Join the Labour Party and save your country!

shortfall · May 2017

https://youtu.be/vcpM1VH2LCY

Enjoy.

bbrap · May 2017

Shortfall wrote:

https://youtu.be/vcpM1VH2LCY

Enjoy.

The gift that keeps on giving :P

Stevo_666 · May 2017

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Dav1d1 wrote:

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/diane-abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/

It's here and cringe worthy hearing she can't put a straight sentence together, first it's 10,000 than it's 250,000 out of the same money which labour has already pledged elsewhere.

Most Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

Whatever your politics are, it's a bit harsh to tar all non right wingers based on the crap that Abbott bilges out.

OK, rephrased to exclude the lefties who might have half an idea

mamba80 · May 2017

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

I ve a feeling that history wont judge the tories kindly for wrecking the UK economy (as leading brexitiers have already told us) as we come out of the EU and beyond but then its only other peoples money.

We ve also had 2 tax policies overturned after press campaigns, hardly strong and stable... lol.

Stevo_666 · May 2017

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

I ve a feeling that history wont judge the tories kindly for wrecking the UK economy (as leading brexitiers have already told us) as we come out of the EU and beyond but then its only other peoples money.

We ve also had 2 tax policies overturned after press campaigns, hardly strong and stable... lol.

You're assuming they will. Many will disagree.

Unlike the case of Labour who have actually wrecked the economy a couple of times now - the last two times they were in power. That's a 100% strike rate - on that basis, what do you reckon would happen if they get in again?

mamba80 · May 2017

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

I ve a feeling that history wont judge the tories kindly for wrecking the UK economy (as leading brexitiers have already told us) as we come out of the EU and beyond but then its only other peoples money.

We ve also had 2 tax policies overturned after press campaigns, hardly strong and stable... lol.

You're assuming they will. Many will disagree.

Unlike the case of Labour who have actually wrecked the economy a couple of times now - the last two times they were in power. That's a 100% strike rate - on that basis, what do you reckon would happen if they get in again?

Well, given the lack of investment in education, nhs, our local services, people are voting for 5 years of the same, when 35k nurses use payday loans and 1000s use food banks, patients treated in corridors and die there, can you say that we ve an economy that works for all? real wages are on avg some 14% lower than they were in 2008?

the GFC was nt Labours fault as well you know, a socialist gov putting the country into massive debt to prop up a failed capitalist system....... and of course, once the tories got in, they promptly ditched most of their fiscal rules and adopted Labours ones

yeah likely to have a few more tax rises post june 8th thats for sure but unlike Labours, they ll raise taxes for the avg earner, whilst keeping CG and IHT cuts......

our poor productivity is something the tories have done zilch about, if the french with a 35hr week, can produce in 4 days what takes us 5, then something is v wrong.

as to your Q, the brexit deal Labour would negotiate would be a lot less damaging to our eco than the one May will inflict on us, i ll assume when you go in for a pay rise request, you insult your boss and tell him that unless he gives you what you want you ll be a bloody difficult man to deal with? and no doubt it works really well :roll:

Abbotts interview was awful no doubt but in the previous ones she got all the figures correct, to me, she had some sort tempprary of mental health issue, the real debate is do we need more Police generally OR a more targeted approach ie more AR and more traffic police?

bbrap · May 2017

I can't believe anyone thinks Abbotts mental health issues are temporary.

rjsterry · May 2017

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

I ve a feeling that history wont judge the tories kindly for wrecking the UK economy (as leading brexitiers have already told us) as we come out of the EU and beyond but then its only other peoples money.

We ve also had 2 tax policies overturned after press campaigns, hardly strong and stable... lol.

You're assuming they will. Many will disagree.

Unlike the case of Labour who have actually wrecked the economy a couple of times now - the last two times they were in power. That's a 100% strike rate - on that basis, what do you reckon would happen if they get in again?

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession.

