Tuesday, 27 July 2010

Hallelujah! Rejoice!

The biggest problem bloggers have had with the ConDems is that there is no bumbling fuckwit that displays the monumental incompetence and blatant vacuous mongosity of Gordon "The Nose Picker" Brown.

But now, bloggers, we can rejoice, relax and feel rejuvenated: we have our bumbling basket case!

Ladies and gentlemen (and bloggers!) may I present the new Master of Disaster, the Mong of the Moment: VINCE "TWAT" CABLE!

Bankers are to be forced to lend to businesses or risk losing their bonuses under plans to be outlined by Vince Cable, the Business Secretary.

Oh yeah? Well, let's just stop there for a second, shall we? Banks shouldn't be "forced" to do anything, let alone fucking forced to lend money to people they don't want to lend money to.

Let's just rewind to a couple of years ago and the banking bailout, shall we? Why were the banks in a position that required them to be bailed out? Could it possibly be that "constrained" by government- and inter-government-decreed levels of liquidity, they lent out money to people who might not have fitted their normal risk profiles.

In this, they were not at all encouraged by a number of governments running wildly expansionist monetary policies and using artificially low interest rates to encourage more lending.

The nett upshot of all this was that people who couldn't possibly repay loans were given money on ludicrous schemes like self-certification. And when it all went completely tits-up, banks got given huge amounts of our fucking money and told "this better not happen again".

Right in front of the jeering crowds was Vince "Twat" Cable, arguing for tighter regulation of banks and bonus control. The taxpayer, he sonorously proclaimed, should not have to bail out the greedy banks again.

And what is the fucking twat saying now? He's saying "lend more to struggling businesses or you will lose part of your bonus". Struggling businesses are actually businesses that are more likely to fail Vince. Which means that the banks will lose money, and also increase their risk, possibly to unsustainable levels. Which could precipitate another crash. Which will lead to more bailouts. Which will lead to Vince "Twat" Cable calling for more regulation and smaller bonuses.

Look, Vince, you're a fucking idiot. You are a fucking danger to shipping and you're my number one candidate to replace Gordon Brown as "Asshat of the Decade".

Can somebody get shot of this useless fucking mongtard before he causes some real damage?

Update: Timdog and the Angry Teen weigh in.


Timdog said...

Mine and AngryTeen's thoughts on the same topic.



Vince Cable is a monumental fuckwit.

Mr Angry said...

it's worse than that Obo. With the new tax on banks' risky balance sheet items, they'll be paying more tax to the treasury for being forced to lend to risky people/businesses.

What a twat.

Dick Puddlecote said...

I think he forgot that he's in government now and isn't meant to burble unworkable idealistic shite anymore.

Kingbingo said...

Your absolutely right, first of all legal tender laws are just a joke, we should have free money and the only banking regulation you need is a sign nailed to the old lady of threadneedle street which clearly states that if a bank goes bust it goes bust, no bailout, no nothing. Banks will look after themselves that way.

And without legal tender laws banks will have to actually back their notes with something a little more substantial that a promise to print some more if we run out. You know, like gold or something.

Furthermore, It’s a common myth that without the bailout banks would have gone bust, I can downright guarantee that Lloyds, Barclays, HSBC would have been just fine. They would all have been able to raise capital no problem. The only real basket case is RBS, and then the very worst that would have happened is they would have been sold for a pound and restructured liabilities to something like 60-80p in the pound. So yes, dear old uncle bob would have had his £100k savings cut down to £80k, but for ever forward uncle bob and every other saver would be going over the Sunday Mail money supplement with a fine tooth comb looking at tables that show how safe your bank is, and would be a little more discerning about who to trust with their money. After that banks would HAVE to offer enough tier 1 capital to attract savers.

As usual the highly regulated environment we have today does fuck all except protect the incumbents and make it piss easy to make money. With the current rate artificially low rate of interest rates and demand of loans you would have to be the worlds most retarded banker not to make a shed load of cash. I wish I could get banking license, but of course government restricts them.

Oh, and no one is going to replace Gordon Brown as Asshat of the decade. Not even St Vince who is a total mong.

Peperbarmi said...

Mmmmm seems the old boy has gone from wise sage to bonkers old fool!

Kingbingo said...

Except in the mind of the BBC when was he ever a wise sage?

They only hyped him up because at the time no one would touch Labour with a bargepole and they thought the libdems mights be Labour 2.0.

It was simply the BBC's 'anyone but the Tories' mentality.

Peperbarmi said...


Well he seemed to be sought out by every heavyweight political programme and by all the broadsheets to share his wisdom not so long ago.

I was hoping he would bring some common sense and intelligence to the Condems,seems my hopes were misguided.

Not that Im saying I know better than he does but he seems to be in freefall!.

Anonymous said...

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this:

"constrained" by government- and inter-government-decreed levels of liquidity, they lent out money to people who might not have fitted their normal risk profiles

Obnoxio The Clown said...

"Can you elaborate on what you mean by this"

There are a number of government and inter-government regulations on what levels of liquidity and capital banks need to hold. Back when the banks used to manage their own requirements, they were much more cautious when things were bad and a more bullish when things were good.

But because governments set regulatory limits on capital and liquidity, banks no longer had to worry about the liquidity they held. All they had to worry about was ticking the box.

Northern Rock was (to the best of my knowledge) entirely compliant with all UK, EU and other global regulations on liquidity and capital when the run showed that the government and inter-government regulatory amounts were not enough.

Kingbingo said...

If you'd all voted Tory, none of this would be happening now. Told you so!!!1!!

Obnoxio, come join us Tories...

Kingbingo said...

Am I important enough to have my own troll now?

Obnoxio The Clown said...


Kingbingo said...


Looking at his background. He was a Labour member for many years. He was also an economist. Now I’m a trained economist also, but unless your an economist who has discovered the Austrian outlook (the libertarian version of economists) your training is worse than useless, and as Obnoxio described, actually dangerous.

A normal economist will tell you that if a family is spending more than it earns it should cut back its expenditure. A normal economist will tell you that a family is able to consume because it has first saved and produced. A normal economist will also tell you that these rules are reversed when looking at national governments. They think that economic output comes from spending, and that spending levels must be maintained no matter what by stimulus. An normal economist will tell you that an economies spending creates production/demand. An Austrian economist will tell you an economy produces, then it consumes.

Normal economists love to use maths, I did shed loads at university, all of which were useless, they are there only to convince the general public that economics and specifically econometrics is a complex science arriving at certainty. Rubbish.

Economics is an art which can be derived from first principles, common sense and example.

Kingbingo said...

“But because governments set regulatory limits on capital and liquidity, banks no longer had to worry about the liquidity they held. All they had to worry about was ticking the box.”

Specifically, for years previous bank generally maintained their tier 1 (stuff they don’t normally lend out but just sits around being secure) although obviously the greater proportion of the money on the balance they are working by lending out the greater the profits. Over the decades this fell and by the end of the last Tory government it stood at 12%. So that means if you put £1 in the bank they can only work or lend 88p, the 12p has to stay locked away.

When Gordon took over at the treasury he promptly slashed that to 4%. This increased the amount of money in circulation. He also stamped on savers with a number of measures that had the effect of making saving less attractive anyway, so more money just got spend and thus more money in circulation. He also increased massively government spending, and funded it by borrowing. This also increased the money in circulation. All these things he did forced down real savings and massively increased liquidity in the economy.

This liquidity chased up asset prices. This is why over 13 years house prices tripled. Not because the people living in those houses became 3 times more productive, but simply because there was more liquidity washing around the system.

Of course none of that liquidity was backed by real savings, and only a proportion was backed by real production, the rest is a short term illusion. That’s why it can’t last and why I won’t buy a house until the real crash actually happens.

Kingbingo said...

"Am I important enough to have my own troll now?" said the fake Kingbingo.

It appears that I am, yes. Did I tell everyone I'm a Tory yet?

I think Iain Dale is ace. I want to be Iain Dale.

Peperbarmi said...

Mmmmm well I certainly have to earn it before I spend it otherwise its dept,I guess what your saying is the same just on a bigger scale of course.

*hoping I haven`t missed the point completely*.

Fuck Peperbarmi's Mommy said...

if you don't mind catching something horrible (or the greenish-yellow pus lubrication).

Don't ask Peperbarmi adult questions - he's just coming up to GCSE. Next year.

Peperbarmi said...

Which adult question would that be genius?

Fuck Peperbarmi's Mommy said...

Is your mommy still a crack whore?
Yes or no.