Awol

It really is a shame the government didn't build up large budget surpluses in the boom years like many other governments just in case we had a down turn.

What I can't fathom is how Brown claimed he ended the boom and bust cycle when he wasn't putting money away during the boom years.

Good question, I think he believed unending economic growth really was achievable, hence 'no more boom and bust'. That fundamental incromprehension of our economic system (combined with the evidence of the current situation) should disabuse people of the notion that he is the man to fix it.

I agree with both of you here. The fact is that politicians, by their very nature, both borrow and spend all they possibly can in order to 'buy' the next election thus further feathering their own beds.

If we believe and accept that the old left/right economic arguments are largely defunct, we are going to need some new ideas for a financially stable and ecologically sound future, which does not rely on never ending growth.

Won't be easy. One wonders what people are actually prepared to give up?

Getting OT here but you're exactly right, and because this fundamental point is being willfully ignored by those responsible for answering it, well, lets see what happens in London this week and how big the ground swell of 'anti' actually is. That will be an interesting gauge of how the public feel imo.

The power and vested interests tied up in the current (collective suicide) system are so great that the implications of what would be necessary to overturn them - effectively overturning the rule of the State - are mind boggling, but that's the only logical way of fundamentally changing the future.

Carpe Diem?

It really is a shame the government didn't build up large budget surpluses in the boom years like many other governments just in case we had a down turn.

What I can't fathom is how Brown claimed he ended the boom and bust cycle when he wasn't putting money away during the boom years.

Good question, I think he believed unending economic growth really was achievable, hence 'no more boom and bust'. That fundamental incromprehension of our economic system (combined with the evidence of the current situation) should disabuse people of the notion that he is the man to fix it.

and his racist tones are there for all to see

so you keep saying but have yet to offer anything to support this ..deflection attempt or do you have some form of material to backup your claim ?

Tony - read the f'ing blog. Read some of his other comments - I aint one of your lackeys

No you are making vile accusations and when called out over them resort to ^ because you cannot substantiate them. Telling indeed.

Again you rather miss the point that his utterly inappropriate and bizarre grinning is a reflection of the mans character and mental state, not his overall physical appearance.

and again the prosecution rests - obsession with physical appearance

:?: Desperate stuff this Ian.

Indeed, it seems I am in the majority. No coincidence that this is the fastest and most widely ever watched political speech on youtube. If people didn't agree it wouldn't be topping youtube's international most watched list would it?

The interesting bit is that the institutional left wing bias of the BBC meant they ignored it for so long, I'm sure you'll agree...

So what if it was looked at by many - I watched it, it does not mean that I hung off every word that Hannan said. Again if Hannan is your champion then fine, his views are odious and his racist tones are there for all to see. If you think that man is the answer then again fine, says a lot about you and your thinking, again IMO

I notice you make some claim about being in the majority, so what? Good to see that individual thought is such a big point foir you or is it being part of a publicity poll more important?

I was under the impression that the majority view was rather important come election time and had a direct bearing on the prospects of politicians and governments.

The BBC did not ignore it - they reported it - it was commented on BBC World. Maybe they saw it for what it was and not some sort of word from the messiah that you are making it out to be

BBC World is hardly the primary BBC vehicle for informing the British public is it.

Edit: Last thing, if you didn't interpret criticism of Brown as a personal attack on you these discussions might be a tad more civilised. Just a thought.

It is merely an observation of reality, that you are too bind to see the truth of it is not the shock of the century. Even the bloody Guardian readers are wading into him en masse for being utterly useless and deluded but you didn't respond to that..

No because unlike you and your obsession with physical appearance, I'd rather look at what the alternatives would and could do.

Again you rather miss the point that his utterly inappropriate and bizarre grinning is a reflection of the mans character and mental state, not his overall physical appearance.

I think Hannan is spot on, if that also makes me an odious right wing creature in your eyes I'm not too worried.

Neither am I Jon - says a lot when Hannan is seen as your champion

Indeed, it seems I am in the majority. No coincidence that this is the fastest and most widely ever watched political speech on youtube. If people didn't agree it wouldn't be topping youtube's international most watched list would it?

The interesting bit is that the institutional left wing bias of the BBC meant they ignored it for so long, I'm sure you'll agree...

Either way they are going down, and they're taking us with them.

I love this comment - straight from the right wing rags.

It is merely an observation of reality, that you are too bind to see the truth of it is not the shock of the century. Even the bloody Guardian readers are wading into him en masse for being utterly useless and deluded but you didn't respond to that..

