ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 including thatch, Major, Reegan, Bush Mk 1, Clintn, Bush mk 2, blair, Brown, Merkel, Mitterand, Chricac etc. etc now getting back to where we are Gringo, would you have let the banks go under and done nothing or would you have supported them to the tune of Trillions of dollars ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 and of course the scapegoating has already started by peopel a few months back happy to work with 'forgeiners'A point made a few pages back on the new protectionism creeping into all areas, from employment to financial services. Gordo himself spoke about it on Friday. Such activities will inevitably weaken the country as a whole, but no reaction could damage the lifestyles of the resident working class. This is one of Gordo's biggest qunadaries in the near months. Apart from pulling out of the EC there is little he can do on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 including thatch, Major, Reegan, Bush Mk 1, Clintn, Bush mk 2, blair, Brown, Merkel, Mitterand, Chricac etc. etcYup - but we expect the yanks to be right wing, but we hope the uk labour govts to be left wing, not cow-tow to the markets. now getting back to where we are Gringo, would you have let the banks go under and done nothing or would you have supported them to the tune of Trillions of dollars ?Great question. Under a socialist govt we could have nationalised the lot. But by ignorning the past we repeat the same mistakes in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 right Gringo, nice evasion but no answer from you ?? lets face we have seen two banks nationalised effectively and anothr as good as it so it has happened, also in the states with AIG for example, so you agree the State had to prop them up at the cost of all that money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykeyb Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Why? Because it is? Care to share some sort of contribution to this thread? Not really. I have better things to do on a saturday night rather than get involved in another political topic which has little to do with debate and more to do with point scoring............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 right Gringo, nice evasion but no answer from you ?? Was the following not what you were after, Ian? :? Under a socialist govt we could have nationalised the lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 right Gringo, nice evasion but no answer from you ??Was the following not what you were after, Ian? :? Under a socialist govt we could have nationalised the lot.Was about to post exactly the same, but snowy saved me the trouble. All this forget how we got here, this is where we are and this is what we have to deal with shiite ignores the fact that the people responsible for implementing the errors are now tasked with implementing the solution. They couldn't see what was wrong with what they were doing before, and indeed believe there was nothing wrong what they were doing, but yet we believe they have a solution that will 'save the world', four months after they saved the world before. The housing initiative and the business lending policy (stolen from the do-nothing tories and then watered down) are the only things that show some promise that this govt is actualy thinking itself out of the problem. As posted a good few pages back, (some of) the banks are insolvent and they need to be taken out of the commercial atmosphere, their bad debts repatrioted to other insuitions and a stimkulus of fiscal measures implemented. Such measures could/would include a reversion of VAT to 0%, a wealth tax or funding requirement to shore up the debt (do you want to buy govt bonds or do you want your assets seized?) and a dropping of wasteful expenditure such as ID Cards and the almost univeraslly ridiculed NHS IT program. As snowy poseted a good few pages back, the NEF have many ideas of rebuilding the economy, rebuilding the country - and some of these could be employed to great effect. But hey ho, let's carry on carrying on and see where we end up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Gringo, I think when I say blame ALL that includes all, us, the system, the banks, the poltician and until peopel except the freemarket is a false veneer of success the circle will happen again but no one will be brave enough to do this so we can turn let it all go but the pain will be enormous and the social reprecussions could deeply **** us all up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Gringo, I think when I say blame ALL that includes all, us, the system, the banks, the poltician and until peopel except the freemarket is a false veneer of success the circle will happen again I find it hard to blame the man on the street when he has been led along on a string of false promises and arrived to find the road paved with turdi instead of gold. Instead of your blame of ALL it never includes the blair/brown combo that under regulated the markets that allowed someone to lend 5,6.7 times lending. Your absolution of the incumbent is followed up by your fatih that his fixes work. In October they restored lending from the banks. But it didn't work. So now a new injection will restore lending from the banks, but still there is no action. But Hah No other govts are doing any better!!! Because they are all following the man who saved the world. I really don't know if the latest tarp scheme will work, but this has been a problem for over 18 months - banks closed their doors to the little man back in 2007 and nothing has changed since. The small companies in the country provide more employment than the big companies but they are ignored time and time again. The govt are elected to run the country. They have falied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Gringo, as I have explained before US are to blame because we want the consumer economy, we want the nice cars, the expensive TV's the leather furniture WE supported the policy of selling off council houses etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 No. WE are not to blame WE did not support the selling off of councils houses The people share the blame (yes - for wanting what they are told they can have), but they are not ultimately to blame. Who is running the show? Who is introducing markets into the NHS against solcialist policy? Who is stripping the post office of it's cash gernerative services so it can be sold off to 'bleeding capitalists'? Who sold off the worlds best nuclear power consultancy the year before the decided to renew the nuclear power base? Joined up govt? My arse. you keep saying ALL to blame, but never gordon. Is he immune? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 isn't he part of ALL ??? durrrr the fact is you have a choice between state and private, it has always been the same the question is of the balance between the two no country in the world has the solution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 isn't he part of ALL ??? durrrrI'm not sure cos so far you've blamed the short sellers, the hedge finds. the 'markets', the banks, the consumers, but not one word of criticism of gordo. As said a few pages previously, this contininutal avoidance of blame is beginning to grate. So go on. Just say the words 'gordo is partially responsible for the shit we are in'. And once you can utter those words and realise the problem can we discuss why his 'solutions' (which haven't shown any sign of working) and his ignorance of the issue ('short and shallow') show that he fails to understand the problem and why his 'solutions' aren't working. A governmenrt that cannot foresee a massive fall in GDP when all around them are telling it will be so, but insist on budgeting for their fantasy land of green shoots and imaginary light at the end of the tunnel are only making things worse. They have no solutions. They are the "do something, do anything" party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 this contininutal avoidance of blame is beginning to grate Christ you make it seem almost a crusade to get yself and Ian to do this and I won;t play your silly little games, the blame for me is simple th free market system and all those who believe in it, most for their own ends, whether it is Brown, thatch, Bush whoever names do not matter because under any party this owuld have happened because we had little control over it the great crusader or that is how it seems to some - Vince Cable has never said he would change the system, just tweak it ... so until Baks are not allowed by regs to base their business on their loan books or 'assets' we woill not see any difference it is only a question of when it will happen next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endof Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 The most corrupt government of all time is in power........the taxpayers own Northern Rock and yet they have the most repossessions,the government says "we don't like to intervene in the running of the banks,they share 50 million pound bonus............when are the public gonna realize that the government is raping and pillaring them to look after themselves and their cronies. We need a new order FAST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Christ you make it seem almost a crusade to get yself and Ian to do this and I won;t play your silly little games, the blame for me is simple th free market system and all those who believe in it, most for their own ends, whether it is Brown, thatch, Bush whoever names do not matter because under any party this owuld have happened because we had little control over itSurely I am and have by my evidence, only been repeating what the papers and commentators have said. Brown won't admit any fault, neither will the neo-thatch-blair-brownite followers. And the opinion polls have followed the peoples confidence in their 'elected' leader downhill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 I actually in thei debate would like your view on it and not just copy and pasted articles it seems Gringo you are unwilling to this, this is not BIAD poltics but the economies of every country which gives everyone a living or not you still have failed to say if you woul have allowed the banks to collapse, the Tories have refused to ay this, Cable has refused to states this from what I have read you are bot prepared to answer it, it is not a poltical debate but an economic debate one extreme is to state pure free market it to let them all go the other extreme it total nationalisation, where do you stand ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 this owuld have happened because we had little control over it ...because governments chose to have little control over it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 you still have failed to say if you woul have allowed the banks to collapse ... the other extreme it total nationalisation, where do you stand ? Under a socialist govt we could have nationalised the lot. :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 I actually in thei debate would like your view on it and not just copy and pasted articles it seems Gringo you are unwilling to this, this is not BIAD poltics but the economies of every country which gives everyone a living or not you still have failed to say if you woul have allowed the banks to collapse, the Tories have refused to ay this, Cable has refused to states this from what I have read you are bot prepared to answer it, it is not a poltical debate but an economic debate one extreme is to state pure free market it to let them all go the other extreme it total nationalisation, where do you stand ?I have given multiple examples, over various thread of policies that I would have put in place, though you seem to ignore them. I mentioned a true socialist party would have nationalised the banks and sought to to engineer some form of business lending, but you ignore that. I have said that I would support some form of housing reclamation. That's three polcies that I have SPECIFCALLY supported on this thread whilst you claim I have offered none. Whilst I claim that you have failed to criticise brown or the brownite factions in any form and you have SPECIFCALLY failed to admit their culpability. Much like they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts