Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2023 16:47:55 GMT
According to New Labour and Blair, the boom was down to their fantastic leadership. Apparently the bust was nothing to do with Brown's "prudent" mishandling of the economy and poor regulation of the banks. I don't believe New Labour. Bollox. They never claimed a boom. Indeed they tried to stop boom and bust by making it the BofE's job to control interest rates. Everyone bar you knows the 2008 banking crises was a banking crises. That it was caused by injudicious lending in the United States. Which was exacerbated by our poor regulation of the banks which "Prudence Brown" presided over for 12 - 13 years. That's why we had to have a new banking act, 2009, to try to correct what had been neglected all those years. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 1, 2023 16:52:19 GMT
Bollox. They never claimed a boom. Indeed they tried to stop boom and bust by making it the BofE's job to control interest rates. Everyone bar you knows the 2008 banking crises was a banking crises. That it was caused by injudicious lending in the United States. Which was exacerbated by our poor regulation of the banks which "Prudence Brown" presided over for 12 - 13 years. That's why we had to have a new banking act, 2009, to try to correct what had been neglected all those years. Care to make some sort of estimate as to the state the UK economy would have been in without the inter-nation-meltdown? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 1, 2023 17:11:04 GMT
Bollox. They never claimed a boom. Indeed they tried to stop boom and bust by making it the BofE's job to control interest rates. Everyone bar you knows the 2008 banking crises was a banking crises. That it was caused by injudicious lending in the United States. Which was exacerbated by our poor regulation of the banks which "Prudence Brown" presided over for 12 - 13 years. That's why we had to have a new banking act, 2009, to try to correct what had been neglected all those years. Been discussed already and found wanting. Go back if you want to catch up. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 1, 2023 17:13:32 GMT
Interesting idea - but as I never claimed any of that somewhat redundant. Care to have a punt at the point I was making - If Labour were so fiscally sound that they had more years of budget surplus than the Tories why were they following Tory spending plans at the time?.....and what happened as soon as they stopped following those plans? They stuck to Tory spending plans for two years because they said they would do so before the 1997 election to reassure the public. And what happened to the deficit when they stopped following Tory spending plans. They inherited a falling budget deficit and passed on a rising one. Rather like their record on unemployment... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 1, 2023 17:19:34 GMT
They stuck to Tory spending plans for two years because they said they would do so before the 1997 election to reassure the public. It stayed below that of the Tories. Despite the increases in NHS spending that lead to the highest satisfaction scores its ever had. Falling from a dizzy height. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 1, 2023 17:30:41 GMT
Falling from a dizzy height. so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 1, 2023 17:46:00 GMT
Falling from a dizzy height. so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. I see you switched from deficit to unemployment. Now why would that be  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 1, 2023 21:08:43 GMT
so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. I see you switched from deficit to unemployment. Now why would that be might have something to do with your comment being in answer to my point about unemployment. If you dont wish to discuss Labours record (and I can perfectly understand why) then perhaps you should not have responded. just a thought.. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 1, 2023 21:26:44 GMT
I see you switched from deficit to unemployment. Now why would that be might have something to do with your comment being in answer to my point about unemployment. If you dont wish to discuss Labours record (and I can perfectly understand why) then perhaps you should not have responded. just a thought.. What are you on about. You said And what happened to the deficit when they stopped following Tory spending plans. They inherited a falling budget deficit and passed on a rising one. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2023 21:41:19 GMT
Falling from a dizzy height. so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. Not true. The Thatcher government left us with far higher unemployment than it inherited, in spite of constantly fiddling the figures. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Apr 1, 2023 23:31:13 GMT
Which was exacerbated by our poor regulation of the banks which "Prudence Brown" presided over for 12 - 13 years. That's why we had to have a new banking act, 2009, to try to correct what had been neglected all those years. Been discussed already and found wanting. Go back if you want to catch up. BS The UK was going to have a crash with or without the problems of the USA. Brown did nothing as idiot UK banks gave 125% mortgages causing house prices to surge and more debt to be levered off those inflated prices and it went on and on until £1T (that's a thousand billion) of extra household debt had been taken on and no more could be levered, people started defaulting on mortgages and interest rates rose making the UK collapse inevitable. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 2, 2023 6:32:53 GMT
Been discussed already and found wanting. Go back if you want to catch up. BS The UK was going to have a crash with or without the problems of the USA. Brown did nothing as idiot UK banks gave 125% mortgages causing house prices to surge and more debt to be levered off those inflated prices and it went on and on until £1T (that's a thousand billion) of extra household debt had been taken on and no more could be levered, people started defaulting on mortgages and interest rates rose making the UK collapse inevitable. They took steps to stop people getting self certificated mortgages which were originally only meant for contractors. But you are right, they did not stop banks giving 125% mortgages though that would not effect house prices, as a 125% mortgage is 25% more than the house value regardless of what that is. You are correct about house prices climbing but this was a steady climb, not a mad rush in the lead up to 2008. Also a lot of that rise was recovery from the slump in house prices after the ERM debacle and its 17% interest rates.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2023 7:01:25 GMT
so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. Not true. The Thatcher government left us with far higher unemployment than it inherited, in spite of constantly fiddling the figures. Blair, like the rest of Labour, frown on home ownership, which is why he crushed the housing market and forced people to rent (his wife now runs property management and profits on it). His government built less council accommodation than Thatcher's, whilst he was knowingly screwing the country. British industry was also decimated under Blair, whilst he sold the country out to the USA, Germany and France and boosted their manufacturing. The manufacturing economy was trashed and fell more than the entire Conservative government prior. Education education education quickly became massive debts for young people, political indoctrination and a business run course system which led to millions of pointless and costly degrees and the deranged and fascistic Woke camps we see today. If that wasn't enough, mass-immigration was used to further trash the country and divide the people, whilst at the same time destroying civil liberties in the name of some war of terrorism. All of which was sidelined for the the utter failures that were Blair's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it cost ~£40 billion and hundreds of lives in Afghanistan alone to cover up all his other failures, where today the Taliban have taken over where Blair left off. Iraq, his other total failure led to ISIS and militia movements, just so he can see a man hanged from the neck by America's new government. He also broke Britain and intentionally created an anti-democratic system to again divide, destroy and benefit the foreign powers he was in the pocket with.
Sadly, I don't see a way out of it. The establishment, institutions and even the left and right of politics is just too corrupt in every way, mostly thanks to Blair. We cannot vote this out, at least not whilst playing ping pong with these mainstream parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 2, 2023 7:13:11 GMT
so dizzy in fact that they are the only Government to pass on unemployment higher than they inherited it.. Not true. The Thatcher government left us with far higher unemployment than it inherited, in spite of constantly fiddling the figures. That is a fair point - I have never seen a change to the way they count the figures (and there has been dozens over the years) that didn't reduce the headline rate. I'll give you that one.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2023 7:15:09 GMT
Not true. The Thatcher government left us with far higher unemployment than it inherited, in spite of constantly fiddling the figures. Blair, like the rest of Labour, frown on home ownership, which is why he crushed the housing market and forced people to rent (his wife now runs property management and profits on it). His government built less council accommodation than Thatcher's, whilst he was knowingly screwing the country. British industry was also decimated under Blair, whilst he sold the country out to the USA, Germany and France and boosted their manufacturing. The manufacturing economy was trashed under Blair, and fell more than the entire Conservative government prior. Education education education quickly became massive debts for young people, political indoctrination, a business run course system which led to millions of pointless and costly degrees and the deranged and fascistic Woke camps we see today. If that wasn't enough, mass-immigration was used to further trash the country and divide the people, whilst at the same time destroying civil liberties in the name of some war of terrorism. All of which was sidelined for the the utter failures that were Blair's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it cost ~£40 billion and hundreds of lives in Afghanistan alone to cover up all his other failures, where today the Taliban have taken over where Blair left off. Iraq, his other total failure led to ISIS and militia movements, just so he can see a man hanged from the neck by America's new government. He also broke Britain and intentionally created an anti-democratic system to again divide, destroy and benefit the foreign powers he was in the pocket with.
Sadly, I don't see a way out of it. The establishment, institutions and even the left and right of politics is just too corrupt in every way, mostly thanks to Blair. We cannot vote this out, at least not whilst playing ping pong with these mainstream parties.
Though as a genuine left winger - not a fake one like Blair - I do not agree with everything you have just said, I pretty much agree with the broad gist of what you say about Blair. It nevertheless remains true that unemployment was far higher under Thatcher than under Blair. And with good reason I generally detest both. You are though totally wrong about Blair's supposed disdain for home ownership. On the contrary he totally backed the idea of the ideal of home ownership being all that really mattered, and continued Thatcherite housing policies unchanged. And in that himself contributed substantially to the housing crisis we have today. |
|
