Jump to content

economic situation is dire


Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter
These ex PM's must be invoicing at a rate of something like £50,000 an hour mustn't they? Especially in the case of Thatcher.

Shhhh - maybe they have good tax avoidance :-)

Its another example of the MP's being on a whole other planet to the other workers of the nation. We cannot claim for £8k TV 's and we can't claim for a new £25k kitchen every 2 years and we certainly can't invoice our ex employers for turning up at the Christmas party and drinking all their booze

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record my opinion on this subject is without a political bias. I don't object to any of them receiving the money. Not Thatcher, not Major and not Blair. I think they deserve every penny and far from the politicians being out of touch it seems some people on this thread who are out of touch with what things cost.

Whether you like them or not, Blair and Thatcher are probably well inside the top 10 most iconic British figures of the 20th century. Again, to put things in context I once attended a corporate do where Shakin' Stevens was paid £40k for an hour set and remember Reg from Corrie being paid £80k to open a supermarket.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have gotten it the wrong way round there. The €100billion "haircut" is money owed to the banks that they will not get back. It's the banks taking the hit there, and the Greek government are getting away with not having to pay back half the money they borrowed.

The banks involved will have to recover that lost money somewhere and it will be down to German and French taxpayers to cover it.

Basically, a load of money has been transfered from German and French taxpayers to the Greek government via the banking system.

I listened to radio 5 live this morning as well :winkold:

(you beat me to the post )

I didn't listen to 5 Live, just read lots of stuff from lots of sources.

surely what actually happened was

To Bankers - Guys, take a 50% cut or lose it all as Greece will default

Bankers - No they won't

To Bankers - Yep, we'll let them default and smile when you get sod all

Bankers - so 50% or sod all, Hmmmm difficult one that, Ok we'll take the 50 % after all as we've effectively written this down by almost that much in our books anyway and it's good PR and god knows we could use some good PR and we'll get it back stitching you up over Italy, Ireland, Spain and Portugal (and possibly France unless they get their act together)

joking aside, I was a strong advocate of the Euro but having seen how some members have treated it I'm exceptionally glad we didn't join and admit I was wrong.

The PIIGS issue hasn't gone away the others are still waiting on the sidelines and if you were any of these other governments wouldn't you be looking at the 50% and thinking "we could do that as well"

Short term elastoplast at nest

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, we should have let the likes of RBS and Lloyds TSB go to the wall

But imagine the carnage after ? Would it be worse than the mess we're in now

Iceland's economy took a major hit when it let its banks fail but it effectively lanced the boil and is now growing again minus the systemic poison created by its banking sector.

Worth noting that they ignored Brown's threats to use anti-terrorist legislation against them and gave their people a referendum on what to do next. The people said "bugger the bankers", the sky didn't fall in, and now they are well on the road to recovery because the transfer of wealth from ordinary people to the financial elite was rejected.

We did the opposite and other poor saps followed our lead. Instead of their banks going broke entire countries are now drowning under a weight of debt created by the greatest heist in financial history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have gotten it the wrong way round there. The €100billion "haircut" is money owed to the banks that they will not get back. It's the banks taking the hit there, and the Greek government are getting away with not having to pay back half the money they borrowed.

Deutsche Bank (among others) up 15% suggests it wasn't such a bad deal for the banks.

The insurance for the new bonds will be underwritten by other European states. I wonder when that will come back to bite us in the arse?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, we should have let the likes of RBS and Lloyds TSB go to the wall

But imagine the carnage after ? Would it be worse than the mess we're in now

Iceland's economy took a major hit when it let its banks fail but it effectively lanced the boil and is now growing again minus the systemic poison created by its banking sector.

Worth noting that they ignored Brown's threats to use anti-terrorist legislation against them and gave their people a referendum on what to do next. The people said "bugger the bankers", the sky didn't fall in, and now they are well on the road to recovery because the transfer of wealth from ordinary people to the financial elite was rejected.

We did the opposite and other poor saps followed our lead. Instead of their banks going broke entire countries are now drowning under a weight of debt created by the greatest heist in financial history.

Well said that man

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, we should have let the likes of RBS and Lloyds TSB go to the wall

But imagine the carnage after ? Would it be worse than the mess we're in now

Iceland's economy took a major hit when it let its banks fail but it effectively lanced the boil and is now growing again minus the systemic poison created by its banking sector.

Worth noting that they ignored Brown's threats to use anti-terrorist legislation against them and gave their people a referendum on what to do next. The people said "bugger the bankers", the sky didn't fall in, and now they are well on the road to recovery because the transfer of wealth from ordinary people to the financial elite was rejected.

We did the opposite and other poor saps followed our lead. Instead of their banks going broke entire countries are now drowning under a weight of debt created by the greatest heist in financial history.