Edit: My apologies I see you did respond and I missed it. A sound bite about pop idol politics to avoid the substance of the issue that Labour voters/supporters are turning on Brown.. A little ironic maybe?

In the Hannan speech linked on Gringo's article you can see Brown grinning inanaely like a masturbating monkey,clearly unable to process the reality of what was said.

Pathetic comment (again)

Whereas this contribution is the height of literary genius Ian? I am clearly being a little unfair to monkey's and I apologise for that.

I think Hannan is spot on, if that also makes me an odious right wing creature in your eyes I'm not too worried.

Not everyone thinks it's just the blue eyed boys to blame

Daniel Hannan slagging off Gordon Brown? I'm afraid that when I first saw that there was some YouTube video around of Hannan's anti-Brown rant at the European parliament on Tuesday, I couldn't be bothered to watch it. I used to work with Hannan at the Daily Telegraph and I like him. He's not exactly a Guardian-reading progressive, but he's very intelligent, he's up for an argument and he's got strong beliefs (which is less common than you'd think in politics). Hannan making a speech in praise of Brown might have aroused my interest. But this one? It sounded utterly predictable.

It turned out that I missed a sensation. When I last looked, Hannan's speech was still at the top of YouTube's "most viewed" section, with 712,860 "hits". It's been described as "the most viewed political speech in the fastest time in internet history". The speech was picked up in the US, where it has featured on the Drudge Report, Fox News and the Rush Limbaugh Show among other places, and it has clearly struck a chord with the American right. "Republicans in Washington could take a lesson from the bravery of this man," Limbaugh said on his show.

The really revealling bits are the comments left after this article, which at the ratio of about 10/1 absolutely slaughter Brown. This is this Guardian website!

Soros now saying in the Times today that the UK may need to bailed out by the IMF, which of course hasn't happened since the last Labour government was in power and led directly to it's downfall.

The other thing which seemed very interesting was the private meeting held this week between Mervyn King and the Queen, apparently unprecedented and at her request. Follwing that meeting King publically announced that we could not afford another big stimulus package and cut the legs off Brown's only key policy to fix the mess - borrow for ever more. He is in total denial and appears incapable of looking at the situation objectively. In the Hannan speech linked on Gringo's article you can see Brown grinning inanaely like a masturbating monkey,clearly unable to process the reality of what was said. He's going to fall flat on his face at the G20 and Labour have to make the decision whether to accept electoral oblivion by not acting or get rid and restrict the damage merely to a period of opposition. Either way they are going down, and they're taking us with them.

What's black and needs pressing?

Liam Neeson's suit.

Perhaps this has already been done, but have we had a poll on whether or not these large institutions should be bailed out or thrown to the wolves?

I not qualified enough to know what would have happened had several big banks gone pop but I suspect the market would have taken it's course and good banks like Lloyds would have survived and prospered.

What worries me enough to be buggering off elsewhere is that the debt we have incurred by bailing banks out could sink the whole economy.

Pop the poll up mate and lets finds out what people think..

did anyone watch a dispatches program a couple of weeks ago - How the squandered our billions.

Yep, it was horrific. Funny thing is whenever anyone on here suggests public spending could be reduced without affecting frontline services, they normally get accused of wanting to put people into the poor house, burn the schools and demolish the NHS.

BROWN APOLOGISES FOR NOT BEING EVEN MORE INTELLIGENT

GORDON Brown today apologised for not being even more intelligent than he so obviously is.

If only he'd been even more stunningly brilliant.. The prime minister said that while he had been amazingly clever and much cleverer than anyone else, he could have prevented the financial crisis by being even cleverer than that.

Mr Brown told the Guardian: "I'm so clever I know what you're going to say even before you say it. I'm so clever I can read two books at the same time. The one in the toilet and the one next to my bed.

"But if only I had been clever enough to realise that capitalism involves some risk and that maybe something could be done to minimise that risk such as rules that stopped banks from lending money to people who couldn't afford to pay it back.

"But that would have taken a super-human degree of intelligence. Not even ET or one of those big, scary computers that can play chess could have worked that one out."

The prime minister also said the era of laissez faire capitalism was over but insisted it would not be replaced by so-called 'big government', adding: "I don't know what we'll actually call it. Maybe 'fat government', or 'chunky government'.

"My personal favourite is 'so-powerful-you-won't-be-able-to-go-for-a-piss-without-my-permission government."

Mr Brown's critics are now expected to spend the next two weeks debating whether an apology for not being even cleverer amounts to an actual apology.

