Tories first policy statement
#91
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
You are an economic incompetent of the highest order. You have literally no idea of what you drivelling on about regarding the economy.
Here are some facts for you to digest
Brown's decade of disaster
Here are some facts for you to digest
Brown's decade of disaster
why don't you come up with something -- instead of regurgitating what you read or is it the case that if you read it on Adamsmith.org it must be true
at least Telboy gave his view on how we got here
lets here yours -- in your own words – or do you just sit dribbling in the corner gently rocking to “it’s a mad world”
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 06 October 2009 at 11:43 AM.
#92
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are an economic incompetent of the highest order. You have literally no idea of what you drivelling on about regarding the economy.
Here are some facts for you to digest
Brown's decade of disaster
Here are some facts for you to digest
Brown's decade of disaster
What it doesn't tell you is that even now the figures percentage wise are comparable to much of the late 80s and early 90s and that the figures under the Labour government have until recently better than under the entire term of the last government.
#94
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You mean I show the sources of facts and the basis for my statements? Rather than vomit forth an ill-informed opinion? Thats a bad thing?
Actually the figures quoted come from the OECD - so whilst some may be in dispute for various reasons, it is a good overall comparator. But this point seems to have escaped your insubstantial intellectual rigour. And what does come up with something mean? I am responding to your assertation that "the idea that labour ruined our economy is sooo ludicrous" and rubutting it with hard facts
Rather unsurprisingly, I dont believe you'll listen or understand a word of what I tell you, but try googling Glass Steagall Act and Community Redevelopment Act, two US bills that enabled and promoted risky sub prime loans. This will give you some background to the credit crunch, and hopefully open your eyes past the "evil banker" mantra you appear to subscribe to. As for Brown, well I haven't even started on public sector productivity, but google that as well. Independent research is actually very profitable which I hope you can learn
Rather unsurprisingly, I dont believe you'll listen or understand a word of what I tell you, but try googling Glass Steagall Act and Community Redevelopment Act, two US bills that enabled and promoted risky sub prime loans. This will give you some background to the credit crunch, and hopefully open your eyes past the "evil banker" mantra you appear to subscribe to. As for Brown, well I haven't even started on public sector productivity, but google that as well. Independent research is actually very profitable which I hope you can learn
#95
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Yorks.
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#96
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HTH
#98
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
they do what they do -- which is prime the pump of the economy with access to capital and credit and make money in the process
and thats what I believe they will continue to do -- making money is an important business and they seem pretty good at it
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well let me put you straight -- nowhere do I say bankers are evil
they do what they do -- which is prime the pump of the economy with access to capital and credit and make money in the process
and thats what I believe they will continue to do -- making money is an important business and they seem pretty good at it
they do what they do -- which is prime the pump of the economy with access to capital and credit and make money in the process
and thats what I believe they will continue to do -- making money is an important business and they seem pretty good at it
#101
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#102
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Yorks.
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd take any statistics with a pinch of salt - they can be manipulated and presented to forward any agenda one chooses, and often are. Also it was Adam Smith style economics that royally screwed the economy during the last Tory government and is the reason why nearly all former public services are now owned by foreign interests.
#103
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What drivel is this? A.S. style economics screwed the economy? What planet are you on? In 1997 the uk financial position was strong. And what is the ownership of utilities got to do with anything. Do you even have a clue what we're talking about here?
#104
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
are you saying it wasn't the "unregulated" free market in debt and mortgaged backed securities that caused the global meltdown of the financial system
#105
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow - have you been taking lessons from hodgy? So you are saying the OECD have it in for Brown and therefore manipulated their figures to make the UK position look ****, whereas in fact its all sunny in the rose garden?
What drivel is this? A.S. style economics screwed the economy? What planet are you on? In 1997 the uk financial position was strong. And what is the ownership of utilities got to do with anything. Do you even have a clue what we're talking about here?