Well said that man

So the UK, which is totally different to Iceland but conveniently ignored, could have easily managed with all of the impacts that hit them?

Read the Wiki article on this

link and then tell me you are still convinced that letting major world wide banks fail would have been a great idea for the UK. Maybe your hatred of Labour is clouding any sense of reality here or your blinkered view from outside of the UK?

Also interesting is the the fact that applying for membership of the EU has apparently aided any sort of recovery they are now seeing, at a time when people like you are calling for us to be out of it?

Also very interesting is that you seem to support the fact that Iceland debt to the UK and Netherlands is just thrown away.

The impact that the strategy taken by the Icelandic Gvmt has had on its citizens cannot be ignored. As this BBC article shows

link

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

The impact that the strategy taken by the Icelandic Gvmt has had on its citizens cannot be ignored. As this BBC article shows

link

I assume the example you are using here is the guy who borrowed far too much money from another country and cant pay it back and may lose everything? Well bad luck - you make your bed you lie in it.

Same goes for the banks, should of let them go rather than the bail out, again if you try to make money investing in high risk investments then if it goes bad then tough. Thats how capatilism should work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The example is straightforward I cannot see a reason why you need to complicate it.

While the country maybe on the surface appearing to be getting back on its feet, the reality is at what cost, because so many of its inhabitants are facing financial ruin which in turn will impact the countries ability to work within any new structure.

Letting the banks go to the wall at the time of the problems would have been a catastrophe for not only the UK but also the world.

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

Link to post
Share on other sites
The example is straightforward I cannot see a reason why you need to complicate it.

While the country maybe on the surface appearing to be getting back on its feet, the reality is at what cost, because so many of its inhabitants are facing financial ruin which in turn will impact the countries ability to work within any new structure.

Letting the banks go to the wall at the time of the problems would have been a catastrophe for not only the UK but also the world.

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

but to a certain degree when you help out the so called needy like greece, they go and default anyway.

so is the solution just to wipe out the debt and say "naughty don't do it again?"

same with the banks, do you just bail them out again when they become unethical in 2030 or whenever they decide to take risks with our money again?

it's all very well helping each other out, but if then they become irresponsible again because they will get help again, then sorry deal with it.

some economies are fast becoming the Pete Doherty's of the global world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
The example is straightforward I cannot see a reason why you need to complicate it.

While the country maybe on the surface appearing to be getting back on its feet, the reality is at what cost, because so many of its inhabitants are facing financial ruin which in turn will impact the countries ability to work within any new structure.

Why complicating it? As i said the example you give is of somebody who spent well above there means and now they are in financial ruin.

Letting the banks go to the wall at the time of the problems would have been a catastrophe for not only the UK but also the world.

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

So on one hand your slapping the bankers for making money (I have some sympathy for that view point) but essentially saying at the same time its alright for people to rack up huge debts and for me to feel sorry for them when they end up in toilet.

It doesnt seem to matter that a lot of these city workers are generating vast amounts of income to the treasurey through business and personal tax and work long hours to earn that money. Yet your advocating those who have spent too much money should just have their debts written off for free. I see that old left wing ideal of "leech as much as you can off those who make money" is alive and well.

Wether its a guy in Iceland or a whole government, if you spend too much money on stuff you cant sit and moan about the situation, its your own fault or in UK PLC case, our fault for letting Gordon loose with the credit card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The example is straightforward I cannot see a reason why you need to complicate it.

While the country maybe on the surface appearing to be getting back on its feet, the reality is at what cost, because so many of its inhabitants are facing financial ruin which in turn will impact the countries ability to work within any new structure.

Letting the banks go to the wall at the time of the problems would have been a catastrophe for not only the UK but also the world.

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

but to a certain degree when you help out the so called needy like greece, they go and default anyway.

so is the solution just to wipe out the debt and say "naughty don't do it again?"

same with the banks, do you just bail them out again when they become unethical in 2030 or whenever they decide to take risks with our money again?

it's all very well helping each other out, but if then they become irresponsible again because they will get help again, then sorry deal with it.

some economies are fast becoming the Pete Doherty's of the global world.

The think is KL, a country like the UK getting impacted with bank's closing would cause far greater problems worldwide than the Icelandic ones.

You are looking at things from a very isolationist point of view, and the world does not work like that now at all. There are key players in the finance world on this planet. The UK is still one and for it's banks to close down would cause problems that so many countries would be affected by.

There is a massive requirement for control over financial sector, not just banks. We see the impact on the man in the street when some arsehole wants to make a few more million and calls out things that affect stock markets etc. The finance sector in the world are the ones at fault, but are probably now so much in control over Gvmts (as we see in the way they help "fund" the Tory party etc) that their power to screw the majority for the benefit of the few can't be controlled

Link to post
Share on other sites

So on one hand your slapping the bankers for making money (I have some sympathy for that view point) but essentially saying at the same time its alright for people to rack up huge debts and for me to feel sorry for them when they end up in toilet.

