker...

Peeler

2020-02-06 22:32:24 UTC

Post by GrikkbassturdderÂ®Â

On Thu, 06 Feb 2020 14:27:33 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
sexual cripple, making an ass of herself as "Grikkbassturdder®", farted

Post by Byker
Get back in the killfile where you belong...

With all jew respect, go fuck yourself, kyker...

The thing you did all your "life" long (if one can call that spastic thing
you are suffering from a "life" at all), sexually crippled psychopath? LOL

--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"Why do we still have outdated laws prohibiting paedophilia? Do you
seriously think that a 12-year old who spends 15 hours a day on Facebook
doesn't know what's going on?"
MID: <FnMUE.676068$***@usenetxs.com>

Keema's Nan

2020-02-06 18:09:45 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

They are minting 10m Brexit 50p coins, although there are about 200m 50p in
circulation at any one time; so it will not be too difficult to avoid them.

Ian Jackson

2020-02-06 19:22:41 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

All bluster, I suggest. I wonder if any have left the country yet?

They are minting 10m Brexit 50p coins, although there are about 200m 50p in
circulation at any one time; so it will not be too difficult to avoid them.

Although I'm a Remainer, I'll be happy to sacrifice my deeply-held
principles - and smile broadly while accepting any 50p coins (Brexit or
not) that my Fellow-Remainers wish to donate to me (and the more the
merrier!).

--
Ian

Col

2020-02-06 18:40:37 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

Ha ha, very good sir!

But has anybody actually received one yet?

--
Col

Roger

2020-02-07 08:48:08 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

Ha ha, very good sir!
But has anybody actually received one yet?
--
Col

During the transistion period they will only be circulated within the banking system.

How they will eventually be distributed depends on talks to be held between 26 governments at an EU summit. These things take time.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-07 09:02:04 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

Ha ha, very good sir!
But has anybody actually received one yet?
--
Col

During the transistion period they will only be circulated within the banking system.

In that case, where are these coming from?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/new-brexit-50p-from-sealed-
bag/254505288611?hash=item3b41b283a3:g:mdcAAOSwGL9eO-gY

Post by Roger
How they will eventually be distributed depends on talks to be held between
26 governments at an EU summit. These things take time.

Roger

2020-02-07 09:06:59 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)

Ha ha, very good sir!
But has anybody actually received one yet?
--
Col

During the transistion period they will only be circulated within the banking system.

In that case, where are these coming from?

Ah well like all these schemes it's really a scam where bankers do insider trading so they can get money out of the system and into financial paradises from where they can make their fortunes on ebay.

True Blue

2020-02-07 08:11:57 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times

:-)

Someone (Julia H-B?) came up with a great response which went something like this;

"Give me your 50p pieces if you don't want them and I'll give you 20p back and then tell you what you can spend it on. That way you can feel as if you've never left the EU"

Roger

2020-02-07 09:04:02 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times

:-)
Someone (Julia H-B?) came up with a great response which went something like this;
"Give me your 50p pieces if you don't want them and I'll give you 20p back and then tell you what you can spend it on. That way you can feel as if you've never left the EU"

The true figure would be give more your 50p and I'll give you 43p back; but the big issue is the "I'll tell you what you can spend it on"; this really should be written as "I will spend it on your behalf as I see appropriate".

JNugent

2020-02-08 16:38:50 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times

:-)
Someone (Julia H-B?) came up with a great response which went something like this;
"Give me your 50p pieces if you don't want them and I'll give you 20p back and then tell you what you can spend it on. That way you can feel as if you've never left the EU"

"...and that may well be in another country on other people".

Roger

2020-02-09 11:21:56 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times

:-)
Someone (Julia H-B?) came up with a great response which went something like this;
"Give me your 50p pieces if you don't want them and I'll give you 20p back and then tell you what you can spend it on. That way you can feel as if you've never left the EU"

"...and that may well be in another country on other people".

That, in itself, is not a problem; most wealthy countries do give aid to emerging countries and taxpayers generally do not oppose this.

The problem is that the decision is a collective one between 350 million people who have different objectives and interests; the outcome is completely unfocused.......read wasted.

The solution is the political union, which seems no nearer now than it did at the start of the 90's. It is ridiculous to talk about monetary union and level playing fields when you can't even agree on what material an eventual constitution would cover :D

Keema's Nan

2020-02-09 11:44:15 UTC

Post by Basil Jet
... thus proving they can't accept change ;-)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Alien Stadium - 2017 - Livin' In Elizabethan Times
-)

Someone (Julia H-B?) came up with a great response which went something
like this;
"Give me your 50p pieces if you don't want them and I'll give you 20p
back and then tell you what you can spend it on. That way you can feel as
if you've never left the EU"

The true figure would be give more your 50p and I'll give you 43p back;
but the big issue is the "I'll tell you what you can spend it on"; this
really should be written as "I will spend it on your behalf as I see
appropriate"...

"...and that may well be in another country on other people".

That, in itself, is not a problem;

Yes it is. I don’t want my money used to prop up some corrupt peasant
country and its bankrupt economy. They got themselves into the mess, and they
should be forced to get themselves out of it - and that should not include
allowing half the population to bugger off elsewhere anyway in order to
sponge off the rich, rather than rebuild their own nation.

Post by Roger
most wealthy countries do give aid to
emerging countries and taxpayers generally do not oppose this.

That is government aid, which is an entirely different thing.

Post by Roger
The problem is that the decision is a collective one between 350 million
people who have different objectives and interests; the outcome is completely
unfocused.......read wasted.
The solution is the political union, which seems no nearer now than it did at
the start of the 90's. It is ridiculous to talk about monetary union and
level playing fields when you can't even agree on what material an eventual
constitution would cover :D

Roger

2020-02-09 18:08:34 UTC

Post by Roger
That, in itself, is not a problem;

A) In many cases, like the 40 Billion Euro given to Eire, it was the Euro that created the mess in the first place.

B) Other countries have not bankrupted themselves, they were ex soviet block countries. The EU incorporated them as a loss leader to pull them out of Soviet sphere. Of course it also moved the economic center of Europe further east.

BUT, the point here is not whether or not you consider it a problem, it's how much say you get in it.

When I said that it is not in itself a problem, I meant with respect to the topic; The point is you effectively do not get a say in the policy.

Keema's Nan

2020-02-09 18:29:36 UTC

Post by Roger
That, in itself, is not a problem;

I wasn’t thinking of ex-Soviet countries; but now you mention them, yes
them as well.

Post by Roger
The EU incorporated them as a loss leader to pull them out of
Soviet sphere. Of course it also moved the economic center of Europe further
east.
BUT, the point here is not whether or not you consider it a problem, it's how
much say you get in it.
When I said that it is not in itself a problem, I meant with respect to the
topic; The point is you effectively do not get a say in the policy.

Vidcapper

2020-02-08 06:52:41 UTC