Psychologist Dr Tom Logan, said: "I'm afraid this is closest you're going to get to an apology from someone who is now clearly in need of immediate hospitalisation."

BROWN REFUSES TO HAND BACK PENSION

GORDON Brown last night dismissed calls to surrender his £123,000 a year pension when he is forced to stop being prime minister next June.

Mr Brown was defiant in the face of City outrage despite the UK government's annual operating loss of £100bn, rising to £1.5 trillion when the write-down of its banking assets is taken into account.

The prime minister said: "I've been building up this pension since I became an MP, it's all completely legal and now you want to take it away because I've been catastrophically bad at my job and you're looking for a scapegoat. What gives?"

He added: "Yes I've been in charge of financial regulation for 12 years, yes I encouraged the housing bubble, and yes I pissed billions up the wall giving pointless jobs to Labour voters, but I fail to see what any of this has to do with me being incredibly well off."

Brown's £3m pension pot is expected to cast the spotlight on the extravagant retirement packages of other failed politicians including Alistair Darling's inexplicable £1.7m and the £1.5m awarded to John Prescott for being a national scandal for 10 years.

Meanwhile Margaret Beckett has a fund worth £1.7m, something called 'Hilary Armstrong' has £1.2m and Tessa Jowell has £1m even though no-one has the faintest idea what any of them actually did.

Critics insist Mr Brown has a moral duty to hand back his pension fund as he will inevitably receive a multi-million pound advance for two volumes of eye-gougingly tedious memoirs which will end up in the bargain bucket at WH Smith within a fortnight.

Martin Bishop, head of pension rows at the Institute for Studies, said: "It's a fascinating dynamic. The politicians blame the bankers, the bankers blame the politicians, and the ordinary taxpayer is down on all fours with a confused look on his face, being **** at both ends."

I think the poll is wrong. Class is the measure of how well you treat your fellow man and nothing else.

^ Get off the fence AJ

Owning a house (as you do) = bad.

Private rental (as I do) = bad.

So should we all live in council houses? Or would a kibbutz or collective farm be better?

Dogmatic right my arse.

no you should have a fair mixture of the two and have the ability if you want to rent from councils rather than rip off private rented who bugger off as soon as the going gets tough

the amout of private landlords throwing peopel out is causing a tremondous strain

But by implication we'd therefore need a considerable stock of council housing standing empty and being maintained ready for occupation. How on earth do we pay for that?

Owning a house (as you do) = bad.

Private rental (as I do) = bad.

So should we all live in council houses? Or would a kibbutz or collective farm be better?

Dogmatic right my arse.

as we have seen is encouraging home onwership really that wonderful ?

Private landlords are scum..

A confusing picture then..

war does help but hos much has been spent in Iraq eh ?

Ah come on, Iraq wasn't a proper war, and besides we've a ready made one in Afghan we just need to start doing it properly! :winkold:

Losing your job doesn't exactly jusitfy murder in my book so I'll be holding back my nominations for sainthood for the strikers, and no government forced them to commit murder did they.

So you would categorise all of the miners because of the actions of two? Amazing way of justifying and scraping a very deep barrel

No not at all, I was trying to learn something - it wasn't a trick question when I asked if strikers had murdered other miners, but for some reason you didn't seem to want to discuss it.

the debate I believe is whether you, tony

well awol and I can debate this over cocktails in Muscat on Sunday (I'll warn the wife to bring a book with her )

I'll rejoin this thread on my return ..I've a feeling it will still be going in the same circle :-)

Looking forward to it, but really, mines a beer you big gay..

I believe you are referring to the the taxi incident where I think a slab of concrete was thrown on a taxi carrying 'scabs'

I wasn't but thanks again for furthering the conversation.

So were these 'scabs' deserving of their fate then, your use of language suggest you might think so. Was it justified to murder men going to work to feed their families then or no? T'other Ian seems to be swerving this one...

no one deserved to die but this was a chicken and egg situation if thatch ahad not allowed her dogma to dictate and be prepared to compromise it may never have got that far

we can only guess at that

Losing your job doesn't exactly jusitfy murder in my book so I'll be holding back my nominations for sainthood for the strikers, and no government forced them to commit murder did they.

as for your class point then class is sometimes how you act towards fellow human beings

That is twice in one night, excellent mate, really.

I believe you are referring to the the taxi incident where I think a slab of concrete was thrown on a taxi carrying 'scabs'

I wasn't but thanks again for furthering the conversation.

So were these 'scabs' deserving of their fate then, your use of language suggest you might think so. Was it justified to murder men going to work to feed their families then or no? T'other Ian seems to be swerving this one...