ianrobo1 Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 Maybe their 2010 election campaign slogan will be " We only cost you £800bn ...but it could have been worse and the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? you keep throwing out the 3800bn figure but do you not accept without that the banks would have collapsed are suggesting the UK government allowed RBS to collapse because no one else was going to rescue it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deko1970 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Maybe the new tactic is to preach that the end is nigh then hope people are grateful when the sky doesn't fall in? Yes and it will no doubt be down to Brown's magnificant handling of the whole situation that will have lead us all away from the abyss???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? I suspect that would actually be a real vote winner based on current feeling towards the banks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 no one could say he is wrongBut it does slightly contradict the short and shallow downturn that was forecast by his colleague darling way back in november. The majority of commentators disagreed with them but the blinkered approach and so any revenue and expenditure forecasts delivered in the PBR are nothing more than candy floss. Their forecasts are surviving barely 8 weeks before being revealed as flawed, and yet they want people to trust their forecasts 6+ years into the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 At least some of those to blame are willing to say sorry and own up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? I suspect that would actually be a real vote winner based on current feeling towards the banks and the consequences of allowing them to collapse would be ? the UK government guanrtees all the deposists , how much would that have been how much do moneyt did they owe other banks causing them to collapse ? simply there was no other choice but to do what was done, anything else and I dread to think where we would have been now .. but right wing free market docrtine (the one that failed us ) dictates the weak shall fall no matter what teh consequences are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 At least some of those to blame are willing to say sorry and own up Yeah, right. I've seen more contrition from a schoolchild caught nicking an extra helping of pudding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 we are dealing with the Spin party after all With a marketing man at the helm and a record of spin your double standards is amazing Tony Osborne's comments were ill advised at the time, something a lot of people said. Spinny Cameron yesterday and his task force, all "me me me" rhetoric. I see Tony you still fail to say what the Tory party should / would have done, again no policy marketing spin Had an interesting chat with an ex-pat yesterday. Apparently the Tory party have been on a recruiting drive in Spain and the Canaries etc basically begging people for money and trying to get monies for hosting political events. How official this is was debatable but the thought was that they could get people on board with a few pennies. The feeling though amongst the ex-pat community there was Bollox to them as they would get very little from a Tory gvmt, which was somewhat interesting - seems the Lib Dems were the vote of many So the challenge is there now for the Tory party say what you will and would do - cos at the moment its tedious from them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 At least some of those to blame are willing to say sorry and own up Yeah, right. I've seen more contrition from a schoolchild caught nicking an extra helping of pudding. OK - at least they trie / pretended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Their forecasts are surviving barely 8 weeks before being revealed as flawed, and yet they want people to trust their forecasts 6+ years into the future. and again then - what would / should they do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? I suspect that would actually be a real vote winner based on current feeling towards the banks A typical Tory comment there Tony - bollox to the consequences of a failed banking sector - especially in a country that lost so much of its industry by the actions of that wonderful caring person so loved by many Tory party faithful, including Cameron and Osborne - good old Mrs T I'm OK Jack - should be the Tory political message Looks like Harry Enfield should start to clear off some of his old material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 and the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? you keep throwing out the 3800bn figure but do you not accept without that the banks would have collapsed are suggesting the UK government allowed RBS to collapse because no one else was going to rescue it Ian it's obvious mate, the Tory ideal is bollox to the man in the street, so what if banks collapse it wont affect the typical Tory voter too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ian(Drat), what do think of Balls' comments in light of the moaning at Osborne for saying considerably less last November? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 simply there was no other choice but to do what was done Perhaps. So, now that it is done, the future needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. It doesn't help that most of the 'I'm very sorry (for my shareholders and colleagues) non mea culpa' session has revolved around a 'we were victims of events' and 'hindsight is a glorious thing' and the only problem with our risk strategy was that the arse fell out of where we invested (other people's) money - a little like a broke gambler blaming the slow horses rather than realising there was any problem with his betting strategy. Yet we are still told that the future (even in the short term) of banking (and even those on the taxpayer IV drip) is best dealt with on a thoroughly commercial basis and best driven forward by the same group of people who have just said that they were very sorry for what happened but it wasn't their fault. So why trust them to make the right calls, now? Why pay big cash for the 'cream' who continued to make dodgy calls even when on the downward slope? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 and the Tories would be that they allowed RBS and HBOS to collapse ? you keep throwing out the 3800bn figure but do you not accept without that the banks would have collapsed are suggesting the UK government allowed RBS to collapse because no one else was going to rescue it Ian it's obvious mate, the Tory ideal is bollox to the man in the street, so what if banks collapse it wont affect the typical Tory voter too much. actually Ian if the banls collapsed it would be the middle class who would suffer the most how many does RBS employ, is it over 100k a good number middle class. Tony, Richard and the the Tory party dare not say 'price worth paying because the poltical consequences would be grave but they provide no other viable alternative so I am left to guess at what they would have done in the situation and now ? and the past record is there, right wing free market policy dictates the weak should fall and blow the consequences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 simply there was no other choice but to do what was done Perhaps. So, now that it is done, the future needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. It doesn't help that most of the 'I'm very sorry (for my shareholders and colleagues) non mea culpa' session has revolved around a 'we were victims of events' and 'hindsight is a glorious thing' and the only problem with our risk strategy was that the arse fell out of where we invested (other people's) money - a little like a broke gambler blaming the slow horses rather than realising there was any problem with his betting strategy. Yet we are still told that the future (even in the short term) of banking (and even those on the taxpayer IV drip) is best dealt with on a thoroughly commercial basis and best driven forward by the same group of people who have just said that they were very sorry for what happened but it wasn't their fault. So why trust them to make the right calls, now? Why pay big cash for the 'cream' who continued to make dodgy calls even when on the downward slope? I agree but I see little choice but to go with them, there is no unfortunatly no alternative Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I'm OK Jack - should be the Tory political messagelLike many political policies, the I'm alright jack approach has worn both red and blue colours in the recent past as can be evidenced by the posts of supporters of both parties on other recent threads such as the house crash one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I agree but I see little choice but to go with them, there is no unfortunatly no alternative Gardner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I agree but I see little choice but to go with them, there is no unfortunatly no alternative Really? Hows about enlisting those dissenting voices (those people who were given the boot from or left senior positions in the banking environment over the last few years) and seeing what their proposals were? Rather than asking for help from the people who couldn't see shit coming - would it be wise to ask for the assistance of those who could? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I agree but I see little choice but to go with them, there is no unfortunatly no alternative Really? Hows about enlisting those dissenting voices (those people who were given the boot from or left senior positions in the banking environment over the last few years) and seeing what their proposals were? Rather than asking for help from the people who couldn't see shit coming - would it be wise to ask for the assistance of those who could? I don;t think anyone involved with city has any right to say they are right or worng, all were a part of it there may have been a few siren voices in the past but the number was limited. however I think for certyain a grand coalition of people are needed to work their way through but you would never get that to work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts