garcon Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Nice link oafc0000 - hadn't seen that before. For those interested in my second figure ... last month (that's last month alone) our government paid £5.9 Billion in interest on the national debt. Current Treasury estimate of the total debt is roughly what you see on oafc0000's link, i.e. around £824 Billion. But remember, that is the figure that Brown and Darling admit to. There are analysts out there who believe the true figure, bringing everything into the calculation, could be anything up to 3 times that. Not sure of the exact figure the government spent on aquiring bank assets (Google suggests around the £50 Billion mark). I very much doubt those assets will ever be worth more than a small proportion of that overall debt figure. They'd have to see a twenty-fold return to get anywhere near balancing the books! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 http://www.debtbombshell.com/ Ok, not a question directed towards you personally.......but what is happening to the money that we were paying to the ~Americans after the debt was paid off from the 2nd world war seeing as national debt is on the rise......!! and now politicians want a salary rise in line with their expenses being cut......ffs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Anyway, does anybody know how Wednesday are funding their ground redevelopment? Last time I took notice they were still in £25 million-plus of debt. I know they have a new chairman, but he isn't exactly a Sheik, as is reflected by their inability to progress beyond mid-table mediocrity for yet another season. Edited October 21, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 what is happening to the money that we were paying to the ~Americans after the debt was paid off from the 2nd world war seeing as national debt is on the rise......!! Good question. Haven't a clue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) The point is, however, that it will be growth on the same fragile basis as before, with people possibly going further into debt as they struggle to keep at bay the effects of spending cuts and higher taxes, and real wages remain stagnant. Which makes another crash inevitable. Think about it-the collapse of the so-called dot-com bubble resulted in the panic creation by Greenspan et al of the housing bubble. That's two crashes within less than a decade. Perhaps we are reaching the end of all that we and our parents' generations became accustomed to. Which leads us to where IYO? Edited October 21, 2009 by tangerinedreams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Nice link oafc0000 - hadn't seen that before. There is a better one which shows every country... I think their is only Canada and China who are actually paying their overall debit back... I will try find it... For those interested in my second figure ... last month (that's last month alone) our government paid £5.9 Billion in interest on the national debt. Current Treasury estimate of the total debt is roughly what you see on oafc0000's link, i.e. around £824 Billion. But remember, that is the figure that Brown and Darling admit to. There are analysts out there who believe the true figure, bringing everything into the calculation, could be anything up to 3 times that. Not sure of the exact figure the government spent on aquiring bank assets (Google suggests around the £50 Billion mark). I very much doubt those assets will ever be worth more than a small proportion of that overall debt figure. They'd have to see a twenty-fold return to get anywhere near balancing the books! A lot of this is more opinion than fact though isn't it... It is hard to know who to trust and I think even harder to understand some of the answers. Even for us part time economists... One thing is for sure, Labours over spending and control of the banks has hurt us and that should show at the next general election... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Ok, not a question directed towards you personally.......but what is happening to the money that we were paying to the ~Americans after the debt was paid off from the 2nd world war seeing as national debt is on the rise......!! and now politicians want a salary rise in line with their expenses being cut......ffs Paying the bonuses of bankers ? Just a j/k although it might be... Seriously, its paying for schools, nhs, ema, winter fuel allowance, baby bounds, police, and such like... Labour increased spending which was good...I just think they went too far... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 There is a better one which shows every country... I think their is only Canada and China who are actually paying their overall debit back... I will try find it... A lot of this is more opinion than fact though isn't it... It is hard to know who to trust and I think even harder to understand some of the answers. Even for us part time economists... One thing is for sure, Labours over spending and control of the banks has hurt us and that should show at the next general election... The thing is, it isn't just Labours spending is it, the whole of the public sector can be brought into question of how/ where money is being spent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 [/b] Which leads us to where IYO? Harder times than we're used to with increased social tension and, long-term, the danger of a major war, especially if you factor in the fact that natural resources are being depleted at the very time that the world's population soars and new economic superpowers, who need a major share of those resources, start to assert themselves. Thank God for the distraction of Latics! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 The thing is, it isn't just Labours spending is it, the whole of the public sector can be brought into question of how/ where money is being spent. Public sector and Labour spending are not mutually exclusive... They are one and the same... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) A lot of this is more opinion than fact though isn't it... It is hard to know who to trust and I think even harder to understand some of the answers. Even for us part time economists... One thing is for sure, Labours over spending and control of the banks has hurt us and that should show at the next general election... True enough - I'd go as far as to say no-one could possibly know the absolute "true" figures, it's just too complicated a calculation. Even the Treasury figures are just an estimate. My opinion is that Gordon Brown had already spent a decade storing up and hiding "invisible" debt for the next generation even before everything went t*ts up, which is the main reason I now tend to think the real picture is actually worse than the Treasury are letting on. Labour will be decimated at the next election. And I do not see them regaining credibility (let alone power) for some considerable time. Edited October 21, 2009 by garcon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Public sector and Labour spending are not mutually exclusive... They are one and the same... I stand to be corrected, of course they are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Harder times than we're used to with increased social tension and, long-term, the danger of a major war, especially if you factor in the fact that natural resources are being depleted at the very time that the world's population soars and new economic superpowers, who need a major share of those resources, start to assert themselves. Thank God for the distraction of Latics! Looks rather grim from where I'm sat too. on both paragraphs of yours Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Anyway, does anybody know how Wednesday are funding their ground redevelopment? Last time I took notice they were still in £25 million-plus of debt. I know they have a new chairman, but he isn't exactly a Sheik, as is reflected by their inability to progress beyond mid-table mediocrity for yet another season. 