b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Off Topic » Post 2001239 | Search
This is a question Off Topic

Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.

(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1

« Go Back | Popular

LAST

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:00, 136 replies, latest was 12 years ago)
We should talk about payday loans.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23078746
I'm suprised that banks aren't jumping on this bandwagon, there's obviously a very profitable hole in the market.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:05, Reply)
I've had friends who have fallen into some really shitty holes because of them, getting one to pay off another while on benfits that get cut... but what could they do? They needed cash to eat and the DWP were fucking them around.
But i've got other friends who have used them as a top-up as they're intended, and its gotten them out of tight spots.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:10, Reply)
maybe they should have got jobs?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:12, Reply)
They were sick though

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:15, Reply)
well you didn't say that...
do you go to crohn's anonymous or something, where a circle of empty pringles tubes is set out for all the participants to squat over?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:18, Reply)
No, they had something else wrong.
Don't you have any friends that have long term sicknesses?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:35, Reply)
The gap between them and "legit" loans is immense.
Payday loans less than £500 for less than a month. at 5000%
...
...
...
...
More than £3k over 2 years at 7%

nothing in the middle that i know about.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:13, Reply)
Bethnal Green legbreakers.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:13, Reply)
I don't think they've got a consumer credit license.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:15, Reply)
Try telling them that.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:15, Reply)
I assume you've got their contact details?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:17, Reply)
this is good.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:09, Reply)
Yup.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:12, Reply)
no.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:12, Reply)
Your previous thread was a bit crap.
Sorry mate. On an unrelated topic those who laugh loudly irritate me. Cunts.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:14, Reply)
It needed more FRACK CHAT. I see that now.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:15, Reply)
Frack is the new black blud.
Sure thing.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:18, Reply)
I laugh quite loudly
It is a constant shame
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:17, Reply)
Alright, I've been reading about Gideon and his cuts,
And I'm struggling a bit. I grasp the concept of him cutting in the wrong places, and maybe too quickly, and I get that a lot of people who are nice and rich are gonna be ok, while poorer people will suffer, which is shit. And I can see why a lot of people are pretty pissed off about, I am a bit too.
However, I keep seeing banners saying "no cuts" and "stop anymore cuts" and I just think, well, Gideon is wrong, but we are as a country in huge debt, how else do we sort it out without some sort of spending cuts somewhere?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:15, Reply)
What those people with signs write is "no more cuts"
What they actually mean is "no more cuts that affect me".

Big difference.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:17, Reply)
also, no more cuts but we don't have viable alternative

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:18, Reply)
See, this I did consider, but I don't want to to believe enough people are that stupid.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:19, Reply)
We both work in occupations that prove without doubt that they are on a regular basis.
Don't fight it, Windy.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:21, Reply)
I just, I just want it to be better.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:22, Reply)
This is the sort of thinking that inexorably leads towards eugenics and genocide
Just accept the stupidity. You cannot fix people.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:23, Reply)
Cutting during a recession is bad
the government needs to spend to stimulate the economy. It seems counter-intuitive until you remember that running a country is completely different to personal finances.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:17, Reply)
Ah yes, the old 'getting into worse debt to get yourself out of debt' trick.
Never fails. It's why I'm so rich.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:18, Reply)
It's like you read the post and then thought
"never mind, I'll just post what I was going to anyway regardless of the fact that it makes me look a complete spastic, oh wait, I am, so I guess it's par for the course."
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:21, Reply)
I didn't read the post until you pointed this out.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:22, Reply)
Are you going to delete this post as well Al?
Monty should know what kind of cunt he's replying to here
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
Why are you so angry today rory?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:29, Reply)
Why did you delete your post?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:56, Reply)
This is like that Paxman/Howard interview

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:09, Reply)
Oh it so is.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:12, Reply)
Sounds like somebody's trying to "mix things up"

