Since I read the Scottish Business for Independence article on the level of US Treasury dollars propping up the City of London's main banks, in the aftermath of Gordon 'Saviour of the World' Brown's attempt to rig the market, to make Lloyds TSB's swallowing of HBOS more palatable in October 2008, by giving the BBC's Peston the nod. I have been left with this worm eating at my brain cells.
I can do my own basic small business accounts with a turn over of £250,000 but once you get into multiples of billions my brain freezes. The idea that the US Fed has put a £UK equivalent of many multiples of the UK Treasury's total bank bail out has me in a spin. If I had a silent investor in my business I know they would be looking for a competitive return on their investment and a majority shareholding. It is clear this is exactly what is happening but no one is asking the big question - what is the real impact of all this cash being sucked out of the UK economy and into the Fed?
Has Ed Balls actually said anything of note to pay attention to on this subject?
Nope, do not think so.
What about the Gideot? Well his claims for the UK economic growth this quarter increasingly has parallels with those of the seller of the infamous Norwegian Blue Parrot - it would not go 'Voom', if you put 40 million volts through it.
How about some journalist looking at the massive injections of US treasury dollars into the likes of Barclays ($522 billion), a similar amount into RBoS in London and HBOS Halifax's London operation? Just what is the implication for the UK economy of this level multi-billion dollar US treasury credit propping up the City of London?
Is it maybe why the Gideot is busy selling off the remaining UK family possessions to corporate America - NHS, Civil Service and the rest ..... after all there is no such thing as a 'free lunch' in the good ol' USA, is there?
If I was seeing 60% of my operating profit going into my silent investor's bank account, my business would not be able to invest in new product or machinery anywhere as quickly as I would need to keep up with my competitors, let alone stay ahead of the game. In fact the logical extension is I would be bought out at the bottom of the market so the venture capitalists and their commercial bank backers could make big bucks out of selling on my business when the economy actually returns to growth.
This, in a nutshell, is my problem: why would the US Fed, as both venture capitalist and commercial banker for the London end of HBOS(Lloyds), Barclays or Natwest/ RBoS, act any differently?
I can do my own basic small business accounts with a turn over of £250,000 but once you get into multiples of billions my brain freezes. The idea that the US Fed has put a £UK equivalent of many multiples of the UK Treasury's total bank bail out has me in a spin. If I had a silent investor in my business I know they would be looking for a competitive return on their investment and a majority shareholding. It is clear this is exactly what is happening but no one is asking the big question - what is the real impact of all this cash being sucked out of the UK economy and into the Fed?
Has Ed Balls actually said anything of note to pay attention to on this subject?
Nope, do not think so.
What about the Gideot? Well his claims for the UK economic growth this quarter increasingly has parallels with those of the seller of the infamous Norwegian Blue Parrot - it would not go 'Voom', if you put 40 million volts through it.
How about some journalist looking at the massive injections of US treasury dollars into the likes of Barclays ($522 billion), a similar amount into RBoS in London and HBOS Halifax's London operation? Just what is the implication for the UK economy of this level multi-billion dollar US treasury credit propping up the City of London?
Is it maybe why the Gideot is busy selling off the remaining UK family possessions to corporate America - NHS, Civil Service and the rest ..... after all there is no such thing as a 'free lunch' in the good ol' USA, is there?
If I was seeing 60% of my operating profit going into my silent investor's bank account, my business would not be able to invest in new product or machinery anywhere as quickly as I would need to keep up with my competitors, let alone stay ahead of the game. In fact the logical extension is I would be bought out at the bottom of the market so the venture capitalists and their commercial bank backers could make big bucks out of selling on my business when the economy actually returns to growth.
This, in a nutshell, is my problem: why would the US Fed, as both venture capitalist and commercial banker for the London end of HBOS(Lloyds), Barclays or Natwest/ RBoS, act any differently?
No comments:
Post a Comment