22531 average attendances this season at I guess far from cheap Championship prices, and don’t they get much higher TV money in that division than they used to? £25m might not be a huge debt in terms of their revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 22531 average attendances this season at I guess far from cheap Championship prices, and don’t they get much higher TV money in that division than they used to? £25m might not be a huge debt in terms of their revenue. http://www.swfc.co.uk/page/SeasonTickets/0,,10304,00.html In comparison to the level and quality of everything in comparison not a bad deal IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 22531 average attendances this season at I guess far from cheap Championship prices, and don’t they get much higher TV money in that division than they used to? £25m might not be a huge debt in terms of their revenue. They've had similar revenue for a while now, though, haven't they? Other than the handful of mega-rich clubs, much of the revenue coming to those in the top two divisions is said to be taken up in running costs. So even if they were somehow able to pay off their debts (after being unable to make a serious dent in them since relegation from the PL), that still leaves the question as to where their stadium redevelopment funding is coming from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) True enough - I'd go as far as to say no-one could possibly know the absolute "true" figures, it's just too complicated a calculation. Even the Treasury figures are just an estimate. My opinion is that Gordon Brown had already spent a decade storing up and hiding "invisible" debt for the next generation even before everything went t*ts up, which is the main reason I now tend to think the real picture is actually worse than the Treasury are letting on. Labour will be decimated at the next election. And I do not see them regaining credibility (let alone power) for some considerable time. Whether or not anybody agrees with Labour's level of public spending, however, it can't be denied that the bulk of the debt has been accrued by the response to the economic crash, which has been unprecedented and is the only thing keeping us afloat. A response that has been replicated across the world by both nominally centre-right and nominally centre-left governments. I doubt that, in office as opoosed to opposition, a Tory government (or a Liberal one, Vince Cable notwithstanding...) would have acted all that differently. Edited October 21, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Not forgetting that Sheffield has 4x the population of Oldham split between the 2 clubs (Wednesday/ United) lets say double the population per team, one can only presume on field success is a major contributor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wozz_oafc Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Sheffield are bidding to be a World Cup host city. I saw posters about it in the city centre last week. I would imagine the redevelopment of Hillsborough may well have a lot of government and council backing/funding, of course I could be wrong. Also comparing Sheffield Wednesday to Oldham is a bit daft. I know a couple of lads who used to work there and they said it was a Premiership set up, you can see why people would be more willing to invest in a club like that as there is more chance of seeing some return on your money. Also the club can probably run with 25 million debt because they have enough assets to cover it if necessary through player sales, land sales etc. I would also expect Wednesday would get more backing off the Sheffield City Council and the general public than Oldham. There is a lot of investment and development going on in Sheffield at the moment, something which I do not see in Oldham, and things do not seem to have stopped like a number of developments in Manchester despite the economic down turn. Edited October 21, 2009 by wozz_oafc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Also comparing Sheffield Wednesday to Oldham is a bit daft. I know a couple of lads who used to work there and they said it was a Premiership set up, you can see why people would be more willing to invest in a club like that as there is more chance of seeing some return on your money. It may well be a Premiership setup, but Sheffield Wednesday have famously been a shambles for a decade or more, and have found it impossible to obtain serious funding. You might have hit the nail on the head regarding the World Cup, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Not forgetting that Sheffield has 4x the population of Oldham split between the 2 clubs (Wednesday/ United) lets say double the population per team, one can only presume on field success is a major contributor. They've always had that population, though. Why didn't the redevelop Hillsborough during the supposed economic boom? And why have they been through such a massive decline on the pitch? These days, while decent attendances undoubtedly help, they are from from enough to help a club seriously compete. That even applies to ManUre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Whether or not anybody agrees with Labour's level of public spending, however, it can't be denied that the bulk of the debt has been accrued by the response to the economic crash, which has been unprecedented and is the only thing keeping us afloat. A response that has been replicated across the world by both nominally centre-right and nominally centre-left governments. I doubt that, in office as opoosed to opposition, a Tory government (or a Liberal one, Vince Cable notwithstanding...) would have acted all that differently. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Whether or not anybody agrees with Labour's level of public spending, however, it can't be denied that the bulk of the debt has been accrued by the response to the economic crash, which has been unprecedented and is the only thing keeping us afloat. A response that has been replicated across the world by both nominally centre-right and nominally centre-left governments. I doubt that, in office as opoosed to opposition, a Tory government (or a Liberal one, Vince Cable notwithstanding...) would have acted all that differently. I do not think many sensible people have an issue with the response... It is what lead us to the crisis that people get angry about... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I do not think many sensible people have an issue with the response... It is what lead us to the crisis that people get angry about... Which wasn't primarily public spending. The level of public spending was dependent on the wider economy, which was resting on a far more fragile base than anybody was prepared to let on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) Which wasn't primarily public spending. The level of public spending was dependent on the wider economy, which was resting on a far more fragile base than anybody was prepared to let on. It might not of been "primarily" public spending but it certainly was a factor.... There was issues with the economy as a whole...accept that... Edited October 21, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.