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:36, Reply)
Typical Quentin!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:44, Reply)
i really hope it's not
that greasy neckless twat would be better off under a bus
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:49, Reply)
I miss the little scamp

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:51, Reply)
urgh no
his occasional funny lines were far outweighed by random turgid crap
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:53, Reply)
he was/is ace

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:03, Reply)
Can you elaborate as to why?
Sorry if this is dull, but I'm interested in alternatives.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:18, Reply)
The theory is the government spending stimulates growth which increases the amount coming back o the governemnt which can pay down the debt faster
however...if that spending doesn't create growth due to international issues out of a governments control, then they will have increased their debt, thus fucking the country further.

it's a gamble basically.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:20, Reply)
Think about it like this:
A council in Norfolk has a couple of acres of unused land. At the moment to make money they sell it to a developer. They get x ammount of money one off.

If they had the budget they could hire a housing contractor/architect build 100 houses, sell them or make them social housing. They'd get much more money this way.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
Ok, so why has the labour government said they will carry on the cuts if they come in to power?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:30, Reply)
Because they're shit and have let the right wing win the argument based on specious logic.
Also elected officials don't trust public sector staff to do anything, except the army who are arguably the worst performing group of people on the government payroll.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:31, Reply)
It has gone down in the public memory that this is all their fault
They are repositioning themselves to appear different from their predecessors.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:33, Reply)
Again, this is a failure on their part by refusing to actually take the argument back
they have let it become known that they left the economy in a mess, but they didn't, it was growing when they lost power.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:34, Reply)
Govenment spending doesn't disappear, it goes to contractors, employers, small firms, etc etc
They pay tax on their income and then pay money to other people in shops, who then pay tax and it all goes round and round. Turn off the tap and there's less money going round.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:22, Reply)
yes, but the government can't be expected to prop up the entire economy in this way

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:25, Reply)
Well they kind of can, seeing as how they're running the country and that.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
Yes, yes they can, this is what you are too stupid to understand.
The government can indeed prop up the economy for a short period of time until the economy grows enough to sustain itself.

But it takes the guts to actually invest with borrowed money, and also to stop that money being syphoned off by parasticic companies who don't pay taxes and banks who jsut sit on it. It actually has to go into peoples pockets, not into company balance sheets.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:33, Reply)
But I don't see any government being brave enough to take on the big tax dodgers,
Surely they employ too many people to just Fuck them off?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:36, Reply)
That's the stupid attitude that is causing the problems.
All companies will adjust to whatever regulatory regime you forece them into, they won't leave, they won't move, they will stay and make a profit. It might not be as much profit as before, but it's still a profit.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:45, Reply)
No need to call me stupid, I'm just curious.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:54, Reply)
I wasn't calling you stupid, it was saying teh attitude that a government has to kowtow to a business is stupid.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:57, Reply)
+ bi

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:03, Reply)
Ok, makes sense,
So, the thing to do would be to shuffle spending around to maximise it's potential for returns?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:26, Reply)
The worst thing for an economy is to have money not doing anything, sitting dormant.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
Initially the thing to do is to use the fact that the government can borrow at a better rate than anyone else,
and the fact that we have a soverign currency and therefore we can pretty much do whatever the fuck we like (in the short term at least) in terms of internal spending, to invest in capital projects now, not in five or ten years time, but now.

This puts money in peoples pockets which they then go out and spend, this in turn allows manufacturers to make money and pay taxes and after a while you get a self supporting economy and you can make cuts and raise taxes to pay off the debts you built up doing this.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:29, Reply)
Well, you see, your mistake here is to have been sensible, logical and realistic instead of just shouting nonsense like a retarded student.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:17, Reply)
although the guy who threw the fire extinguisher WAS ginger...