What drivel is this? A.S. style economics screwed the economy? What planet are you on? In 1997 the uk financial position was strong. And what is the ownership of utilities got to do with anything. Do you even have a clue what we're talking about here?
To claim that the strength of the economy in 1997 was due to the great economic stewardship is frankly obsurd, and does absolutely nothing to help the other claims you make.
1997 our economy had recovered from the biggest single piece of financial mismanagement in living memory...remember ERM. Post the ERM disaster the cripplingly high interest rates could be reduced, and with our currency no longer held artifically high against the German mark, we could get an export led recovery going.
To give the Tories credit for the state of the economy in 1997 is rather like giving a mugger credit for calling an ambulance after he's stabbed you!! - ffs how have you got the front to the Tories credit for the state of our economy??????
So Warren you have a very very selective memory, and as with so many on here completely biased by political ideology.
#106
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A simple way to solve the whole problem is transparency. If people knew the kind of risks being taken, knew the contents of the CDOs, knew the the insurance companies couldn't possibly cover the shortfall, then they would never have bought the product in the first place, and the market would not have grown into the bubble it did. It would self regulate. So I would simply enact transparency laws, so everyone can make an informed decision and the problem would never have occurred. Of course, I would never have forced the banks to take on subprime loans in the first place and backed it with taxpayers money (Fannie and Freddie).
Hope that was a reasoned reply to a reasonable question
#110
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Yorks.
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by warrenm2
What drivel is this? A.S. style economics screwed the economy? What planet are you on? In 1997 the uk financial position was strong. And what is the ownership of utilities got to do with anything. Do you even have a clue what we're talking about here?
#111
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
well its fine -- a view is a view
often all I want is an explanation of people views etc -- we arn't all going to agree
but you always seem to just get - "your talking bollox" -- and thats it
thats fine maybe i am -- but just "your talking bollox" seems a bit weak to me
anyway I know where people stand - cool
often all I want is an explanation of people views etc -- we arn't all going to agree
but you always seem to just get - "your talking bollox" -- and thats it
thats fine maybe i am -- but just "your talking bollox" seems a bit weak to me
anyway I know where people stand - cool
#112
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i may act as an arbitrator, Martin, Warren's assertion that the UK's financial position was strong in 1997 isn't necessarily at odds with your observations about the ERM debaclé. It depends what criteria you're using. But we could go round in circles here - who knows whether a Labour government wouldn't have had to go through Black Wednesday themselves? It's simply impossible to say. But that's not the same as saying that the Tory government screwed up everything else before that point, because they simply didn't, unless you're going to be dogmatic in your opinion of the Tories. In my opinion, anyway...
#114
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
presumably you believe that the US and UK government owed it to the banks to bail them out because the Govnt's were responsible for the mess
what then would you say to the American free marketeers who believed and made a case for letting all the banks and financial institutions fail
and hence believe the bank bailouts were a socialist act and had no place in the US economy
what then would you say to the American free marketeers who believed and made a case for letting all the banks and financial institutions fail
and hence believe the bank bailouts were a socialist act and had no place in the US economy
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 06 October 2009 at 02:53 PM.
#115
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Telboy, I see Martin is talking about the ERM / Black Wednesday incident. For the record, I think that was a complete **** up and Lawson should have been shot for that. A complete mistake by the Tories (or Lawson really).
Last edited by warrenm2; 06 October 2009 at 03:08 PM. Reason: helps if I name the right guy
#116
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hodgy you're getting way too philosophical about this
The US and UK positions were different. The UK banking system is effectively four banks. One goes, they all go. Failure was simply not an option, whatever the cost.
Allowing the US banks to fail would have left capitalism dead in the water. Free markets are one thing, but sometimes the rules simply have to be bent. But the US Government have made it clear they won't be caught out again. I don't think that's an ideological standpoint as such, but more of an inherrent safety valve to prevent the banks getting into something they don't understand again.
