The worst thing about David Cameron

passout

neilmacd wrote:

Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.

So far wrong that it's unbelievable.
The GLOBAL recession was caused by the financial sector intiially in the US givning mortgages and other loans to people who had no way of repaying them and then some gamblers in "the City" packaging up said bad debts and selling them on between banks.
Brown didn't cause the recession and to be totally honest his handling of it has been pretty much correct.
It'll be interesting to see how the doppelganger of Piers Fletcher-Dervish - George Osborne fairs but i'd hazard a guess that he will stuff things up good and proper.

The tories are so far out of touch with reality and always have been that it beggars belief.


Keep reading the crap that's poured out via Newscorp and I'm sure you'll believe that the Tories are the saviour of the country - Murdoch has bought another election in another country

[/quote]


The Tories won because there are lots of 'blue voters' in England and Wales and because people were sick of Labour & Brown. Don't underestimated the public's ability to see through campaigns.

On the economy- Brown was part of problem that pre-dates the global financial crisis, meaning that we had little money in reserve when it did hit. Brown sold our gold reserves whilst they were at a low level - just before the price rocketed. He propped up our economy with public sector spending e.g. he threw money at the NHS in a hurried manner which meant that it actually made very little difference and was wasted. He certainly presided over a housing bubble when in goveernment.

I admitt that he did pretty well when the global crisis, which can't be blamed on him, hit. However I think he'd been mismanaging the economy for years.

finchy

I've said this before and I'll say it again, although I don't know why because it will change absolutely nothing.

Tories and Labour - same economic policies. If the Tories had got into power in 2001 or 2005 we'd have exactly the same problems as we do now.

How many times did you hear a Tory speak out about the housing bubble before it burst?

attica

passout wrote:

I must say though that Browns speech was good and I do feel sorry for him on a personal level.

I thought his speech was very dignified and gracious in defeat.
I don't feel sorry for him, he's probably rather relieved that he can walk away from it all after what looked like a very exhausting election, he really looked like a weight had been lifted yesterday.

The perspective of a few years will tell us if he dealt with the financial crisis well or not. He'll either be remembered as Prudence or the man who made it all happen.

Limburger

neilmacd wrote:

Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.

So far wrong that it's unbelievable.
The GLOBAL recession was caused by the financial sector intiially in the US givning mortgages and other loans to people who had no way of repaying them and then some gamblers in "the City" packaging up said bad debts and selling them on between banks.
Brown didn't cause the recession and to be totally honest his handling of it has been pretty much correct.
It'll be interesting to see how the doppelganger of Piers Fletcher-Dervish - George Osborne fairs but i'd hazard a guess that he will stuff things up good and proper.

The tories are so far out of touch with reality and always have been that it beggars belief.

Keep reading the crap that's poured out via Newscorp and I'm sure you'll believe that the Tories are the saviour of the country - Murdoch has bought another election in another country

[/quote]

Newscorp has nothing to do with it. I live in another country you buffoon, I don't read your newspapers or watch your TV channels. I take my information from independent sources. I am a researcher, it is what I do. You sound like you take all your information from the Labour manifesto.

Calling it a global recession is a way of shifting the responsibility to some faceless entity.
Not every bank on the planet went to the wall and neither has unemployment and debt risen universally.
Countries with good regulation and a chancellor who can count beyond 10 aren't up the swany in the same way the UK is. The Labour government would not admit to how large the funding deficit is let alone have any glimmer of an idea how to reduce it.
Gordon Brown used to make speeches about how he had 'Presided over the fastest growing economy in British history' after promising no more boom and bust. He presided over the largest boom then bust of any UK government ever. Unsustainable growth is not some new concept only conjured up in the last 18 months. A first year economics student could explain to you how this comes about quite simply.
Unfortunately people are small minded and insular so as long as they had a new TV and a conservatory on the never never without any inkling that they might not actually be able to pay for it Labour remained in power.

Now the people who refinanced their homes and indebted them selves enormously to buy a new car every 2 years or go on holiday 3 times a year are royally screwed and they were always going to be. It was just a matter of time. The government kept telling them everything was going to be fine and people believed them.

