Cyclone   10 #37 Posted September 17, 2018 Which years of government have we not had a debt then?  Oh, and is it possible that a sovereign wealth fund might ever return a higher % than sovereign debt? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
davyboy   19 #38 Posted September 17, 2018   Norway didn't squander its North Sea revenue on benefit payments. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tinfoilhat   11 #39 Posted September 17, 2018 We've got loads of gold, can't that be used..........  .....well we did have loads of gold. That would have been handy in 2009! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ez8004   10 #40 Posted September 18, 2018 £100bn is very small in comparison to Norway’s. Especially given Norway’s population size.  Norway didn't squander its North Sea revenue on benefit payments.  So Norway doesn't have a social welfare system? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
truman   10 #41 Posted September 18, 2018 So Norway doesn't have a social welfare system?  Yes it has but it also has a far lower population than us (less than a tenth I believe) and has had about 20 odd billion from oil revenues per year..I don't thin we get that much now, so you can see Norway has more cash to save... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Phanerothyme   12 #42 Posted September 18, 2018 I don't think the people in charge are capable of managing it. It'd be too tempting and would get pillaged at the first opportunity, mostly to fund large vanity projects or backstop some giant white elephant mess.  We can't be trusted with it.  This.  It's what the UK did with north sea oil revenue.  Norway started a Sovereign Wealth Fund with it instead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
truman   10 #43 Posted September 18, 2018 This. It's what the UK did with north sea oil revenue.  Norway started a Sovereign Wealth Fund with it instead.  It was a bit easier for them though...all that cash coming in and only 10% of our population.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Anna B Â Â 1,414 #44 Posted September 18, 2018 It was a bit easier for them though...all that cash coming in and only 10% of our population.. Â What happened to all our Oil money? Was it really necessary for Thatcher to start selling off the family silver? What did she do with that money too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
truman   10 #45 Posted September 18, 2018 What happened to all our Oil money? Was it really necessary for Thatcher to start selling off the family silver? What did she do with that money too?  Why didn't the Labour gov of the mid sixties set a fund up..? What did they do with the money? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #46 Posted September 18, 2018 Norway managed it much better  Analysis of official government statistics show that the U.K. generated $470 billion in revenues whilst Norway has generated $1,197 billion since 1971 in real (2014) terms And that's on the UK extracting slightly more; both countries have produced similar amounts of hydrocarbons: the U.K. has produced 42.8 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) and Norway 40 billion boe (figure 1).  ---------- Post added 18-09-2018 at 14:36 ----------  From  https://resourcegovernance.org/blog/did-uk-miss-out-%C2%A3400-billion-worth-oil-revenue  Not included in these figures is the amount the U.K. state gained from selling its assets in the North Sea. This figure is not precisely known, but accounts suggest that U.K. earnings from the oil company privatisations in the early 1980s were only around £1.2 billion[5] ($1.7 billion) in money of the day terms, or around $3.76 billion in 2014 terms. This is perhaps an underestimate as it does not include income from the privatization of BG beyond its oil assets. Nonetheless, the income to the U.K. from privatization of oil assets does not make up for the lower U.K. government revenues relative to Norway.  ---------- Post added 18-09-2018 at 14:38 ----------  Let's guess which party was in power when state assets were sold off to the private market for a short term gain, but long term loss. Answers on a postcard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
sheffbag   230 #47 Posted September 18, 2018 What happened to all our Oil money? Was it really necessary for Thatcher to start selling off the family silver? What did she do with that money too?  Probably the same thing Gordon did when he artificially created a low price for gold and sold off half the family stock of it cheaply.  Have we moved on from answering previous questions now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
the_bloke   17 #48 Posted September 18, 2018 So when its a paper that doesnt support Labour its all media bias and is influencing the voters. When its a paper that does support Labour it doesnt matter because politics doesnt sell newspapers to its readership  2017 election headlines. Obviously in Anna B's viewpoint, they are all against Corbyn.  https://www.theguardian.com/politics/gallery/2017/jun/09/cor-blimey-general-election-uk-front-pages-in-pictures Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...