ianrobo1

it is actually good news that inflation has not dropped dramtically. what a weird world eh ?

we all would Scott, so perfect for us

AG, was the atmoshere as poor as it came over on TV ? barely heard either fans or was that setanta ?

because one party looked at the ideas, some of which I remebered I supported but the context was wrong especially in a recession and clearly the guy has seen this and gone the Tories will have no such problems with their rank and file, hitting on the poor and weak is easy for them, no doubt single mums will get regular bashings as we head towards an election and in recessions people in general become nastier in their scapegoating of others.

not dropped snowy but there was never a chance it would have been passed in the first draft form the rebellion was large and growing and that is why he jumped ship I think when we discussed this snowy I said I agreed with some points, no one can deny that changes should be made but this guy was scary in what he wanted and after the banks and nationalisation do you thinany labour government could push through a privatisation of welfare ? the nasty party could though

actually it is scary to see Freud go to a party more than willing to implement every idea, clearly Labour was never going to push it through as the rebellion would have been massive the thatcherites are gathering

Gringo, do you think Lloyds were pushed into this, could they have said no ? remember lloyds took government money as well despite Clarke's claims of a solid bank I have a theory every recession banks will lose out it is inevitable, are they now using the credit crunch to try and get the governments to effectivtly write off their own bad debts ? and the governments have no choice ?

not rom the BBC report on the website he did not so he thinks the best option was to nationalise it, thats fine but I also think Lloyds saw a possible bargain, there is no indication they HAD to do the deal Lloyds took a gamble it looks liek it failed but who knows in three years time it may have been a master stroke

Why? In order to try and invalidate any criticism of what might well be incorrect actions. I keep on hearing this rubbish about 'you can't criticize unless you've got an alternative' and 'what would you do? If you don't tell us then it means that what we're doing is right' and, frankly, it is rather idiotic. If one wants to have a debate about various options then one requires various options to debate. If one wants to have a debate about the efficacy or sense of one option, introducing another option into the debate is, actually, a distraction. not in this case because if cuddly Ken is saying it was wrong (did he or any tory say this at the time ??) then what is the alternative, bankruptcy ? but thoe adovcating full nationaliation are getting very close to getting their wishes granted !! I do wonder what the Tories think of that

I do snowy but in these desperate times pure critiscm has to be backed up with ideas, to at least have a proper debate and how us some alternatives again therefore I can only conclude they would have let the bank slide into bankruptcy

yes that is the case Gringo but if you have no idea what to do how can you feasibly criticse what Labour are doing, especially has results won't be een for months if not years the key qustion to be debated I suppose is hthe rlabour made things worse in the last 12 months and if so how ?

just as we discussed last night clarke has saud this about the Lloyds/Hbos merger well the reason it happened wa because HBOS was very close to collapse so as usual I think it is a valid thing to ay but what woul he have done instead ? only 2 options I see 1- let it collapse and the huge liabilities, not least the safeguarding of deposits 2 - or totally nationalise it taking the liabilities on board he gives us neither same as what we said

who is wihing anything just a choice and at the moment 77% support option A which has stayed steady since I started the poll

Mark, I doubt you have read all of this thread but Richard and Tony have both keot going about the huge amount of borrowing, most of it to prop up the banking system. so has Cameron and Osbourne my gut feeling is that actually the tories would do **** all except small things like £20b to guarntee business loans but what is the poit of this when one bank has debts of at least 10bn and we have 3 nationalised banks thats why we don;t hear what they do because they would not do a lot for me with no evidence to the contary it is that simple

thats right DDID that is how much the win could be, beat Chelsea and we will ne 10 in front of Arse ad they would see Chelsea as the rivals and not us, also it means we can afford to lose a couple especially Ma Ure ad plop back to back

thats the problem no one knows what the right descions are to nationalise banks or not ? let them collapse or not ? tax cuts or soial housing ? no one has a clue and only history (note not hindsight) will tell us I jsut want from a politial poit of view the Tories to tell us what they would do and they can not say this at the moment because unless they have really changed the rights answer to recessions has always been to leave them to the free market the advisors of thatcher will not turn agaist this but can not say it either which for me is abysmal. just wished the libs were a more credible force to give a choice.

snowy remember when I keep sayig ALL to BLAME that includes the people they wanted the houses, they allowed thatch to sell off council housing, they accepted 7 timesmultiple mortgages, 110% mortgages etc. the peopel want the good times but moan at the bad of the free market

no chance snowy and the peopel are the worse to decide we know fuk all on why this has happened I suspect if there was a vote on what to do most would say let the banks fall (deposits are of course saved) but the public would not understand the consequences of that Look at the damage just one - Lehmans did when ti collapses, if RBS collapsed as one of the world's biggest banks the fallout would be depression and no one wants that

Hutton is a socialist and thus would support the nationialisation of all banks I am just not sure of it, there are plus points but a lot of minuses jut in the cost alone, the admin and the benefits. said it before but no one holds any answers because this has never been seen before so everything is a wait and see problem is in this age people are too impatient there is no quick answer and would be good if all the parties could sit together and come up with a common approach but that would be impossible

sorry Snowy I thought I made it clear I meant the tories I still have yet to work out what they would have done either to stop this (almost imposible as they are more wedded to the housing market) or to tackle the problems they had fun over the german minister laiming brown was wrong, a month or so later Germany did the same !!

thats my point Mark it is the lack o an alternative, peopel snipe and make party points but when challenged I do not hear a coherent argument on how to get us out of the mess with the losses at HBOS today it shows the shit the bankers got us into but I did hear for the past 3 years they had made 4 times the money in proits, so were these real profits or just false ?

now now Bicks i that not a PFE, from a mod as well tut tut

i don't think i agree with that. i think selling off the council houses was a good idea - why? 1) people look after their own house that they own, people don't look after houses owned by the council. 2) people who own their house, have more of an interest in their surrounding area. 3) because of this, council estates end up becoming 'run-down' or sink estates. 4) there's no reason why a private renting market wouldn't/doesn't work. i think it works pretty much in fact, and can drive up standards in housing. The real issue in housing is that not enough houses have been built over the past 25 years. If enough land & planning permission was given, then we would have a good supply of houses, which would have meant that house price would be at a sensible level, and therefore affordable to the majority of the population. see that is the argument of those who espose the situation we now have simply put private renting is shite, Council housing worked for many years and the good stuff was the bits that was sold off not the shite which the councils were left with. the free market does not have the answers, landlords are basically crooks and little security Council housing provided cheap affordable and mostly ok housing which meant people did not have to over borrow or over stretch themselves peopel on low wages were in amny cases forced to take high multiple moprtgages added to this no one wanted new houses built next to them or in green fields so demand never kept up with supply and a boom ...

the thing about privatisation is that there are some industires that should be private BT for example others clearly not - power, rail etc but that has gone, Labour amended it because the peopel would not except any form of nationalisation, times have changed though said it before loads of times and Richard never answered my question on the previous page but the worse of all was the selling of the council houses, I have no doubt on that

So if we lose at Everton and crash out of the cup we won't lose any momentum then?... we never after Zilna or Hamburg or QPR did we ?