The clever folk saved their cash and will be fine. Some of us never believed Big Gs' economic forecasts.

rick_chasey

Did a bit of campaigning for the Lib Dems this election.

Can't say I'm entirely comfortable with Lib Dems propping up a Tory gov't.

I'd say I'm anti-tory above a Lib Dem.

I can see why it's occured, but I'm still uneasy.

Very glad I don't need to stand on supporters' doorstep and try and explain that one.

Av it

Rick Chasey wrote:

Did a bit of campaigning for the Lib Dems this election.

Can't say I'm entirely comfortable with Lib Dems propping up a Tory gov't.

I'd say I'm anti-tory above a Lib Dem.

I can see why it's occured, but I'm still uneasy.

Very glad I don't need to stand on supporter's doorstep and try and explain that one.

Youre a Lib Dem? what a surprise

passout

Av it wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Did a bit of campaigning for the Lib Dems this election.

Can't say I'm entirely comfortable with Lib Dems propping up a Tory gov't.

I'd say I'm anti-tory above a Lib Dem.

I can see why it's occured, but I'm still uneasy.

Very glad I don't need to stand on supporter's doorstep and try and explain that one.

Youre a Lib Dem? what a surprise

Correction - he was a Lib Dem, he's a Tory now! Give him a cigar.

Seanos

Av it wrote:

He did a good job regualting the financial services industry too and avoided a potentially nasty and expensive recession with his prudent management.

It's a good job that the Tories spent all their time complaining the City was underregulated and that fund managers and market makers had far too much of a free hand to package and sell complex financal instruments that had the potential to cause serious repercussions throughout the credit market, ultimately leading to a global recession.

Oh sorry, they didn't did they? They spent most of the last 10 years bleating that the financial markets were overregulated and how it was so unfair that City non doms would have to start paying minimal amounts of tax into the exchequer of the country that was allowing them to make vast amounts of money in the first place.

Av it wrote:

Also the level of integrity he showed the country invading Iraq is unlikely to be met by Cameron.

It's a good job that the Tories argued so effectively against invading Iraq then hey? Oh, I'm sorry, they didn't did they?

beverick

bompington wrote:

is that for the first time the PM is younger than me

...and so is his tea boy, sorry that should read deputy.

Bob

SteveR_100Milers

Limburger wrote:

ExeterSimon wrote:

I don't even have to live there but it brings a tear to my eye what happened since 1997.

Yeah....it's been so bad in the UK since '97 that it's no wonder the Tories swept to power in '01 and '05. And that landslide victory last Thursday! Wow!!!

If Cameron can admit that this country is better off now that it was 10 years ago (as he did in that speach outside No. 10) then maybe the Tory press will back off, look at the facts and maybe, just maybe, admit that we are better off.

Then the tabloid reading Tory sheep can follow....

Are you quite alright?

What is it about Politics that makes people so forgetful. Recession? Unemployment? Wars?
None of this ringing any bells?
How about we go back in history. Thatcher got vilified for closing mines that lost money, not a situation she could even control because of much cheaper coal coming from Siberia.
Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.
Oh and on the mines (which is what tired Labour supporters fall back on when they have no other reasonable recourse) Labour closed more mines that the conservatives.
Considering Labour is supposed to be a party for the working people they spent the last 13 years supporting big business buy outs of British firms with the jobs then exported to somewhere cheaper.

Two things - if you don't live here then p*** oppff with your advice! This is a private country for British people only (and that currently includes all of the UK, not johnny foreigner ex pats like you )

Secondly on a serious note, if blaming NL for the recent recession, credit bubble, and unemployment isn't short term slective memory that wtf is?? If you bother to check the figures most people never had it so good for the most part of the last decade, and you cannot blame western governments, let alone one govt for what happned in the financial markets. Banks wanted to lend money they didnt have to people who could not afford it. So what do you want - intervention (state control?) or freedom for business and the public to m ake its own decisions. Now tell me if I am wrong but socialism and redistribution of wealth has often resulted in greater state control, not less! Your party would argue for less control, so make your mind up before resorting to old skool slagging off!
And no, you can't come back in we don't want you here!

SteveR_100Milers

Av it wrote:

neilmacd wrote:

Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.