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:49, Reply)
Two ways to get rid of debt, increase income or decrease spending.
On a country wide scale country decreasing spending (in any real way) can and will decrease income. So he's pulling the wrong leavers.
The cuts are ideological not economic.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:19, Reply)
But I thought he was investing in infrastructure, while cutting fat out of certain sectors?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:21, Reply)
this spending review has included some large capital expenditure

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:22, Reply)
It hasn't really
they have just re-announced a lot of projects that they were going to do anyway, and most of which are actually long term things that won't kick in for a number of years.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:24, Reply)
i haven't looked that closely tbh
large scale projects will always be long term
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
This isn't just long term, this is "not actually going to happen for ten years"
and therefore announcing it now is just pointless window dressing, it means nothing and affects nothing and can be cut without having any effect because nothing has or will happen regarding it for years.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:30, Reply)
He's planning to invest in infrastructure from 2015 onwards, he's not doing it now and hasn't since 2008

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:23, Reply)
Ok. I read that wrong then.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:26, Reply)
you're just sad to have lost your auto pay rise
I mean what the fuck was that about any way?*

* unless it's a pay adjustment which is fine
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:21, Reply)
Didn't have one, I'm on performance related pay as is everyone in the NHS (agenda for change rules).
And the pay adjustment is bullshit anyway, it was 0% for three years, now it'll be 1% for five, that's an effective pay cut.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:24, Reply)
this is as it should be
aside from the adjustment which sucks
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:28, Reply)
The savings of £2billion a year is plucked out of the air as well.
That's assuming everyone who gets an auto pay increase now won't get performance related bonus, and that running these pay reviews in every organisation will be free.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:45, Reply)
No one I know in public sector has had an auto payrise of any sort for a long time.
Again this is for the benefit of the Daily Heil and Express readers that think all civil servants work in London, wear bowler hats and carry an umbrella even in summer.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:29, Reply)
School leavers?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:23, Reply)
He's pulling school leavers?
Oh dear. Yewtree ahoy.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:24, Reply)
And also a load of bollocks, since public spending is still going up, not down
and that's even before you start with all the PFI nonsense that's "off the balance sheet".

He's just trying to keep the Daily Heil readers happy by kicking their favourite demons.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:26, Reply)
It's gone down as a percentage of GDP.
Only by about 4%
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:29, Reply)
Which is a heck of a lot less than the 10% + year on year cuts he's claiming to be making

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:36, Reply)
That's ignoring the ringfenced bits, like pensions that are like 40% of all spending.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:46, Reply)
Listen guys thanks for contributing and all that
but this is a LAST thread, not fucking Question Time OK?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:45, Reply)
This is the sort of attitude that'll save b3ta!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:47, Reply)
Why LAST?
You having a stroke or something?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:48, Reply)
*WAVES*

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:46, Reply)
:(

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:50, Reply)
this thread is like the england football team in that everyone thinks they could be a better manager than whichever hapless sod is appointed
anyone who's read an article on the internet thinks THEY know the best way to run the country, regardless of whether they've actually studied economics, or politics, or worked in either sphere. this is the same reason why so many politicians suck - they are lawyers suddenly running the coffers or the education system, for example.

basically, they should have people with real expertise in the field as ministers. and i should be the queen of all of them.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:48, Reply)
The biggest joke about economics
is that it is actually fairly straightforward on a macro scale.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:51, Reply)
so much of it seems to involve a crystal ball
i mean, look at actuaries - they basically predict how much an insurer will have to spend in the next 12 months when it insures itself against losses. that's got to be part science, part fiction.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:53, Reply)
^this.
I studied economics at A Level, and I found the macro side to be incredibly easy to understand. MV=PT etc. It was the micro that I could never get my head round.

Unfortunately, most people don't even think about what it really means. They just believe what the papers tell them, according to their own agenda.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:54, Reply)
hey
i got my opinion from wikipedia, google and the comments on the daily retard website. IT'S THEREFORE TOTALLY VALID AND ACCURATE.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:56, Reply)
I proof read a mates economics degree thesis at uni
Every third sentence had the word "assume" in it.

This doesn't lead me to have much faith in economists.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:58, Reply)
DEACONonmists *I* call them!!!!!!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:58, Reply)
No wonder it's such a fucking dull subject if that's the biggest joke.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:55, Reply)
I just think everything would be better if all the immigrants* were thrown out.
Is that so wrong?


*apart from those in the catering industry, and drug mules
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:53, Reply)
hmmmmm
going back how far? and does ireland count? i might well be fecked then.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:56, Reply)
It does, so it does.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:57, Reply)
Better throw them out
You know, to be sure
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:20, Reply)
to be sure

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 14:26, Reply)
Alright law face,
Is there a way I can sort of accept an inevitable sentence without admitting guilt?
Say they have enough evidence to convict, but I'm still sure I'm innocent, is there a way to sort of say "fine, I'll go without a fuss if you go easy on me, but I'm totes innocent still?"
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:53, Reply)
is it criminal or civil?
civil yes, you would say: "i remain firmly convinced of my position, and have very robust legal advice. however, strictly without prejudice to this position, in the interest of bringing the matter to a swift and mutually beneficial resolution, i will do X/pay Y to save time and costs for both parties. In the event that you do not accept this offer, i will be referring the court to this letter on the question of costs in due course."

criminal - no idea, as not a criminal lawyer, but i think you could get your sentence reduced by going along with it. however, you'd still have pleaded guilty...
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:55, Reply)
Ok, is there a criminal lawyer nearby you could ask?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:57, Reply)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmdhqRgRsmE
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:55, Reply)
Not available on mobiles,

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:57, Reply)
'Murderer' by Barrington Levi xxxx

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:58, Reply)
I like that song.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:58, Reply)
Well that's good, because I do too.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:59, Reply)
I'm trying to build up a nice collection of reggae to listen to this summer.
Gaz me some suggestions, would you, there's a good chap.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:03, Reply)
Oh my god, you did kill that guy?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:56, Reply)
No, I'm innocent like I said.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:58, Reply)
Unlike Al the delelter
Why does everyone not like Al WP? Where did it all go so wrong for him?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:01, Reply)
I can help with this.
It's because Al is a cunt.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:08, Reply)
Et Tu Monty?

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:10, Reply)
I love you really, you great tub of shit.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:14, Reply)
WOOOOO!!!!!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:14, Reply)
I like Al.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:12, Reply)
WOOOO!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:13, Reply)
Doesn't mean you're not a cunt mind.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:17, Reply)
That's what I like about him.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:18, Reply)
Coppers getting uncomfortably close
and you want to try and save some face, huh?
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:01, Reply)
Maybe.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:12, Reply)
Just tell them that cabbie looked at your pint.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:15, Reply)
I'm sure that'll be enough to prove my innocence.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:18, Reply)
There's no a court in the land that would convict with that provocation.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:18, Reply)
Yeah, voters shouldn't take any interest in the running of the country
you thick cunt.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 12:59, Reply)
Logging out to reply, are you?
Pretty sure swipe should delete this, now.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:02, Reply)
fingers crossed!

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:03, Reply)
I do enjoy the twisted "x did y and that justifies me to do y too AND maintain the moral high ground" logic in this duel of yours.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:04, Reply)
No you don't.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:05, Reply)
No you don't.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:05, Reply)
Yeah, you're right. I don't.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:06, Reply)
No-one should stoop so low as to 'do an Al'

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:03, Reply)
It's worse than that - some of them have been reading things in order to form their own opinions.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:06, Reply)
I'm really considering taking the retard off ignore because no one seems to point out how shit her opinions and attitude is.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:08, Reply)
There is no point.
It's like punching jelly.
(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:10, Reply)
You may as well if you are both reading one another's posts anyway.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:10, Reply)
I'll give it a month.

(, Thu 27 Jun 2013, 13:11, Reply)

« Go Back | Reply To This »

Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1