"Abject failure" of secularism

Banbh

You can have any colour you like as long as its black.
Here's a pic of supporters of the 2015 Kilkenny camogie final - or they may be Mayo supporters, or Galway or...

Sarky

While waiting for the bus this morning I saw a girl in hijab pass by, on her way to college I suspect. She'd pimped it out with a pretty flower pin-badge and chains.

Banbh

Chains are appropriate.

A friend of mine was involved in designing a university building in Saudi Arabia where male and female students should never meet.

The solution was a split level lecture theatre with the females entering by an underground passage and the males at ground level. Both could see the lecturers without ever coming in contact with each other.

Think of the jobs restructuring our Third Level institutions would create.

Sarky

Think of the crash in the nightclub economy when the students can't get ridiculously drunk and attempt to get into each other's knickers for an embarrassingly brief fumble.

Although... Most nightclub owners have some serious property interests, so it might cause rent and house prices to fall, too. Hmm... Nah, probably not worth it.

MrPudding

Sarky wrote: »

Think of the crash in the nightclub economy when the students can't get ridiculously drunk and attempt to get into each other's knickers for an embarrassingly brief fumble.

Although... Most nightclub owners have some serious property interests, so it might cause rent and house prices to fall, too. Hmm... Nah, probably not worth it.

We need to consider the other economic impacts of Islam becoming the predominant or indeed only religion in Ireland.

• The clothing industry. Sales of woman clothes will drop dramatically. I understand that they will wear other clothes under the sack they will be forced to wear, but I expect there will be nowhere near the variety of clothes needed.
• Childcare. The need for childcare will disappear. Given that women will no longer work and will stay at home there will be little or no need for childcare services.
• The motor industry. Second cars will only be required when male children become old enough to drive, and even then will only be optional.
• The pork industry. Fairly obvious what will happen there.
• Bookshops. Sales of books, other than Islamic religious orientated books, will drop dramatically. Books of science, rationalism and the real physical world will be particularly impacted.
• Financial services. No more loans? A complete reworking of the banking system will be required. Of course it is arguable that this is needed anyway, but possibly not like this…

I am sure there are plenty more areas where there will be an impact.

MrP

Dades

This thread has gone down a rather stereotyped path. :pac:

No mention of minarets, yet? And people thought the Angelus was bad!

Sarky

What with drunks shouting back at them and pissing up against the side, they wouldn't last long.

robindch

MrPudding wrote: »

I am sure there are plenty more areas where there will be an impact.

And where exactly in Ireland is there a road smooth enough for this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-bOIFhMzhc

My accounting body keeps spamming my email about a diploma in Islamic finance
(ie how to account for loans and interest in a way that it isn't really interest but it really is)

Maybe I should sign up to get ahead of the curve. Maybe I am too late.

robindch

Deleted User wrote: »

My accounting body keeps spamming my email about a diploma in Islamic finance

Aka, mullah money management -- madness that way lies.

There's at least one version for shia islam (basically Iran), and at least one separate and incompatible one for sunni islam (everywhere else). I'm sure the bahai's have something else.

Today's fun fact -- did you know that under Saudi islamic finance, a bank can't extend credit at an ATM?

doctoremma

robindch wrote: »

Today's fun fact -- did you know that under Saudi islamic finance, a bank can't extend credit at an ATM?

Could a bank do so if they waived the interest charges on any borrowing?

robindch

doctoremma wrote: »

Could a bank do so if they waived the interest charges on any borrowing?

I don't believe so. I can't remember the exact problem since it's been a few years since I was out in Saudi and having this explained to me over dinner one evening, but I do remember that it was elegantly complicated.

vibe666

there's another good point, isn't it illegal for them to be in debt?

i wonder what would happen to all the money we owe to the EU?

or would they just chop off one hand from everyone in the country and call it even?

recedite

doctoremma wrote: »

Could a bank do so if they waived the interest charges on any borrowing?

Yes, IMO. There is no prohibition on extending credit, which is actually encouraged as an act of charity. However banks are not there to provide charity, hence they look for ways to circumvent the Islamic law. The extent to which a Muslim society is willing to overlook the corruption of that particular Sharia law (Riba) is reflected in the diversity of Islamic banking methods.

BTW Collecting interest on loans or Riba is referred to as Usury in the Bible and is also forbidden for Christians, although that has been conveniently overlooked since around the time that banks were formed.

Sarky

That bit's just metaphorical.

recedite

vibe666 wrote: »

i wonder what would happen to all the money we owe to the EU?

We would still owe it, but we wouldn't pay the interest.
But then if nobody ever defaulted, there would be no need for the others to pay interest anyway.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

But then if nobody ever defaulted, there would be no need for the others to pay interest anyway.

Cash also has an facilitation value by virtue of it being present, the technical term for which escapes me just now.

Basically, if I have $100, then under normal circumstances, I'd like to keep that cash in case I need it. Then, say you come up to me and want to borrow $100, I'm within my rights to charge you (a) an insurance fee in case you don't pay back, probably related to how much I trust you and your promises to repay (b) an administration fee to transfer the cash; (c) naked profit fee and (d) a facilitation fee which recompenses me for not having immediate access to my own money; and that facilitation fee might cover say, insurance and administration expenses against a third party if I suddenly need quick access to the cash and I need to borrow it from somebody else. There are other, additional fees that one can lob in with varying degrees of justification, but the above four are the basic ones.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Basically, if I have $100, then under normal circumstances, I'd like to keep that cash in case I need it. Then, say you come up to me and want to borrow $100, I'm within my rights to charge you (a) an insurance fee in case you don't pay back, probably related to how much I trust you and your promises to repay (b) an administration fee to transfer the cash; (c) naked profit fee and (d) a facilitation fee which recompenses me for not having immediate access to my own money; and that facilitation fee might cover say, insurance and administration expenses against a third party if I suddenly need quick access to the cash and I need to borrow it from somebody else. There are other, additional fees that one can lob in with varying degrees of justification, but the above four are the basic ones.

