Waaay OT: Brown - what am I missing?

kurako

MatHammond wrote:

wildmoustache wrote:

To be honest they all seem complicit in spinning the same old lies and its all a bit depressing. One thing I am sure of is that George Osborne will be a disaster as chancellor. I give him months not years in that job.

+1 from me

+1 from David too. LOL!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 060479.ece

Mr_Cellophane

Always Tyred wrote:

]Is there a party you would vote for without a PR team, which aren't a tad two faced and who don't stage manage TV appearances?

Please let me know and I'll see if there is a candidate local to me.

BNP for you then :P

bigmat

wildmoustache wrote:

From the perspective of Mrs Duffy, the large Eastern European influx is a Labour f'up, and she is right that it could have been avoided through transitional arrangements (which Mr Cameron proposes). Remember that many such people came here to work because it was a relatively easy place to come where there wer jobs ... we didn't have to have an open door.

Absolutely, but why was all the rhetoric about "caps" on immigration then? What the hell is that all about?! A cap on the 20% of immigration that hasn't really changed that much over the last few years, but lets do nothing about the bit that people are up in arms about?! (FWIW I'm not in the anti-immigrant camp, although I do think the situation could've been managed better - making the UK an easier place to come than most of its comparators within the EU was asking for trouble).

wildmoustache

I don't have high hopes for Osborne either, though he'd have to try very very hard indeed to have a worse record than Brown at managing the economy.

the man engineered the biggest housing bubble in history that brought down the economy

and sh@gged the public finances and locked us into high taxation as far as the eye can see.

I think the UK will pay dearly for this in a global economy that's going to get a whole lot more competitive over the next 20 years.

Mr_Cellophane

MrsDuffy wrote:

You can’t say anything about the immigrants because you’re saying you’re – but all these eastern Europeans coming in, where are they flocking from?

Then Brown proved her right by calling her a bigot for mentioning immigration.

bigmat

wildmoustache wrote:

I don't have high hopes for Osborne either, though he'd have to try very very hard indeed to have a worse record than Brown at managing the economy.

the man engineered the biggest housing bubble in history that brought down the economy

and sh@gged the public finances and locked us into high taxation as far as the eye can see.

I think the UK will pay dearly for this in a global economy that's going to get a whole lot more competitive over the next 20 years.

Thing is, the Tories would have done exactly the same re the housing bubble etc. would they not? Nu-Lab's error has been overspending when the going was good, but then you have to look at that in the context of the lack of investment over the preceding 16 years. Had we had another 16 years of that the country would already have been on its knees, so massive investment was needed. Its all about balance though - its hard to back a party that has underperformed so chronically in recent years, but I do sense they have the most coherent and thought out policy for managing the economic situation we are now in. To be fair, Brown and Darling have so far managed the recession pretty well. We shall see what a change of government brings. I think after 13 years a change is generally a good thing, I just have even less faith in the alternatives than I do in the status quo!

Eau Rouge

MatHammond wrote:

Its a load of old b******s really, like most of the parties' policies. 80% of immigration is within the EU and none of the parties propose doing anything about that, not even prepared to mention it (until Clegg, finally, did last night). Its this immigration that the man on the street seems to be concerned about - see Mrs Duffy's comments - and all 3 parties refused to address it.

What's to address? Internal EU immigration can't be changed anymore than Canute could stop the tide coming in. They come here, create jobs, pay taxes, spend money in our economy. We send our retired and criminal to Spain where they are less of a drain on our resources. Simples.

kurako

The housing bubble was driven by loose monetary policy around the world. You had a combination of an unusually low Fed Fund rate and Far Eastern governments buying up all the debt they could get their hands on in order to keep their currencies pegged to the dollar. There was way too much speculation based on readily available cheap credit.

How about the exit from the ERM and 15% interest rates? That was a conservative governement if I remember rightly.

bigmat

Eau Rouge wrote:

MatHammond wrote:

Its a load of old b******s really, like most of the parties' policies. 80% of immigration is within the EU and none of the parties propose doing anything about that, not even prepared to mention it (until Clegg, finally, did last night). Its this immigration that the man on the street seems to be concerned about - see Mrs Duffy's comments - and all 3 parties refused to address it.