So far wrong that it's unbelievable.
The GLOBAL recession was caused by the financial sector intiially in the US givning mortgages and other loans to people who had no way of repaying them and then some gamblers in "the City" packaging up said bad debts and selling them on between banks.
Brown didn't cause the recession and to be totally honest his handling of it has been pretty much correct.
It'll be interesting to see how the doppelganger of Piers Fletcher-Dervish - George Osborne fairs but i'd hazard a guess that he will stuff things up good and proper.

The tories are so far out of touch with reality and always have been that it beggars belief.

Keep reading the crap that's poured out via Newscorp and I'm sure you'll believe that the Tories are the saviour of the country - Murdoch has bought another election in another country

I believe he was chancelor or PM ultimatley resposncible for the Financial services sector including the manner in which they conduct themselves in for the entire period before, leading up to, during and after the problems. At what point did you decide he didnt cause or contribute through negligence arrogance and lack of intelect to the problem?[/quote]

Banks were private businesse that's why, and free to lend to any pilock that would take it. The Tories have always been the party of self control and self judgement advocating less state intervention, so who do you really support? And no the FSA is not govt controlled, and rightly so in our free market economy, though personally I'd be happioer with much greater levels of nationalisation.

Radioactiveman

And Cameron is a RLJer

Limburger

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

Limburger wrote:

ExeterSimon wrote:

I don't even have to live there but it brings a tear to my eye what happened since 1997.

Yeah....it's been so bad in the UK since '97 that it's no wonder the Tories swept to power in '01 and '05. And that landslide victory last Thursday! Wow!!!

If Cameron can admit that this country is better off now that it was 10 years ago (as he did in that speach outside No. 10) then maybe the Tory press will back off, look at the facts and maybe, just maybe, admit that we are better off.

Then the tabloid reading Tory sheep can follow....

Are you quite alright?

What is it about Politics that makes people so forgetful. Recession? Unemployment? Wars?
None of this ringing any bells?
How about we go back in history. Thatcher got vilified for closing mines that lost money, not a situation she could even control because of much cheaper coal coming from Siberia.
Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.
Oh and on the mines (which is what tired Labour supporters fall back on when they have no other reasonable recourse) Labour closed more mines that the conservatives.
Considering Labour is supposed to be a party for the working people they spent the last 13 years supporting big business buy outs of British firms with the jobs then exported to somewhere cheaper.

Two things - if you don't live here then p*** oppff with your advice! This is a private country for British people only (and that currently includes all of the UK, not johnny foreigner ex pats like you )

Secondly on a serious note, if blaming NL for the recent recession, credit bubble, and unemployment isn't short term slective memory that wtf is?? If you bother to check the figures most people never had it so good for the most part of the last decade, and you cannot blame western governments, let alone one govt for what happned in the financial markets. Banks wanted to lend money they didnt have to people who could not afford it. So what do you want - intervention (state control?) or freedom for business and the public to m ake its own decisions. Now tell me if I am wrong but socialism and redistribution of wealth has often resulted in greater state control, not less! Your party would argue for less control, so make your mind up before resorting to old skool slagging off!
And no, you can't come back in we don't want you here!

It says British on my passport, I can vote in your elections too.
I am just (wisely) waiting for it to be safe to return to the UK.

People never had it so good, as you put it, because they were spending money that wasn't theirs given to them by banks whose money it wasn't to give and allowed and overseen by the deregulation of the banking sector by Labour.

The conservatives aren't my party BTW although people seem to want to paint me as such. I don't think there is a party in the land that could fathom my views which are an amalgam of liberal/socialist/communist/conservative/Monster raving looney and even more extreme besides.

verloren

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

If you bother to check the figures most people never had it so good for the most part of the last decade

Actually if you bother to check the figures most people *spent* like they'd never had it so good. Much, though not all, of that spending was based on the increase in value of property, an increase which was based on little more than a shared assumption that property values will continue to go up.

stonehouse

Thatcher destroyed the manufacturing industry of this country

I think you will find that trade unions had their fair share in that matter.

passout

ExeterSimon wrote:

I don't even have to live there but it brings a tear to my eye what happened since 1997.