It doesnt seem to matter that a lot of these city workers are generating vast amounts of income to the treasurey through business and personal tax and work long hours to earn that money. Yet your advocating those who have spent too much money should just have their debts written off for free. I see that old left wing ideal of "leech as much as you can off those who make money" is alive and well.

Wether its a guy in Iceland or a whole government, if you spend too much money on stuff you cant sit and moan about the situation, its your own fault or in UK PLC case, our fault for letting Gordon loose with the credit card.

You are making things up now. Where have I said that amassing massive debts is OK? There is a danger that the obsession with debt clouds any reasonable judgement and is used to mask other policies IMO. Countries, industry, society in general is built on debt has been for many years and that is the way the world works. Killing off the ability to function to keep on top of debts is the flawed way of addressing things IMO

Please do not make out that the finance sector is the victim in all of this, because that is just laughable. Its interesting that profits in the sector are seemingly still running at quite a high level and payments and rewards are still high especially when you compare to average guy who is being hit by cuts and job losses, VAT rises, Inflation etc. I am struggling to see where I have said that debts be written off for free, have you made that up?

Again your blinkered view on blame on Labour makes you fail to see that the world has issues with finance. Interestingly the flip flopping that the Tory party and its supporters do on that subject. We see Gideon who was spouting off the same tune as you pre election blaming Brown but is now trying to state that it's a world problem and not any of his doing - despite the massive problems his ideas are bringing to this country. A different face for each argument. They used to call Cameron the Chameleon, that seems to still be the case

I suppose we go back to the old argument that Brown and Labour were responsible for Iceland, the Euro, the collapse of US banks, the Japanese financial implosion etc etc. Some Tory supporters would have you think that. Shame that they struggle to see what damage the ideologically led attacks from Gideon et al are having on this country and for its future

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

You are making things up now. Where have I said that amassing massive debts is OK? There is a danger that the obsession with debt clouds any reasonable judgement and is used to mask other policies IMO. Countries, industry, society in general is built on debt has been for many years and that is the way the world works. Killing off the ability to function to keep on top of debts is the flawed way of addressing things IMO

Please do not make out that the finance sector is the victim in all of this, because that is just laughable. Its interesting that profits in the sector are seemingly still running at quite a high level and payments and rewards are still high especially when you compare to average guy who is being hit by cuts and job losses, VAT rises, Inflation etc. I am struggling to see where I have said that debts be written off for free, have you made that up?

Again your blinkered view on blame on Labour makes you fail to see that the world has issues with finance. Interestingly the flip flopping that the Tory party and its supporters do on that subject. We see Gideon who was spouting off the same tune as you pre election blaming Brown but is now trying to state that it's a world problem and not any of his doing - despite the massive problems his ideas are bringing to this country. A different face for each argument. They used to call Cameron the Chameleon, that seems to still be the case

I suppose we go back to the old argument that Brown and Labour were responsible for Iceland, the Euro, the collapse of US banks, the Japanese financial implosion etc etc. Some Tory supporters would have you think that. Shame that they struggle to see what damage the ideologically led attacks from Gideon et al are having on this country and for its future

Where to start?

You gave an example as to how Iceland wasnt all that great because of this poor guy with the debts and that we should feel sorry for him. It reminds me of the woman who sued Walmart for falling over her own kid. My point being the example in the article about Iceland is pointless due to the fact he racked up lots of debts by his own fruition and by using him as your example you are therefore defending his actions.

Oh no, Im not making the finance sector to be a victim, i just wonder why you always put the blame there rather than those who spent more and more money they couldnt afford to "keep up with the Jones"? The whole debt culture is built out of wanting to have what others have because they feel they deserve it and it doesnt seem to matter if they are on benefits or in a high paid business job, they feel they should have the same. Perfect left wing ideology....

I agree that it has been a world problem but in the end our issues are at home and Brown should be responsible for raiding the excessive spending, the raiding of the pension funds and the selling of assets on the cheap.

So whilst you keep talking about these idelogical attacks, that is just left wing propoganda as an excuse for the money they have wasted on essentially trying to buy votes. In the end the Tories are just trying to pay off the debts left by the Labour government and not for the first time either.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole debt culture is built out of wanting to have what others have because they feel they deserve it and it doesnt seem to matter if they are on benefits or in a high paid business job, they feel they should have the same. Perfect left wing ideology....

The 'whole debt culture' is what the modern economy (which mainly benefits large corporations and a very, very few people) is based upon, surely?

