Letter: Who is responsible for the state we’re in?
Thursday 21st October 2010, 9:41AM BST.
Letter: Are you as fed up as I am with every comment by a Conservative or Lib Dem MP containing the phrase “we have to deal with the mess left to us by the Labour Government”? It’s as if they repeat it often enough it will somehow come true.
I don’t like the British public being constantly fed falsehoods for party political ends; the truth being that banks and other financial institutions were mainly responsible for creating the economic crisis by pushing more and more risky investment decisions which backfired.
Gordon Brown as Prime Minister did the same as the vast majority of governments across the world by using public finances and borrowing to keep the banking system operational and support national economies.
The alternative to building up national debt to current levels was to let the markets “sort themselves out”, a view taken at the time by most Conservatives.
That approach was what caused the great depression of the 1920s and 30s with mass unemployment and hardship on a far greater scale than we are likely to see in the next few years.
Contrary to popular myth the Labour Government sa- ved the UK economy from a far worse state; although it’s easier for the coalition to say “look how bad things are” than for more enlightened observers to argue it would have been much worse if we had followed Tory advice in 2008 and 2009.
Brian Smith
Wellington
UK News
Most Commented
- Clampdown on Shrewsbury chuggers
- Bishop's gay marriage views do nothing to support bible teachings
- Letter: Alcohol price plans annoy me
- Planners ordered to stay on Newport visit bus
- Letter: Angered by close encounter of the furred kind
- Letter: No sense in overseas job adverts
- The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff doesn't raise a smile
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Yeah, because giving the dole dossers and benefit scroungers free laptops was a great way to keep help with the mounting debt….. It’s this kind of thing that people refer to when they blame labour for the countries debt. Giving the scroungers more, creating more debt, just to please the lazy in order for them to vote for them again. This is why people are angry at labour, not because of what the banks did.
Report abuse
where were these free laptops that the dole dossers got the banks lent 25 or 30 percent more than things were actually worth this is suicide which led to this not just in england but eire iceland spain france greece if labour were to blame then they were becoming a new world order people are up in arms but you tell me when my kids grow up and need somewhere to live why should they have to pay 20% more rent then those who do now this government is about screwing the poor there are people on the dole alot of young ones who have no wish to work take what they can drink it or mainline it have a baby but these young ones are from parents of the late 70 and 80 thatchers era sod u jack get on your bike or as now ibs get on the bus they took away any manufacturing base and without production you have no means to trade this is trade suicide i never voted tory or lib but these stand for the rich and sod the poor
Report abuse
I hear France, Spain, Greece, Ireland, Italy and the USA etc have all joined the condems in blaming Labour for thier plights rather than the global finaicial crisis
Report abuse
Brian, you’re missing the obvious. Yes, the economic storm that swept around the world was caused by irresponsible bankers (who, by the way, had important restraining regulations removed by President Clinton and Chancellor Brown). However, that storm nearly swamped the UK because our economy was loaded to the gunwhales with debt, courtesy of our ‘prudent’ Labour government. Whether Prime Minister Brown ‘saved the world’, as he accidentally claimed in Parliament, is another question, but the policy of printing money has not materially affected the economies of the US or the UK so far, it has merely refloated the banks.
Report abuse
What utter nonsense!
I know exactly who to blame for this mess:
Labour, and specifically Gordon Brown!
It was Brown, as chancellor who allowed the banks to take more and more risk with OUR money.
It was Brown who allowed the formation of all these banks “too big to be allowed to fail”
It was Brown who, despite being in a boom, spent more than we were bringing in in tax.
It was Brown who, showing his utter incompetence in understanding the facts about capitalist economic policies, proudly declared the end to boom and bust – yes you were right Winky – you changed it to boom, boom, borrow and bankrupt!
Dont start blaming the condems for this muppets incompetence.
And dont go saying “it was a global problem” -the boom was as global as the bust, but I see double standards of the worst kind: Everything that goes right is down to me, everything wrong is “global” – pathetic. The reaosn we were so badly hit was down to his cosying up with the banks and allowing them to live the lifestyle we allowed them to: billions in bonuses knowing full well that the reserves were not sufficient but equally kknowing that they had become so big that we, the tax payers, would have to bail them out when it all went pear… Had he supported manufacturing, agricutlure, technology and all the other components of a well balanced economy as much as the champagne swigging chancers in the city we would have been more resilient to the crisis.
