| With regard to paying for Covid 08:12 - Mar 5 with 1868 views | Guthrum |
I am surprised the Treasury haven't come up with something more creative, such as a bond system similar to during the World Wars.
At a time when savings returns are extremely low they didn't even need to offer very high yields. And, of course, with Consol-type borrowing, they can be redeemed at a time of the government's own choosing.
During the various lockdowns, those who were still earning didn't have a lot of leisure and travel activities to spend money on. Plus it could have spearheaded a "we're all in this together" national unity campaign.
Would have encouraged saving and kept funds in the country for the government to use. But instead they preferred to let people send their money to Jeff Bezos. |  |
| |  |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:34 - Mar 5 with 311 views | Keno |
I believe it has been discussed tho the likes of footers and stoked may now more on that than I do |  |
| |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:45 - Mar 5 with 296 views | Guthrum |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:34 - Mar 5 by StokieBlue |
So in that case you're back to my first point of many people are unlikely to want their funds tied up and a very low coupon with no known time horizon of when they will get their money back.
I think you're going to get far less takers for that proposition than you think given the uncertainty around rates, inflation and the economy (as well as Brexit) we are likely to see over the coming years.
SB [Post edited 5 Mar 2021 9:34]
|
Not sure about that, if promoted well. After all, people are prepared to pour money into things like lotteries, with absolutlely minimal chance of a return and no preservation of the capital.
Whereas this would be "in the national interest" and "helping to fund our NHS", etc., with the added benefit of a small return and the original capital preserved in a heritable (even tradeable) certificate. | |
| |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:49 - Mar 5 with 295 views | StokieBlue |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:45 - Mar 5 by Guthrum |
Not sure about that, if promoted well. After all, people are prepared to pour money into things like lotteries, with absolutlely minimal chance of a return and no preservation of the capital.
Whereas this would be "in the national interest" and "helping to fund our NHS", etc., with the added benefit of a small return and the original capital preserved in a heritable (even tradeable) certificate. |
Think we will have to disagree on this one. I know there are many (yourself and possibly myself included) who would buy these but I feel there are far more who wouldn't.
The proposition is essentially: "Lend the government your money, you'll get a very small coupon and you will get paid back at some point in the future but we can't tell you when that will be."
Given the economic uncertainly around jobs and other things I think there will be an awful lot of people who won't like the sound of that and would prefer to have the money available immediately. Tradable certificates are great but it relies on a thriving secondary market.
In the end, it's still much cheaper to borrow from the markets although I agree it doesn't stimulate the national psyche in the same way your bond proposal would. I am left wondering though if given the general views of the populace whether a good percentage would even care about that. Times have changed from the general viewpoints of the 1940s.
SB [Post edited 5 Mar 2021 9:49]
|  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:58 - Mar 5 with 290 views | DerryfromBury |
My thoughts exactly. Also why didn't the chancellor up the limit on premium bonds to £100k. What's happened to the rumor's about taxing all income generated in the UK i.e. Amazon, Ebay, Faceache etc etc.
There was so much more he could have done, not necessarily implemented straightaway, but like the hike in corporation tax deferred for a couple of years. The other thing which surprises me is the number of people criticizing the increased tax take, didn't they realise all the money spent propping up the nation through this pandemic would have to be paid back at some point. |  | | |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 10:09 - Mar 5 with 281 views | Guthrum |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 09:49 - Mar 5 by StokieBlue |
Think we will have to disagree on this one. I know there are many (yourself and possibly myself included) who would buy these but I feel there are far more who wouldn't.
The proposition is essentially: "Lend the government your money, you'll get a very small coupon and you will get paid back at some point in the future but we can't tell you when that will be."
Given the economic uncertainly around jobs and other things I think there will be an awful lot of people who won't like the sound of that and would prefer to have the money available immediately. Tradable certificates are great but it relies on a thriving secondary market.
In the end, it's still much cheaper to borrow from the markets although I agree it doesn't stimulate the national psyche in the same way your bond proposal would. I am left wondering though if given the general views of the populace whether a good percentage would even care about that. Times have changed from the general viewpoints of the 1940s.
SB [Post edited 5 Mar 2021 9:49]
|
Perhaps so, saddening tho it is that people get passionate about national independence, but are not then willing to back it financially. | |
| |
| With regard to paying for Covid on 11:43 - Mar 5 with 231 views | giant_stow |
You always seem clued up on economic matters - do you think there's no need to worry about the deficit? |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