The US and UK positions were different. The UK banking system is effectively four banks. One goes, they all go. Failure was simply not an option, whatever the cost.
Allowing the US banks to fail would have left capitalism dead in the water. Free markets are one thing, but sometimes the rules simply have to be bent. But the US Government have made it clear they won't be caught out again. I don't think that's an ideological standpoint as such, but more of an inherrent safety valve to prevent the banks getting into something they don't understand again.
#117
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i may act as an arbitrator, Martin, Warren's assertion that the UK's financial position was strong in 1997 isn't necessarily at odds with your observations about the ERM debaclé. It depends what criteria you're using. But we could go round in circles here - who knows whether a Labour government wouldn't have had to go through Black Wednesday themselves? It's simply impossible to say. But that's not the same as saying that the Tory government screwed up everything else before that point, because they simply didn't, unless you're going to be dogmatic in your opinion of the Tories. In my opinion, anyway...
And dogma plays no part in my comments, I'm fully paid up member of the 'lets get rid of the dogma' club
Last edited by Martin2005; 06 October 2009 at 03:00 PM.
#118
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Epsom
Posts: 5,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
presumably you believe that the US and UK government owed it to the banks to bail them out because the Govnt's were responsible for the mess
what then would you say to the American free marketeers who believed and made a case for letting all the banks and financial institutions fail
and hence believe the bank bailouts were a socialist act and had no place in the US economy
what then would you say to the American free marketeers who believed and made a case for letting all the banks and financial institutions fail
and hence believe the bank bailouts were a socialist act and had no place in the US economy
The fact that group 1 was caught up in group 2 due to the acts repeal is a mistake. They should be treated separately and ring fenced from each other. The fact they werent when the crisis hit is the reason that taxpayers money is being used to prop up the banks.
I personally wouldn't have started from here, but given we are here, I think the taxpayer bailout is the least bad course of action, other actions would have been worse I believe. Doesn't mean Im happy with the way things are but I am a pragmatist too. If Glass Steagall was in place, then yes I would be happy to see them fall. As for being socialist, thats not a definition of Socialism that I recognise, but as with so many terms, it has become more meaningless with misuse
Last edited by warrenm2; 06 October 2009 at 03:02 PM.
#119
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
yes - I understand the fundemental differences between the UK and US banking system and indeed the general political consesus between the UK and America
but I would still be interested thats all -- no worries I'll live
posted -- before I have read Warren's reply
but I would still be interested thats all -- no worries I'll live
posted -- before I have read Warren's reply
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 06 October 2009 at 03:06 PM.
#120
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Yeh i have got onto all that, but in the mean time im out of work, still having treatment and it all happened to my right arm/shoulder, and im right handed, and being that ive always been in the manual labour type of jobs, im trying to get my arm sorted, an get the strength back in my arm, and grip in my hand. but until then i am on benefit, so do people suggest they are cut, and because im young i should be left to starve? Not everyone is a sponger
However, just like other benefits, some people do abuse them, and claim when they shouldn't basically because they don't want to work, not because they can't.
I was taken aback recently by something my neighbour said. I was talking to her about tests I was having done after having fits, and how the neurologist I was seeing believed it could be epilepsy (subject to further tests at the time, seems that he was right). Turns out she has epilepsy herself and the first thing she said to me was that I would have to give up my job. I was quite shocked as the thought hadn't even crossed my mind. Unless I was totally unable to work, I just wouldn't even consider chucking work in, even though I don't really like my job at the moment. Obviously I don't know all the ins and outs regarding her condition, but she said it was under control with drugs, so I can't for the life of me understand how she can't work. She has 3 children, and a partner who doesn't work either, the youngest will probably allow her even more time away from work, but it seems her condition is enough to get out of work. I could go on about even more people like this who at least seem to be taking a lend, but what's the point.
Genuine people should be helped, but the element of scroungers needs to be addressed in my opinion.