Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Are you sure about that? And don't forget, its not just PPE we import.....
Yes. It's QE or bankrupt.
Are you sure about that? And don't forget, its not just PPE we import.....
We were already QE'd to the hilt, so I doubt this very much. Besides, the markets weren't very impressed.Yes. It's QE or bankrupt.
We were already QE'd to the hilt, so I doubt this very much. Besides, the markets weren't very impressed.
Yes, but the point is that the more you do it, the less benefit it has.You can't "QE to the hilt" as that implies a hard limit or that it is a state rather than an act. You can QE as much as you like. It's just like businesses issuing more shares, diluting existing capital.
Are you sure about that? And don't forget, its not just PPE we import.....
Thank you FDR. This has always been one economic argument. Maybe it's time has come... again.It's no use saying "well, this is made cheaper somewhere else" if you can't afford the funds to pay for it - parrticularly if you're paying someone unemployment benefits. At some stage you're better off paying the unemployed person to manufacture what you need.
Thank you FDR. This has always been one economic argument. Maybe it's time has come... again.
People not spending money on holidays (which by the way holiday companies are currently working with people already booked to simply book dates later this year or next, so that's not as helpful as you might think) will not even begin to fill the hole left in lost revenue (income tax, VAT, NI etc).
Why do younger people have more 'lose' than older people from the lockdown? In what way do younger people lose that older people don't?