The truth is Gordon Brown was not the financial genius he convinced himself of. Remember the 10p tax fiasco? Anyone with a GCSE in maths could tell that that was always going to prejudice the low earners.
He betrayed his office, the country and the people. Even worse, he claims to be a socialist: New Labour did absolutely nothing for the working class other than condem them to a fate of minimum wage, benefit handouts and poverty, and labour supporters, blinkered and bigoted, continue to come out with this rubbish in his defence.
Report abuse
Buy that man a drink! Couldn’t have said it better myself,
Report abuse
Don’t forget he also sold off half our gold reserves when prices were low.
Other world factors helped start the recession, but Labour made sure our cupboard was bare when it happened – glad to see the back of them.
Report abuse
Well said Andy!
Brown – Sadly, his legacy is such a complete and utter mess that the people he so wanted to help may now well have to give up all the things he gave them without thinking of the consequences
Brown – first whilst in No 11 and then disastrously in No 10 created:
- the Private Finance Initiative which means our children and grandchildren will be paying for hospitals, schools, bridges and roads long into the future (along with astronomic annual fees to the contractors, consultants, lawyers and banks)
- a complete mis-management of the Defence budget which tried to impose commercial attitudes of profit and development on a military whose priorities are wholly and necessarily different
- a ‘there,there’ benefits system which literally threw money at various deprived sections of the community in order to win votes, but without any attempt to make sure it was those most in need, not those with the loudest voices, that benefited. Not only various sections, but also illogical sections, often over-lapping and missing many, if not most, of the truly deserving
- was over-influenced by his Fife upbringing and 1950s trade unionism to the point where he could not distinguish between the those and the 21st century
- morally ethical by strict Presbyterian standards, but practically, financially and economically INCOMPETENT
Report abuse
remember when your water rates was in your rent remember when your rates were in your rent then poll tax then privatise water bt electric gas whoop whoop we all pay more the whole seed of injustice was sporn from the thatcher era we where once a nation for production now all we produce is lost souls and if you voted tory or lib dem i hope your kids arn’t wanting to go to university as if they do they will have a mini mortgage at 21 then finding somwhere to live will be fun for them they are cutting as they enjoy this those liberals should hang their heads in shame no increase in vat no to tuition fees you ever feel you have been cheated well you have
Report abuse
It seems to be the policy of the Coalition and right-wing press to constantly state the “fact” that Labour has left Britain in an “economic mess” – giving them a perfect excuse to cut public spending and blame the opposition.
The idea, like with all propaganda, is to repeat the statement to such an extent that it becomes true – even though it has no basis in fact.
And the alternative argument – the blindingly obvious truth – is forgotten (except by a handful of Labour MPs).
So what is this truth? The irony is that everyone knows – it’s a global recession.
That’s right – it really is that simple. America, Ireland, Portugal, Japan and many other countries all have the same problem – and in some cases worse.
Ireland, for example, has a budget deficit which is a whopping 30 per cent of its overall GDP. The country is almost certain to face a double dip. And why? Because they implemented exactly the same policies as the Tories are now – cut, cut and cut some more.
And considering the American economy was probably hit the worse by the recession, since it started there, it seems to be on the recovery. The OECD, which is based in Paris, indicated in its latest US Economic Survey that “after shrinking through the first half of 2009, US GDP began to increase again and is now projected to be 2.6 percent higher in 2010 than the year before.”
And why is this? Because President Obama is pumping money into the economy – exactly what Labour would have done.
Our deficit is 10 per cent of our overall GDP. It’s not ideal, but it is by no means fatal – and no different from many other countries.
David Cameron’s classic argument is that we have the highest budget deficit (in proportion to GDP) in the G20 – so that in itself is proof that it was Labour’s fault. The simple explanation is Britain is highly dependent on the financial industry – which makes up around 40 per cent of our GDP. Most of the other countries in the G20, however, have an economy based on manufacturing.
Germany, for example, is a huge manufacturer. Important to Germany are its traditional industries of steel and coal mining – both heavily subsidised and still large employers. Precision engineering remains a strong area. Aerospace is a small but growing industry – also heavily subsidised – and German companies often join with companies from other EU countries.
Britain lost its manufacturing industry in the 80s. Just one of Thatcher’s damaging policies was to close down the coal mines for her own political purposes. Without an export it became more and more dependent on borrowing and lending.
It’s bizarre that these clear arguments are rarely put forward. Even in America Gordon Brown is hailed as a hero for saving the world economy. It may be a product of the right wing press in Britain – and I don’t like it.
Report abuse
Oh yeah and selling the gold reserves when they were at their lowest, yeah great financial foresight….
Report abuse
Who is responsible for the state we’re in?
Nobody.
To suggest there is individuals responsible is to be an apologist for the system itself. The longer we continue to suggest that the system itself isn’t fundamentally flawed and that someone dropped the ball the longer we delay fixing it. The longer we delay fixing it the closer we get to repeating it and the further we get from it’s last failure the greater the failure will be the next time. This is the world according to the late Hyman Minsky anyway.
Even the systems’ greatest proponents such as Alan Greenspan know and will say categorically that it’s is flawed and that it will collapse again (and again ad infinitum).
But, hey it’s the best system we’ve got.
Although only a fool under those circumstances wouldn’t say ‘Time to think of a new system!’
Report abuse
I wouldn’t say no one is to blame but I wouldn’t say any one person or institution is either.
Who’s fault it is, is no longer relevant, we’ve got to focus on putting it right now and that’s all George Osbourne is trying to do.
We’ve all got to take responsibility now and do out individual best to manage and where possible help others manage.
The public took advantage of the good times and the extended and unsustainable lines of credit offered usually by those banks everyone is now trying to blame, now we have to pay for it
This is a time for for helping and supporting each other, at the end of the day apportioning blame is not going to help any of our circumstances.
Report abuse
George Osborne is trying to put *something* right but not the system itself. To consider the view that Bankers are to blame or even the General Public, is to miss the cause – what economist have been saying since the Great Depression is that there is a flaw in the system that cannot be fixed – we’ve bought a lemon!
It will be of interest to see whether what Mr Osborne actually puts ‘right’ is proportioned and without political bias. There is also a question which might at first seem dumb but perhaps isn’t so as to whether cuts are actually necessary at all (much as one could argue whether quantitative easing was/is) in a free-market system – it’s self fixing isn’t it ?
Report abuse
Whilst in agreement that Brown lit the touch paper and created the scenario for the desolation that the banks subsequently wreaked, there is one other group of culprits that no-one has blamed.
And that group consists of?
In simple terms, those consumers who took up a line of credit.
The banks may have been pushing the loans, but it wasn’t the banks taking them. It was the majority of the population living above their means on cheap credit.
Oh, and by the way: who was the biggest loan taker of all? Gordon Brown, to fund Labour’s profligacy.
And through Quantitative Easing, Labour (and now it is mooted that the coalition are considering doing the same) continued borrowing and adding to the long term problem long after the consequences had hit us.
We are all going to suffer, but we all benefited in one way or another, some much more than others.
I’d also like to advocate that should the banks require further funding, it isn’t given to them. Your local shop or small business goes bust if it overspends and cannot pay its debts, why not banks?
Banks are businesses and should be treated no differently to other businesses. They should file for bankruptcy and go down.
Consumers would not suffer because savings are protected by government, (taxpayer). If you’re a shareholder in any business, you should accept the risks of bankruptcy, not be bailed out by the government.
Any banks in such a situation that had a sound infrastructure would inevitably be snapped up by other organisations at a knock-down price and carry on trading the next day, just like many other companies.
The debts would be gone, no bail-outs would be initiated, no collapse of the banking system would occur and the only victims would be shareholders and those who lost bonuses because their company could not pay them.
Bankers are always scrutinising small companies’ business plans for soundness, but very lax in creating and following their own sound plan. I doubt that any bank manager would lend to his own bank on the basis of their current business plan.
Report abuse
Who’s to blame? We are, Joe Public, we continue to vote for these incompetent thieves or should I say Politicians. Yesterday, we gave more money to overseas aid. India for example has more millionaires than the UK, have owners who run major British Companies yet we send them £295m, together with African Dictatorships who cream this money off before it gets to the people who need it. Sorry but I believe Pensioners, ill children, disabled and many other worthy causes need this money. Look after our own country first. The goody two shoes who will scream about this statement will no doubt give reasons to support overseas aid, I for one believe charity begins at home.
We have stood by and watched a “Benefit and Claims” culture take over this Country and no amount of chipping away will force these idlers back to work.I for one found myself out of work for 9 months, the first time in 40 years. I cringed when walking into the job centre getting my £60 jobseekers, whilst professional scroungers laughed as they announced their girlfriends were getting £480 to bring up their 5 kids so a loss of £60
meant nothing.Yes folks we’re to blame, Joe Public
Report abuse
Not quite. Note the complete absence of any mention of the EU in all this and yet, thanks to dear old Tony Blair giving up our rebate and ALL of the 3 main parties being complicit in surrendering us to Brussels, we shall be handing over 6 billion this year, rising to 8 billion next year and then 10 billion by 2015. IF we were allowed a referendum on our continued funding of the EU gravy train, we would undoubtedly choose to break away and many of the cuts announced yesterday would become unnecessary.
Report abuse
This question can be solved with the statement of a few simple facts.
The official figures show that the debt as a percentage of GDP inherited by the incoming Gov’t was 62% of GDP.
Of that, official figures once again show that almost half of this debt, or 30% of GDP, was directly attributable to the cost of the necessary bank nationalisations which took place.
So the net debt attributable to the last regime was 32% of GDP. When the Labour government took over in 1997 from the previous Tory administration, debt as a percentage of GDP was higher than that.
32% of GDP is not an historically high debt figure. In the late ’50s/early ’60s, it was around the 100% of GDP mark. At the time people were told ‘You’ve never had it so good!’
So contrary to the mantra, we’re not in the worst debt crisis since the war, and it therefore seems that the cuts are as much driven by dogma as they are by debt.
For those that are fixated upon the ‘benefit scrounger’ issue, it’s estimated that some £6bn is defrauded from benefit systems. What isn’t often reported alongside that is the large amount in benefits that go unclaimed – especially in pension credits.
Whatever the figures for benefits, they are dwarfed by the amount that goes unpaid in tax.
You might be surprised to know that we currently have:
£25 billion of tax avoidance via legal , but morally dubious, loopholes
£70 billion of tax evasion – i.e. tax fraud.
£25 billion of uncollected tax – tax which has been assessed as due, but not collected.
The government indicated yesterday that it will provide some £900m investement in HMRC systems and people, in the hope of collecting £7bn of this unpaid tax.
Why aren’t they collecting the rest of the £120bn? You tell me… it seems thay’d rather get it off the ordinary people than chase the large corporations and super-wealthy individuals for what they owe.
Report abuse
Your figures are incorrect. Debt was nudging 39/40% GDP before the crisis, on internationally recognised measures – not counting the PFI programme, by which we borrowed £68 billion capital value or £250 billion repayments due, without it being ‘debt’ (magic, perhaps?). Nor have you considered the fact that Gordon Browne systematically skewed tax, benefits and investment so that large areas of the North, for instance, were entirely dependent on the government for employment or other state income, IN A BOOM. So come the bust, we have swathes of the UK reliant on the rest to pay for the capital borrowed yesterday, pay for their living costs today, and pay for their re-integration into ‘commercial’ reality tomorrow.
Report abuse
Stephen,
Debt was indeed nudging 39/40% before the crisis – but, excluding the 30% of GDP that had to be lent to the bankers, it subsequently dropped, leaving the ‘net’ figure at the point of change of government at the 32% I quoted – my figure isn’t incorrect, you’re quoting a figure from a different point in time.
PFI, as I’m sure you know was a method for pruchase introduced in the 80s. Once you’ve made such fundamental changes in how government purchases its services it’s almost impossible to go back to the previous way. It’s a bit like expectin gthe Labour government to go out and replace all of the council houses that were sold off – with the best will in the world it couldn’t have happened.
But I think you’re missing the point. Whether the debt was 32% or 39% – neither are histroically high levels of debt. It is the banker’s debt that has pushed us to the high level. Yet the current government are seeking to take just £2.5bn per annum back from the banks, out of the £200bn or more lent to them. At the same time, the banks are expected to pay out £7.5bn in bonuses this year.
Why are the current government so soft on bankers? They claim that it is because the banks will take their business elsewhere!
Yet if/when the million or so people who are expected to lose their livelihoods start to take industrial action to protest, I’m quite sure they’ll be accused of ‘holding the country to ransom’. Can you perhaps explain how the banks are not doing precisely that, and why we should put up with it?
As for the tax evasion/avoidance question – no it isn’t easy to sort out. But the gov’t will never get there when they’re cutting the very public servants who are capable of recovering some of it!
Report abuse
‘You might be surprised to know that we currently have:
£25 billion of tax avoidance via legal , but morally dubious, loopholes
£70 billion of tax evasion – i.e. tax fraud.
£25 billion of uncollected tax – tax which has been assessed as due, but not collected.’
And if this lot is so easily recoverable, Labour had 13 years in power to sort ut and did………………………………………………………..diddly squat.
Report abuse
All of this rhetoric is pertinent and to the point and statistics will approve or disprove it but whilst we debate fiscal responsibility and moral turpitude let us consider the actions of a mean spirited British Government with regard to the circumstance of thousands of it’s subjects who opted to live for varying reasons beyond it’s borders many in Commonwealth Countries who are now retired and living on fixed income and in receipt of a pension from the UK in accordance with their entitlements but without cost of living indexing which is granted to pensioners in the UK … the refusal of the British Government to index these pension entitlements is both mean and morally bankrupt.
All of these pensioners have subscribed to the social infrastructure of the UK and many have served in uniform in time of conflict in stark contrast to the millions who are allowed to flood into the UK and receive benefits that they have not contributed to and the actions of the professional scroungers illustrated by other posters who have lived their whole lives sucking on the teat of a system that they have not contributed to.
So many of these Ex-Pats left their Homeland for many reasons some to acquire employment and opportunity when none presented itself in the UK and some to be with family (Children and Grandchildren) and in doing so removed the financial cost to the State as they aged! …. they make no demands for anything that they are not entitled to but merely that their stipend be indexed! .. increases to the cost of living is not felt solely in the UK but is Global too.
Report abuse
The blame is totally laid at the feet of Labour.
Who reduced the unemployed figures overnight by putting thousands on incapacity benefit. Who sold all the gold at it’s lowest price.
Who allowed the country to be swamped with illegal immigrants all on benifits. Should I go on?
Report abuse
OH life and everything is oh so simple
Report abuse
Illegal Immigrants don’t get benefits, the clue is in the word illegal, therefore not entitled to benefits. Too much reading of the Tabloids me thinks.
Report abuse
They may not get benefits, but why does it take so long to send them back. the taxpayer is picking up the tab while they go through an appeal system lasting, sometimes, years. They have tobe housed and fed etc while all these appeals are heard. Cut out the appeals and send them back straight away.
Report abuse
I place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and
public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. Thomas Jefferson
Well obviously neither Bush or Brown read Jefferson but for me it is not who is to blame but how we are going to repair the damage without further damaging society.
Report abuse
“Should I go on?”
Probably not.
Report abuse
Can the Shropshire Star impose a limit on the length of messages allowed by posters?
The above party political broadcasts are way too long, quite frankly completely dull and are destroying my will to live.
Please SS take a stand and impose a limit as we apparently are incapable of self control.
With spaces this is 349 characters. 500 would be ample.
Report abuse
‘we apparently are incapable of self control.’
Now there’s your smoking gun in what caused the crisis!
Report abuse
Don’t worry Brian. Just give me your credit card and I will make sure that the next few years are the best of your life! All your dreams will come true. (That’s Labour policy in a nutshell…)
Report abuse
“I don’t like the British public being constantly fed falsehoods for party political ends”
Well, Brian Smith, you must have some real issues with Gordon Brown, then!
Report abuse
The main issue here is not who caused it, but who is going to pay for it.
Anybody need more than one guess?.
Report abuse
Well if the question doesn’t give us the clue – its all of us of course, the inevitable outcome of a society that’s lost its way. Greed, exploitation, materialism, you name it – the vast majority have an “I’m alright Jack” outlook – and the mess we’re now is the consequence. How many times over the past “Boom” (don’t make me laugh) years have you heard some smug twit regale you with their story of the increasing “value” of their house and how “rich” they are – its just laughable how stupid people are. The banks are laughing themselves sick – i.e. if you don’t get it – its all a COMPLETE CON by the financial institutions who are now so powerful they own ALL the politicians – so forget about hearing any truth from there. You are going to have to work it out yourself. I have some very bad news for you – that means we are ALL going to have to take RESPONSIBILITY and start looking after one another – scary isn’t it ?
Report abuse
simple answer = president clinton,
for laudible reasons he tried to help poor people in the US get onto the property ladder by unregulating mortgages leading to easy credit zero deposit 100+% LTV loans which is what lead to subprime, bank collapse and subsequent recession and debt
Report abuse
President Clinton may have had laudable motives, but the same can’t be said for the commission-hungry greedy sharks who knowingly signed up people who would never be able to pay, and often couldn’t even read well enough to understand that the low rates offered could double or treble at any time.
The dodgy loans were sold on quick smart and the companies/salesmen pocketed the commission and moved on to the next victim.
Report abuse
the main point here though is correct it was the USA who caused this, we just got the ricochet effect, its not a UK recession, a labour recession or to be fair even thatcher or tories fault, it is the USA’s fault, clinton, bush snr and jnr and their economic teams are the cause of the subprime global recession
Report abuse
All of this assumes that the bubble that burst was sub-prime in origin. But what if it wasn’t ? What if sub-prime lending was part of the symptoms of a even bigger, older bubble ? What if the Ponzi style gambling had begun earlier because we were so far away from the last mega-crash (and we knew what had caused that and ‘fixed it’), that we imagined ourselves immune ?
Now we often hear people saying that Communism will always fail because of basic human self-interest. And they should ! But we don’t often hear that Capitalism will always fail for exactly the same reason. (And we should !)
Report abuse
Well , uncontrolled credit to people who should not have had it , Credit full stop really if you have to borrow it you cant afford it .
Banks,
uncontrolled immigration ,
Far to high benefits bill,
and many other things be it quangos ,over paid public sector jobs (not all) silly pensions, pay rises,, pay off deals,
Many thing can cause a country to end up in the state we are in from the big issues to the small issues .
People need to live with in their means , we have far to many uk people who earn 35k a year and think they can have what ever they want get it on credit lose the job and who ends up paying for it then? 185,000 personal bankrupts these are people who carried high levels of debt until their bubble burst for goodness sake we have husband and wife teachers in work going bankrupt and they are supposed to be responsible adults .
Report abuse
Blair for giving him the job of Chancellor, but from then on – Brown, Brown, Brown!
Brown – Sadly, his legacy is such a complete and utter mess that the people he so wanted to help may now well have to give up all the things he gave them without thinking of the consequences
Brown – first whilst in No 11 and then disastrously in No 10 created:
- the Private Finance Initiative which means our children and grandchildren will be paying for hospitals, schools, bridges and roads long into the future (along with astronomic annual fees to the contractors, consultants, lawyers and banks)
- a complete mis-management of the Defence budget which tried to impose commercial attitudes of profit and development on a military whose priorities are wholly and necessarily different
- enjoyed the adulation of the City to the point where he filled the Treasury with City consultants and never saw beyond their bulls**t to the banking disaster in the making by relaxing controls, refusing all request for tighter auditing and said, too often- “my friends say all is well”
- a ‘there,there’ benefits system which literally threw money at various deprived sections of the community in order to win votes, but without any attempt to make sure it was those most in need, not those with the loudest voices, that benefited. Not only various sections, but also illogical sections, often over-lapping and missing many, if not most, of the truly deserving
- was over-influenced by his Fife upbringing and 1950s trade unionism to the point where he could not distinguish between those circumstances and the realities of the 21st century
- morally ethical by strict Presbyterian standards, but practically, financially and economically INCOMPETENT
Report abuse
one word answer
BANKERS
Report abuse
Mrs Thatcher is ultimately responsible for the mess were in because She oversaw the destruction of traditional manufacturing and encouraged us to buy into banking. Because we put all our eggs into one basket when the banking sector was in trouble we had nothing else to turn to whereas most other countries had.
Report abuse
And Labour couldn’t do anything about it during their record 3 terms in office? No, that doesn’t wash. Labour curried favour with the banks prior to the 97 election and thereafter let them off the leash. Now, having been bailed out by the taxpayer and returned to profit they are in a position to stick two fingers up at any future HM Government and threaten to move out of the country if fundamental restructuring is forced upon them. Labour made a proper job of finishing what Thatcher only started.
Report abuse
Well said that man – the rot of capitalism started formly with her with free market forces doing more and more, usually to their own benefit and not the countries. Free, easy credit for all with few controls, a generation of “I want’s”, and everything built on sand. All the ‘family silver’ sold off too and manufacturing decimated. NEW Labour were just the more moderate version of the Tories in disguise and continued the programme. Short-termism is the legacy of a Thatcher regime as politicians direct things to what wins votes at the next election rather than looking forward.
Report abuse
well said, the classic example was selling council houses, seen as a good thing at the time and still hailed by tories as their best ever policy its ruined the housing market and caused massive issues today for social housing and councils financing new builds of properties and such which has let to shortage of housing, fueling the boom and thus in part is why this busted recession hurts so much, thatcher or rather thatcher ISM as practiced by major, blair, cameron and even brown ever since has been great for UK in some ways but is ultimately why our economy is now in ruins and why its so unstable and finance driven
Report abuse
Simple it was all browns fault, he was a fool!
even Blair was OK, atleast economically he followed on from the success of John Major and kept it ticking along nicely but as soon as that grumpy scot got in things went backwards, he single handedly ran up massive debts building pfi hosptials and such rot, he should be tried for treason i think, look what he has done to the global economy and now they want to make him head of the IMF, THAT IS AN OUTRAGE!!! HE SHOuld be hung drawn and quartered imo
Report abuse
While agreeing with you on the madness of PFI could I point out that it was introduced to the UK by John Major’s government in 1992 and then taken up enthusiastically by Labour (who had opposed it while in opposition) on their gaining power in 1997.
The “OK” Tony Blair was one of its fiercest advocates (supported by his Chancellor Brown).
The sad truth is that on the things that really matter there is little to choose between the main parties – they all want to look after themselves and their rich chums.
Report abuse
So why is no-one condemning the amounts footballers earn but are too ready to hang ‘well-paid’ bankers/financiers/anyone in an extrememly well paid job? Does anyone in a real job earn the same money as footballers?
Report abuse
Perhaps because although the amounts paid to footballers and other celebrities are obscene no one would seriously suggest that the likes of Spudface Rooney are capable of bringing about a worldwide recession through their greed and incompetence.
Report abuse
The MD/SEOs of Banks deserve every penny they get. They clearly work 5000 times harder and have intellects 5000 times bigger than yours and hence deserve to be paid 5000 times more. Now get over your lazy, dumb self and stop trying to compare yourself with these giants!
Rob’s right, footballers can’t bring about a worldwide recession, they can only bring football to its knees (with only oil barons and oligarchs to offer a rescue package for the select few – some clubs will be Lehmans equivalent). Mark my words, Football’s bubble if not already burst, will be very soon.
Report abuse
brown brown brown
Report abuse
“brown brown brown”
Well, that level of debate is too much for me I’m afraid.
I suppose I could always put my thumbs in my ears and wiggle my fingers.
Report abuse
i agree its all browns fault, the world will never be the same and its all his fault, we need a good 15 years of conservative medicine to fix this, as per usual labour wrekced the economy now we need some hard medicine to fix it, cut the public sector for starters and then get started on benefits and charities too
the only thing i want taxes going on is defence
Report abuse
labour are to blame – years of giving MY money away to lazy unemployed northerners no suprise its run out now – since tories got back in we have seen the economy grow, no coincidence, you dont need to be an economist to know brown was a clown and conservatives will make you rich, if you want profits for your company, if you want a BMW if you want to own a seond home its the conservative party, if you want to share a skoda with your bearded neighbour and wear hand me down clothign from oxfam then go and live in russia with your loony lefty labour losers
Report abuse
Harvey,
The figures showing a higher rate of growth cannot be attirbuted to the new government – they simply hadn’t been in power long enough.
Instead they were attributable to the stready handling of the debt crisis by the previous incumbents, which included continued investment in growth.
The savage cuts outlined by the new Tory government will drive us back into recession – and this time a real economic recession, rather than one caused by an interruption in the money supply between banks. Let’s see how growth goes over the next 2 years or so as the unemployment figures rise and rise – then we’ll know…
Report abuse
tv is to blame giving clegg air time at eelection time
Report abuse
one e blame keyboard or brown
Report abuse