Yeah....it's been so bad in the UK since '97 that it's no wonder the Tories swept to power in '01 and '05. And that landslide victory last Thursday! Wow!!!

If Cameron can admit that this country is better off now that it was 10 years ago (as he did in that speach outside No. 10) then maybe the Tory press will back off, look at the facts and maybe, just maybe, admit that we are better off.

Then the tabloid reading Tory sheep can follow....

Tabloid reading sheep?! As a Tory voter I have some questions:

1) If everyone who read a tabloid voted Tory, then why have Labour been in power for 13 years?
2) Have tabloids have never supported Labour? I think you'll find........
3) Do you assume that all educated and reasonable people must be left of centre?
4) Re- state of the country: don't other things outside of government (e.g. world economics) dictate the state of the country in reality?


I eagerly await your reply.

attica

passout wrote:

1) If everyone who read a tabloid voted Tory, then why have Labour been in power for 13 years?
2) Have tabloids have never supported Labour? I think you'll find........

I think it was the tabloids who all switched allegiance, hence the use of the word sheep.

The implication is that tabloid readers in general voted as they were told not that the well educated are left leaning

Av it

Does that mean all those lefty liberal tits spouting recieved wisdom and slagging off the daily mail have their own tabloid to blindly follow?

Pross

Only The Sun has switched allegiances (twice) the others have traditionally been right of centre as have some of the "quality" papers. Considering the numbers buying right of centre papers even during The Sun's New Labour era I suspect Labour wouldn't have been in Government on the above "thick voters doing what the tabloids tell them" scenario.

Chris James

Av it wrote:

Yes I prefer the one eyed scottish goon too, ......

I see why Teresa May said the Conservatives were viewed as the 'nasty party'....

Sirius631

Now he'll be jumping red lights in a posh car with police outriders.

Clever Pun

Splottboy wrote:

Wudnt you grope it too?

I know I....shoot, ere comes the Mrs, Bye...

is it just me or does she look too much like a tranny???

Nothing wrong with that... hardly traditional tory behaviour though

verylonglegs

Chris James wrote:

Av it wrote:

Yes I prefer the one eyed scottish goon too, ......

I see why Teresa May said the Conservatives were viewed as the 'nasty party'....

To be fair you'll find such nasty comments from either party. I've lost count of the times I've heard or read people, including some on this forum, refer to the Conservatives as toffs, rich tw@ts etc. and for some reason thinking that having a bit of money in your pocket makes you fair game for abuse.

finchy

verylonglegs wrote:

Chris James wrote:

Av it wrote:

Yes I prefer the one eyed scottish goon too, ......

I see why Teresa May said the Conservatives were viewed as the 'nasty party'....

To be fair you'll find such nasty comments from either party. I've lost count of the times I've heard or read people, including some on this forum, refer to the Conservatives as toffs, rich tw@ts etc. and for some reason thinking that having a bit of money in your pocket makes you fair game for abuse.

Implication of toffs etc is that politicians born into wealth, sent to Eton, Cambridge and then onto a highly paid job before becoming an MP wouldn't really understand what life is like for many Britons.

Do you remember Norman Tebbit appearing on Question Time a few years back to oppose the minimum wage by saying that if he'd negotiated a wage with his employer, he'd resent government interference? That's the sort of out-of-touch image that Labour want to create around the Conservatives.

It's sad though that we never just get a straightforward discussion of policies in this country, rather than resorting to this type of name-calling.

guilliano

It would be nice if things like Prime Minister's question time didn't resort to name calling and general slagging off. The fact is that the politics that the general public see is the so-called leaders of the country having playground squabbles, or the party whips telling the MPs which way to vote without allowing them to think of their constituents needs or views on "Party Policy"

What the country needs is a government that's actually answerable to the people they represent at the time they represent them, both nationally and locally.

Personally I am glad GB has gone. I don't think he was a good PM and as chancellor he ensured that the banks presided over a self destructive programme of gambling with money they didn't have (by the way, gambling on credit is illegal for residents of the UK).

The problem we now have is that the people and companies that don't like the taxation levels necessarily thrust upon them to revive the country are the same people and companies who can happily afford to bugger off elsewhere and pay lower rates in whatever country will happily have them while they continue to operate here without being UK based.

neilmacd

Av it wrote:

neilmacd wrote:

Brown created the biggest financial bubble in British history and when it burst he used your money to bail failed organisations out.

So far wrong that it's unbelievable.
The GLOBAL recession was caused by the financial sector intiially in the US givning mortgages and other loans to people who had no way of repaying them and then some gamblers in "the City" packaging up said bad debts and selling them on between banks.
Brown didn't cause the recession and to be totally honest his handling of it has been pretty much correct.
It'll be interesting to see how the doppelganger of Piers Fletcher-Dervish - George Osborne fairs but i'd hazard a guess that he will stuff things up good and proper.

The tories are so far out of touch with reality and always have been that it beggars belief.

Keep reading the crap that's poured out via Newscorp and I'm sure you'll believe that the Tories are the saviour of the country - Murdoch has bought another election in another country

I believe he was chancelor or PM ultimatley resposncible for the Financial services sector including the manner in which they conduct themselves in for the entire period before, leading up to, during and after the problems. At what point did you decide he didnt cause or contribute through negligence arrogance and lack of intelect to the problem?[/quote]

Fact of the matter is the recession was kickstarted by the American banks lending to people with no income which the British banks then contributed to through their speculating on these toxic assets, Brown may have had a part in terms of his role in things as chancellor but the shite the topry press which let's face it is 95% of the media in this country are trying to solely blame him for it which is wrong on every level.

shouldbeinbed

Limburger wrote:

For your information I have never read a tabloid in my life and I am not a Conservative supporter, I am just closer to them that any warmongering failures.

You are aware that Cameron personally voted for the current conflicts and the Conservatives a a party supported the lLabour administration in the war decision and effort aren't you.

326 seats = success. The conservatives got?????

maybe a bit of reading of something news based might help

guilliano

I do think that the media (the BBC and their business editor Robert Peston in particular) were very prevalent in the collapse of Northern Rock for reporting their loans from the BOE as "emergency loans". They were not as stated "emergency loans" but seeking lending from an alternative source as the interest rates offered by other banks (which they had always used to fund mortgages) were deemed to be too high compared to previous rates. They were simply acting as they always had, but the reporting of the changed source of loans and the manner of the reporting caused the removal of the capital which they had in their coffers to secure the loans.

This just highlights a major problem with the world economy at the moment..... it is reported on in a far too sensationalistic way to ever be stable and the media will always run it as they believe knowledge is power, but the knowledge they offer will always sensationalise things to sell the "news" for profit

bagpusscp

I think this country and its people need to relearn the old principle of do not spend what you cannot afford.
Some of the Labour goverment fiscal policy was built on what taxes they hoped were going collect.With the World slump this did not happen.Don't just blame the banks.As already mentioned on this thread there were many factors a work/play.Clearly the deregulation of the UK based banks led to the uncontrolled risk taking overseas.Also 120% mortgages lent on the basis of what something maybe worth further down the line is maddness.Grossly over inflated house prices here in the UK had to be propped up {Quantitative easing},anything else would of made Greece and its financial crisis look minor.
Supermarkets becoming Banks {We have yet to see Banks becoming supermareks!}
Gordon Brown clearly stated the days of boom and bust were over .Clearly they were not.He could never control one basic human factor here .GREED.
I really feel for the young of this nation for the £160 billion and rising national debt will take more than a generation to repay.
The proposed saving of £5 to 6 billion are chicken feed .
Maybe the low pound will help exports and encourage tourists to come here.
A new deal style {Roosevelt} thinking is required.
Lets see what Dave and Nick can pull out the hat.Time will tell.

Chris James

verylonglegs wrote:

Chris James wrote:

Av it wrote:

Yes I prefer the one eyed scottish goon too, ......

I see why Teresa May said the Conservatives were viewed as the 'nasty party'....

To be fair you'll find such nasty comments from either party. I've lost count of the times I've heard or read people, including some on this forum, refer to the Conservatives as toffs, rich tw@ts etc. and for some reason thinking that having a bit of money in your pocket makes you fair game for abuse.

It was using Brown's eye injury as some form of abuse that I thought that unpleasant..