All good points, but supposing "you" are a bank.......
If the State ultimately provides the credit default insurance to the bank free of charge (AKA the bailouts) then the bank is not ethically entitled to charge the citizens of the State for that same default insurance. Hence (a) above is unjustified.
(b) account administration fees are already charged for, separately.
(c) naked profit fee....well that is an ecumenical matter. "Profiteering" from someone else's misfortune and all that. Some like it, some don't.
(d) facilitation fee; this pre-supposes that the lender actually possessed the money, and will be disadvantaged by not having access to it. Whereas banks operate by lending out money they don't really have. They rely on the gamble that not every depositor will come looking for his money back at the same time, and so they keep lending the same money out again and again, charging more interest each time. Profits are greatly multiplied, but so is the risk of a systemic banking collapse, followed by, well.... look around you.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

All If the State ultimately provides the credit default insurance to the bank free of charge (AKA the bailouts) then the bank is not ethically entitled to charge the citizens of the State for that same default insurance. Hence (a) above is unjustified.

Not true. Apart from the costs of the bailouts themselves, the Irish government guarantees any deposits an (eligible) institution wishes, and charges for the privilege according to the Eligible Liability Guarantee fees (Annex 7, here). To the best of my knowledge, Irish banks have paid around €1.5 billion in fees to the Irish government so far under this scheme (see here).

recedite wrote: »

(d) facilitation fee; this pre-supposes that the lender actually possessed the money, and will be disadvantaged by not having access to it.

It doesn't presuppose anything. The here-and-now value of cash exists from the borrower's perspective whether or not the lending bank operates a fractional reserve or not. It's a bit smoke and mirrory.

.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Irish banks have paid around €1.5 billion in fees to the Irish government so far

And where did they get the €1.5 billion from? Only a tiny fraction of the money donated to them by the citizens, via the govt. under the "recapitalisation" scheme they devised.

The here-and-now value of cash exists from the borrower's perspective whether or not the lending bank operates a fractional reserve or not. It's a bit smoke and mirrory.

That's like saying the selling of snake-oil is a legitimate business. The placebo effect is indeed real from the patients perspective. Even if the active ingredient is non-existent.

robindch

robindch wrote: »

Cash also has an facilitation value by virtue of it being present, the technical term for which escapes me just now.

Opportunity cost?

Newaglish

robindch wrote: »

Cash also has an facilitation value by virtue of it being present, the technical term for which escapes me just now.

Deleted User wrote: »

Opportunity cost?

I suspect it's either that or present value? Present value being the value of having cash now rather than in the future.

robindch

Newaglish wrote: »

Present value being the value of having cash now rather than in the future.

Nope. The present or future value of some amount is the value at some specified point in time of one or more payments, usually subject to compound interest. It's not related to the facilitation/presence value or whatever the hell it's called. Opportunity cost is the expense incurred by choosing one mutually exclusive item over another (ie, I can choose pizza for dinner, but at the expense of not having that yummy pasta).

golden lane

at least the beggars would have official status.........

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Opportunity cost is the expense incurred by choosing one mutually exclusive item over another

That is the term though; if you are invested in stocks or bonds, and some better investment comes along, you have to forego that opportunity because your money is tied up. It doesn't really apply to cash in the bank though, because that should be easily available (if the bank still had it).

Newaglish

robindch wrote: »

Nope. The present or future value of some amount is the value at some specified point in time of one or more payments, usually subject to compound interest. It's not related to the facilitation/presence value or whatever the hell it's called. Opportunity cost is the expense incurred by choosing one mutually exclusive item over another (ie, I can choose pizza for dinner, but at the expense of not having that yummy pasta).

I know what the two terms are, I'm just trying to guess at what you mean. If you're talking about the value of having cash now compared to the value of cash in the future, it's present value. If you're talking about the value of having unused cash as opposed to cash tied up in particular investments, it's the opportunity cost. They're both sort of interrelated, the cost of you not have that money being calculated as your cost of capital (usually weighted average cost of capital).

Edit: I appreciate I've gone way off-topic but I really want to figure out what this term is!

robindch

Newaglish wrote: »

If you're talking about the value of having cash now compared to the value of cash in the future, it's present value. If you're talking about the value of having unused cash as opposed to cash tied up in particular investments, it's the opportunity cost.

Yes, that's right, but the term I'm thinking relates to the value of having cash available. Or I could be just making a dog's breakfast of the whole thing

Newaglish wrote: »

Edit: I appreciate I've gone way off-topic but I really want to figure out what this term is!

Off-topic? This is A+A, the off-topic forum

Hotblack Desiato

MrPudding wrote: »

Sales of woman clothes will drop dramatically. I understand that they will wear other clothes under the sack

Aha that's what you think. Unless you've peered under (or, up?) a representative sample of the world's burkhas, you don't really know that they don't all go butt naked under them black yokes. Would be cooler in the hot climates...

MrPudding

ninja900 wrote: »

Aha that's what you think. Unless you've peered under (or, up?) a representative sample of the world's burkhas, you don't really know that they don't all go butt naked under them black yokes. Would be cooler in the hot climates...

There is a real fancy shopping centre near where I live, you will often see burka clad woman shopping for clothes. There is something slightly odd seeing a woman in a burka carrying an agent provocature bag!

MrP

Turtwig

Damn I've learned so much about banks and cultures in the last 10 mins or so reading this thread. You guys are a gold mine for new and interesting info that I'd never have come across otherwise.
(Just hope that some of my posts reciprocate that a little.)