Without people 'wanting to keep up with the Joneses' (by whatever means - debt, cheating, theft, working hard, gambling, taking risks and winning, taking risks and failing, &c.) or being desperate to ugrade the material things in their life to the latest, short term improvement or having to replace the intentionally disposable (or intentionally not meant to last) consumer items, corporations and very 'wealthy' people wouldn't be in as good a position as they are. It could be argued that the rest benefit because of their wellbeing through all sorts of means (jobs, taxes, pensions and so on) and, whilst they may, wouldn't the argument be that the vast proportion of all of the benefits have gone to the very few?

To focus your anger and the blame on those people who incur the debt as opposed to those who gladly facilitate it, those who promote people getting in to it, those whose prosperity is based on other people getting in to it and so on is quite bizarre.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The example is straightforward I cannot see a reason why you need to complicate it.

While the country maybe on the surface appearing to be getting back on its feet, the reality is at what cost, because so many of its inhabitants are facing financial ruin which in turn will impact the countries ability to work within any new structure.

Letting the banks go to the wall at the time of the problems would have been a catastrophe for not only the UK but also the world.

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

but to a certain degree when you help out the so called needy like greece, they go and default anyway.

so is the solution just to wipe out the debt and say "naughty don't do it again?"

same with the banks, do you just bail them out again when they become unethical in 2030 or whenever they decide to take risks with our money again?

it's all very well helping each other out, but if then they become irresponsible again because they will get help again, then sorry deal with it.

some economies are fast becoming the Pete Doherty's of the global world.

The think is KL, a country like the UK getting impacted with bank's closing would cause far greater problems worldwide than the Icelandic ones.

You are looking at things from a very isolationist point of view, and the world does not work like that now at all. There are key players in the finance world on this planet. The UK is still one and for it's banks to close down would cause problems that so many countries would be affected by.

There is a massive requirement for control over financial sector, not just banks. We see the impact on the man in the street when some arsehole wants to make a few more million and calls out things that affect stock markets etc. The finance sector in the world are the ones at fault, but are probably now so much in control over Gvmts (as we see in the way they help "fund" the Tory party etc) that their power to screw the majority for the benefit of the few can't be controlled

hang on,

nothing to do with tory party as a unique party cuddling up to Banks.

I was talking about Greece and other countries. How is it they got into so much debt?

was it the banks screwing them over? was it them being allowed to borrow more than they could afford?

Whilst I know that tourism is a vastly small aspect of countries GDP, it does seem a bit weird how Greece, Spain and Portugal are big players on the receiving end of this mess.

I know that the UK isn't something we could send to the wall, but surely we have no comeback if the banks screw things up again. we just have to pay them again, and then they pay us back with our own money?

seems a cheecky way of doing business to me. It's certainly not a "tory" problem as you imply. Whatever their involvement other parties in this country and others have had chance to sort the issue out but haven't.

What my issue is that, this bailout (seemingly now the EU are going cap in hand to China for some dosh?) will still not work and further money will go into the pot.

where the hell is this trillion pounds going? wiping out some "bad debt" okay, but where else?

are the banks still gambling and causing more carnage? if so then can the government not force take over them in national interest or something?

I'd get all Russian on their asses and do that. bastards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the old Right wing ideal of "I'm OK and **** all the rest" is alive kicking and doing a jig

Ian, I am always interested in your views, but I cannot agree that the 'ideal' that you describe is exclusive to the right wing. It is just as easily applied to the left side of politics, and was never the more clearer when Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson were running the country. Despite the inevitable denial from VTers of the 'true left wing' this was a Labour government, a left wing party with socialist thinking. They and their fellow members have all come out all right, while the rest of us have been truly **** by the self serving manner in which they governed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I would have voted for the war if the government told me Iraq had WMD and could land missiles in the UK within 45minutes .

Interesting again that Labour supporters only defence of the war is to mention Tories , its as though you have no real belief that bunch of crooks were up to it hence the need to deflect

You really do not have a clue do you?

Cameron supported Blair and the call for war - 2006

Tory leader calls for stronger action against Iraq - 2002

Cameron still supports the war - 2010

Read Hagues comments pre the war and how he claimed actions did not go far enough

Michael Howard tried a marketing spin during his failed election campaign, that some still try to spout now as fact - see you posts earlier. The reality is simple here, the Iraq war was and still is supported by members of both the Labour and the Tory party, some supporters still being the leaders of that party. The only party that was really against it were the Lib Dems.

Don't forget this also which completely blows your flawed argument out of the water

In 2003, Conservatives voted with the Government to send British troops into military action, while all Liberal Democrats MPs opposed the war. Tony Blair relied on Conservative votes to carry the motion authorising conflict, since 139 Labour MPs rebelled against their party’s whip.

well I suppose you didn't deflect and mention the tories

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â