If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

tangled_metal · May 2017

I can't believe that anyone thinks there's a better outcome possible from either side. May's hard Brexit or Labour's likely cave in. There just isn't a better option to be had from Brexit in the short to medium term.

wallace_and_gromit · May 2017

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

rick_chasey · May 2017

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

kingstongraham · May 2017

mamba80 wrote:

Abbotts interview was awful no doubt but in the previous ones she got all the figures correct, to me, she had some sort tempprary of mental health issue, the real debate is do we need more Police generally OR a more targeted approach ie more AR and more traffic police?

As soon as she got it wrong (£300,000 instead of £300m), she couldn't work out what she had got wrong and started making numbers up at random rather than sticking to the agreed made up numbers. It is important (as well as a debate about police numbers), because she wants to be home secretary.

Anyone who says the interview is embarrassing for her clearly hasn't been paying attention - she is unembarrassable.

wallace_and_gromit · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

Eh? Brown gets the blame for the UK's banking crisis as he was in charge of the UK's financial system regulatory regime for the previous 10 years.

rick_chasey · May 2017

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

Eh? Brown gets the blame for the UK's banking crisis as he was in charge of the UK's financial system regulatory regime for the previous 10 years.

Do you hold equal blame for all other chancellors who were in charge of developed countries in that period, that was a result, mainly, of being closely connected to badly sold US mortgages?

kingstongraham · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

Eh? Brown gets the blame for the UK's banking crisis as he was in charge of the UK's financial system regulatory regime for the previous 10 years.

Do you hold equal blame for all other chancellors who were in charge of developed countries in that period, that was a result, mainly, of being closely connected to badly sold US mortgages?

Canada managed to dodge it.

rick_chasey · May 2017

KingstonGraham wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

Eh? Brown gets the blame for the UK's banking crisis as he was in charge of the UK's financial system regulatory regime for the previous 10 years.

Do you hold equal blame for all other chancellors who were in charge of developed countries in that period, that was a result, mainly, of being closely connected to badly sold US mortgages?

Canada managed to dodge it.

True true.

Though, it's in the press at the moment for this:

surrey_commuter · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

I think the key difference is that the early 80s and early 90s recessions weren't accompanied by banking crises and so were relatively easily recovered from.

Who gets the blame for the Wall Street crash?

British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin or British Prime Minister Ramsey MacDonald?

Eh? Brown gets the blame for the UK's banking crisis as he was in charge of the UK's financial system regulatory regime for the previous 10 years.

Do you hold equal blame for all other chancellors who were in charge of developed countries in that period, that was a result, mainly, of being closely connected to badly sold US mortgages?

Canada managed to dodge it.

True true.

Though, it's in the press at the moment for this:

Now I am confused - is Carney a genius for safely navigating the GFC or the clown who set them on the path to the above charts

bompington · May 2017

Dunno, but he was the guy smart enough to get out of the country before anyone pointed the finger

rick_chasey · May 2017

It still boggles my mind that people blame UK politicians for a GFC that eminanted in the US.

It boggles the mind that people think that the US having a monumental banking liquidity problem is something UK politicians should have foreseen.

As if a GFC is foreseeable.

surrey_commuter · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

It still boggles my mind that people blame UK politicians for a GFC that eminanted in the US.

It boggles the mind that people think that the US having a monumental banking liquidity problem is something UK politicians should have foreseen.

As if a GFC is foreseeable.

but he can be blamed for running a deficit in the 2nd Blair term

coopster_the_1st · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

It still boggles my mind that people blame UK politicians for a GFC that eminanted in the US.

UK politicians, AKA Brown is blamed for believing there was a never ending money tree rather than building up a buffer for when things are not going so well.

Had he been more prudent there would have been a smaller hit to the UK from the GFC. We would have had a buffer and valuations would not have been so high to correct from.

rick_chasey · May 2017

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We would have had a buffer and valuations would not have been so high to correct from.

Eh?

What's that got to do with a loose fiscal policy?

rick_chasey · May 2017

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

It still boggles my mind that people blame UK politicians for a GFC that eminanted in the US.

It boggles the mind that people think that the US having a monumental banking liquidity problem is something UK politicians should have foreseen.

As if a GFC is foreseeable.

but he can be blamed for running a deficit in the 2nd Blair term

True true.