What's to address? Internal EU immigration can't be changed anymore than Canute could stop the tide coming in. They come here, create jobs, pay taxes, spend money in our economy. We send our retired and criminal to Spain where they are less of a drain on our resources. Simples.

Well it could be changed, I'm sure UKIP and the BNP would happily change it! My point is the lack of clarity from all 3 leaders. The immigration "issue" is about EU movement, rather than non-EU immigration. Why is nobody prepared to ackowledge that?

bigmat

Kurako wrote:

The housing bubble was driven by loose monetary policy around the world. You had a combination of an unusually low Fed Fund rate and Far Eastern governments buying up all the debt they could get their hands on in order to keep their currencies pegged to the dollar. There was way too much speculation based on readily available cheap credit.

How about the exit from the ERM and 15% interest rates? That was a conservative governement if I remember rightly.

Lets not ask who was Lamont's special adviser at the time, eh? :roll:

wildmoustache

MatHammond wrote:

wildmoustache wrote:

I don't have high hopes for Osborne either, though he'd have to try very very hard indeed to have a worse record than Brown at managing the economy.

the man engineered the biggest housing bubble in history that brought down the economy

and sh@gged the public finances and locked us into high taxation as far as the eye can see.

I think the UK will pay dearly for this in a global economy that's going to get a whole lot more competitive over the next 20 years.

Thing is, the Tories would have done exactly the same re the housing bubble etc. would they not? Nu-Lab's error has been overspending when the going was good, but then you have to look at that in the context of the lack of investment over the preceding 16 years. Had we had another 16 years of that the country would already have been on its knees, so massive investment was needed. Its all about balance though - its hard to back a party that has underperformed so chronically in recent years, but I do sense they have the most coherent and thought out policy for managing the economic situation we are now in. To be fair, Brown and Darling have so far managed the recession pretty well. We shall see what a change of government brings. I think after 13 years a change is generally a good thing, I just have even less faith in the alternatives than I do in the status quo!

On housing- they quite possibly would, though it doesn't make them guilty of it. On the public finances I very much doubt they would have. Brown did and didn't do a number of things that have been particularly damaging.

I'd disagree massive investment was needed ... I'd put it more that targeted increases in investment coupled wih reductions in other areas (e.g. publc sector pensions) would have been sensible.

Brown and Darling have done OK in the recession. But the depth of it is a consequence of their prior mismanagement. Moreover they've made bad decisions they bizarrely want to take credit for ... e.g. destroying Lloyds TSB by pushing for a shotgun marriage with crocked HBOS.

kurako

I don't see much that the Tory's would have done differently during the credit bubble.

The housing market rose way too fast on the back of mortgages that were far too cheap and too easy to get hold off. It could probably have done with more regulation but last I checked the Torys aren't too big on government interference. Lets not forget all the people who were jumping on the buy-to-let bandwagon and going cock-a-hoop at how much their property was going up in value. A lot of those would be the traditional Conservative voting type.

The credit card industry was also wreckless and exploitative. Seemingly endless periods of 0% interest just encouraged people to take on more and more unsecured debt. Again, more regulation not less would have been the order of the day.

The idea that government is inherently evil and the markets know best should have been discredited a long time ago.

Eau Rouge

MatHammond wrote:

Well it could be changed, I'm sure UKIP and the BNP would happily change it! My point is the lack of clarity from all 3 leaders. The immigration "issue" is about EU movement, rather than non-EU immigration. Why is nobody prepared to ackowledge that?

Because nobody in the UK seems to have the slightest interest in understanding anything about how the EU actually really works, and to dare mention it as anything other than "it's awful" gets you labeled as a looney and could be the biggest election-losing gaff ever.

You can't change it. You'd be foolish to try,it's been GOOD for the UK, and on more than just economic grounds. The only way to change it is to convince the rest of Europe that what they know to be a good idea really isn't, or to leave the EU, which is even more of a non-starter than most people think it is, and again, amazingly stupid. Not being in the EU just means you have to deal with the same rules as now only you no longer get a say in what they are.

Kieran_Burns

Mr_Cellophane wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

]Is there a party you would vote for without a PR team, which aren't a tad two faced and who don't stage manage TV appearances?

Please let me know and I'll see if there is a candidate local to me.

BNP for you then :P

Or better still: http://www.thecep.org.uk/wordpress/