I'm sympathetic to that; UK needed a lot of investment, but I take your point.

FocusZing · May 2017

Hang on Rick, we are one of the most indebted countries in the world as a result of the implementation of the FSA and deregulation. Building societies being able to turn into banks, being one amongst many. No one is saying government policy is solely responsible, but contributiary yes.

Meredith Whitney!?

rick_chasey · May 2017

FocusZing wrote:

Hang on Rick, we are one of the most indebted countries in the world as a result of the implementation of the FSA and deregulation. Building societies being able to turn into banks, being one amongst many. No one is saying government policy is solely responsible, but contributiary yes.

Meredith Whitney!?

I wouldn't go that far. SC has it about right on that but it's not like the rest of the world had vastly better mortgage regulation.

The UK, because of its FS bias, was always going to be more exposed to a global liquidity crisis.

Then again, be glad you didn't have Cameron and Redwood then.

After all, Cameron endorsed this push for more Financial deregulation in 2007:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -tape.html

A vast range of regulations on the financial services industry should either be abolished or watered down, including money-laundering restrictions affecting banks and building societies. Mr Redwood's group also sees "no need to continue" to regulate mortgage provision, saying it is the lender, not the client, who takes the risk.

FocusZing · May 2017

^Above in bold.

Totaly agree, but your point was why do people blame ministers (government policy)?

kingstongraham · May 2017

1) if banks are backed by an implicit guarantee from the country, it is essential that there are regulations to prevent banks exposing themselves to risks that could cause them to need that guarantee. If those are not there, it's likely the government policy that is at fault.
2) if a chancellor insists on increasing a deficit when the economy is doing well, he deserves the blame not for the crisis, but the difficulties in funding public services after it.

Stevo_666 · May 2017

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lefties have never been strong on finance/economics/business etc - if they were, they probably wouldn't be lefties That and the oft repated phrase that its only other peoples' money, so they only worry about it to the extent they think the public worries about it.

I ve a feeling that history wont judge the tories kindly for wrecking the UK economy (as leading brexitiers have already told us) as we come out of the EU and beyond but then its only other peoples money.

We ve also had 2 tax policies overturned after press campaigns, hardly strong and stable... lol.

You're assuming they will. Many will disagree.

Unlike the case of Labour who have actually wrecked the economy a couple of times now - the last two times they were in power. That's a 100% strike rate - on that basis, what do you reckon would happen if they get in again?

Does that make it 2-2? I didn't think you were young enough to not remember the early '90s recession. If it hadn't been for the distraction of the Falklands, Thatcher might have copped the blame for the early '80s recession, too. They no more wrecked the economy than Labour did in 2007-8, albeit that with hindsight there may have been more that could have been done in terms of mitigation.

The Tories left a country in good economic health to Labour when Blair went into Downing Street as I recall (and yes I am easily old enough to remember). Whereas Labour have screwed up 100% of the time in living memory. And we now have a Labour party that is further left and so more liable to wreak havoc than previous incarnations of the party.

wallace_and_gromit · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

Do you hold equal blame for all other chancellors who were in charge of developed countries in that period, that was a result, mainly, of being closely connected to badly sold US mortgages?

I do, but most developed countries didn't suffer anywhere near as badly as the UK did.

Which ever way you spin it Rick, to have been in charge of the regulatory regime that allowed 4 high street banks (LBG, RBS, Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley) to go down the pan can only be a black mark on the CV. It doesn't really matter whether there were other Finance Ministers (or political rivals) who were worse than Brown. Brown is the only person who can realistically take the blame for wrecking the UK banking system and running up a deficit of 11% of GDP because he was paid for 11 years to do nothing else than be in charge of the UK's finances and financial system. It's not like he can be excused for taking his eye off the ball as he was curing cancer at the same time.

wallace_and_gromit · May 2017

Rick Chasey wrote:

Then again, be glad you didn't have Cameron and Redwood then.

This would appear to be a de facto admission that Brown did mess up - the "Well the Tories would have been as bad or worse" defence. If you've been on the bridge for 10 years when the ship sinks, it's your fault.

Join the Labour Party and save your country!

Comments

Categories