Has to be said
Cable, unbound and let loose on UK Banking industry.
George Osborne arrived at 11 Downing St today with little more than Vince Cable and stack of good wishes from business lobbyists to help him grapple with the UK’s enormous economic problems. Osborne was quickly confirmed as Chancellor once David Cameron visited Buckingham Palace yesterday to kiss hands with the Queen in the …
Cable, unbound and let loose on UK Banking industry.
of what happens when you 'unbind' a cable which is under tension - it tends to whip around rapidly slicing through things.
I think maybe that the person who downvoted my comment may have read more into the metaphor than was intended. I suspect Vince will manage to do a better job than 'the badger'.
What a challenge, sorting out the last 13 years of Labour mis-management and economic ruin.......
There is no way you can blame a WORLDWIDE financial meltdown on the UK government.
True they failed to keep a tight enough reign on the greedy bankers, but then so did pretty much every other western government. If there had been a unilateral tightening of banking in the UK the sector would have just relocated to a country where it is easier for them to carry on doing what they want. Then the UK would have been a big loser in the boom times without the massive income that banking produces.
Nothing was ever going to change until a worldwide recession made it completely clear to everyone how unsustainable the growth was in banking. Only that could be a driving force for all governments to tighten up at the same time. But even now it looks like it may still get back to business as usual for the banks as the western governments shy away from tougher bank regulation, which will undoubtedly include our new all singing and dancing Tory +1 government.
We can certainly blame FuLab and especially Gordon for depth of shit the 'worldwide' problems left the UK in. Gordon "put and end to the Tory years of boom and bust", yes, he replaced it with a long boom sustained by government spending of taxes on money which didn't really exist which precipitated our worst bust in living memory.
You can't just blame bankers, yes they were incompetent and facilitated the assets bubble but with Gordon's blessing.
Worldwide banking crisis causes uk to borrow astonishing amounts of cash to bail out the banks. Gordon Brown told us time and time again he had abolished boom and bust. Maybe he did. But he didnt leave any money in the bank just in case did he. If he had, we wouldnt have such massive borrowings.
He ran up an enormous public spending deficit even before the banking crisis. Spending money the country didnt have so that he could keep banging on about year on year real terms increases in funding to the NHS, education, the armed forces, etc etc etc.
Face it. Gordon Brown made a massive mess and now someone else has to come in and look like the bad guy while they put everything right again.
Its just like if i ran up massive debts, and then got shirty with my bank for taking away my house, its contents, and my car, when i couldnt afford to pay them back. Wasnt my fault i lost my house... its the banks fault for taking all my stuff.
The crisis was caused by not regulating the mortgage sector properly. If you trace through the roots of the problems, it is fundamentally caused by a few decisions in a few countries. The most noticeable is the political interference in Fannie/Freddie by Clinton and then Bush that forced them to underwrite loans to the super-poor who couldn't pay them back. The next most noticeable is a failure to regulate mortgages in the UK where we had crazy 125% mortgages (and 10% house inflation with 4% interest rates). The reason Gordon Clown didn't regulate them was that the equity being released by the rampant uncontrolled house price inflation and easy access to credit was used to buy our way through a 2002 recession in a very Keynesian way. Unfortunately, that meant the bubble was so much bigger when it finally started to burst. The slightly scary thing is that in trying to buy our way through the second recession in a Keynesian way, we have set ourselves up for a 3rd and much more disastrous recession.
The blame for this crisis lies first with Government. The bankers exploited the poor regulation, but governments didn't intervene for very personal reasons.
>>> There is no way you can blame a WORLDWIDE financial meltdown on the UK government.
Bollocks! The meltdown was caused by absurd trading in toxic mortgages that were worthless. The worst offenders were the US and UK financial institutions who got away with dodgy dealing because of non-existent or toothless regulation. That WAS the government's fault. No banks or insurance companies in Germany, Australia, Japan, Spain, etc - even Greece FFS! - went bust or had to be nationalised. That was because they were properly regulated.
"There is no way you can blame a WORLDWIDE financial meltdown on the UK government."
I agree, despite the hype of some segments of the media we were pretty much shafted to the same extend as other countries. The main problems the UK had was down to a total lack of any real industry (and I am fairly sure we got rid of all that a good few years before Herr Braun took over).
"True they failed to keep a tight enough reign on the greedy bankers, but then so did pretty much every other western government. If there had been a unilateral tightening of banking in the UK the sector would have just relocated to a country where it is easier for them to carry on doing what they want."
Again, I totally agree. Every time any attempt to reign in the bankers has been made, they threaten to re-locate and the Government backs down. The hint of stronger regulation is always met with "it will drive business away" so it never happens.
The end result is that greed is human and the inevitable happens.
Will this change under the BlairLite ConDem Government? Probably not.
The financial situation in the UK will rise or fall depending on the global issue, nothing the Government will do will have any real impact.
Gordo listened to the banks when they said they wanted less regulation. He was suckered in and did as they said. Now they face going back to the amount of regulation they had before.
He should never have cut the red tape in the first place.
"where we had crazy 125% mortgages "
Can I just say Thank you all once again for underwriting my mortgage.
"Can I just say Thank you all once again for underwriting my mortgage."
Actually, there are lots of people in that situation.
We have had 10 - 15 years of people getting "rich" because they can mortgage the hell out of their property. Rightly or wrongly this money has been so beneficial to UK Plc there was only limited complaining. Almost every one I know took advantage of being able to get 100+% mortages to buy very nice houses, which in turn, allowed the previous owner / builders to get more money. For at least a decade everyone was happy with this merry go round.
Its only when the pyramid scheme collapsed that people started to get upset. We (rightly IMHO) demand more regulation for the bankers because we also admit that the "average" person cant be trusted not to over reach.
Are we all happy that the idea of everyone being able to own their own home is nonsense *or* the average house price will have to be about 3 times the average wage. I think there are lots of people who are going to be upset at the thought of their £300k house actually only being worth £100k from now on. No amount of government cuts will change this and, if anything, it means more needs to be spent on social housing.
The reality is someone on a good wage of £25k a year is going to struggle to get more than £85k in mortgage (this is a good thing to some people) and is unlikely to have more than £15k for a deposit.
Welcome to the new world order.
First day under the Tories and already we have the highest unemployment for umpteen years.
But the Labour party has been blaming the last Tory regime for most stuff for the last 13 years. So surely our new ConDem government has a few weeks grace where it can blame Brown?
Yup, I'm forcibly reminded of that picture taken in the House at the first budget with Brown as PM. Alistair Darling looking like someone had just shoved a pineapple up his arse sitting next to Brown who was obviously enjoying a joke.
I mentally captioned it: "What's so funny?". "Ah, I was just thinking it could have been worse. Last year this would have been my fault.".
Slithering off to leave someone else in the firing line just as the true scale of his cockup becomes apparent? Typical indeed.
More like Luke Skywalker and Yoda...
At least he won't be having to find a way of funding the repulsive idea of ID cards (apart from what's already been spunked on it).
Still, we're in for a rocky ride, but let's remember who created it.
Good riddance to total shit.
No ID from the Tories? I don't beleive it!
No way these control freaks will resist the chance of trying to pin everyone down.
Wait until they get busy with immigration and benefits and the 'need to prove entitlement'.
It may not be called an ID card but I wouldn't trust Osborne as far as I could throw his entrails.
They've put Hague in as Foreign Secretary and he hates foriegners.
There is also only one way to do the huge reductions in spending on people in government offices, civil servants and paper shifters and that's to centalise in the guise of greater local autonomy where locals appear to have more power but it's all controlled centrally with a tighter grip than of now. There are already calls for less police spending and those coppers that are left won't have time to ask people to assist with enquiries, they will just demand the person's Proof of Entitlement card.
So, once you hear of the usual bunch of fucking vultures (reg staff excepted) known as ' IT consultants' being appointed then some form of ID card is imminent - once they've spent billions on two or three systems that don't even get as far as public trials.
"capital gains tax on non-business assets is be on the cards"
So my rich bosses dont have to pay the 1% ride in national insurance but I do?
Cnuts the lot of 'em...
Would you rather your rich bosses sacked you to save money?
A 1% personal NI hike is trivial. We have to find 25% more taxes and/or spending cuts and that's just to maintain our current huge level of debt.
Welcome to FuLab's legacy - you ain't seen nothing yet.
"Would you rather your rich bosses sacked you to save money?
A 1% personal NI hike is trivial."
So for a person finding 1% extra to pay in NI is trivial but its financially crippling for a business? Interesting. Doubly interesting in a business that pays its executives ~45% in bonuses each year......
"Any resemblance between Boy George and Vince and Obi Wan and Yoda is purely coincidental."
The whole office is laughing at that.
"When 70 years old you are, look as good you will not"
There still has to be a change in the expectations of some people such as the loafing gits in the brand new (social) houses opposite where I work.
Imagine a friend would lend you money at 0.5% and then borrow it back from you at 4% on an ongoing basis.
This is how the current Gilt market works, the banks borrow from the Bank of England at 0.5% and then lend it to the Government at 4%. The banks then take this Gilt and use it as collateral to borrow more money at 0.5% from the Bank of England.
"Imagine a friend would lend you money at 0.5% and then borrow it back from you at 4% on an ongoing basis."
Imagine a friend who will lend you money for a day or two at 0.5%, and then borrows money from you for 10 years at 4%...
Gilts are sold to public investors at, say, 4% over whatever number of years, as far as i understand it. You buy £100k in gilts and earn a 4% return on your investment and its deemed to be a pretty safe investment since (unless you're greek) your government doesnt go bust very often.
Gilts are just a way to generate income in the short term.
Thats how my understanding goes anyway. Not that we've covered it in much detail in my studies so far.
"...the effective repeal of Labour’s planned NI rise...but the NI rise for employees will stay. Employers will escape the rise."
So he kept his word - no tax on jobs...just a tax on being employed.
Oh well I'm sure my employer will use part of the saving to give me a pay rise this year so my net income doesn't drop even further. Oh look, pigs! Up in the sky!
That a 1% increase in ers would always impact negatively on ees. I don't think that, as some people suggested, it would discourage employers from creating new posts, but it would clearly put any chance of a pay rise in jeopardy.
You'll have your tax free allowance boosted from 6500ish to 10000ish over the next couple of years. That would make a difference of about £60 per month. Your 1% national insurance hike isnt going to cost you that, so you still win.
Had the lib dems not pushed through this part of the deal you'd be worse off with the conservatives plan to hike the ni for people but not companies, but as it stands you should be better off.
Nah, they have to claw money back from somewhere and V.A.T. is going to go up.
There may even be an attempt to out do Maggie T by bunging V.A.T. on more essentials like stuff for kids.
Expect them to bung more tax on the usual drugs - Baccy, Petrol and Booze.
They will be bringing in laws to make it easier to gamble (the fourth drug) and say it's not thier fault.
I also expect those left in government office to get pat rises due to the increased workload (well, those already earning far too much).
Enjoy it while it lasts.
I give this hastily cobbeled together pair of shoes 6 months before they fall apart.
Hey i've only got half a pint left grab me another (never understood saying you had a half full glass if its not your round)
No rush, but y'know don't forget giving this the chop sometime soonish eh..??
Sounds like an ideal candidate for chopping some heads at HMRC.
...while you're at it.
"Any resemblance between Boy George and Vince and Obi Wan and Yoda is purely coincidental."
Luke Skywalker and Yoda, shurely??
Who was suprised? The minute we got the quote from the lib dems that the tories had the only deal in town then the resignation was on the cards and only hours away. It was simply a case of jumping before a signed agreement between the tories and whigs would have pushed him. The guy was just trying to retain a little dignity, love him or loathe him you can't blame him for doing that.
I presumed that he chose to resign when he did because it was clearly on the cards that come this morning the coalition agreement would have been signed and sealed.
The thing which amuses me most is that Labour and the Tories seem to favour electoral reform in the form of a variation on single transferable vote. Amusing because this was the system the British imposed on Ireland in order to ensure that there would be no overall majority and leave them with a weak a devisive parliament.
Personally I think that "strong and stable" government is a bad thing. A party with an overall majority can pass radical legislation (ID cards anybody?) effectively unopposed by imposing a three line whip. Where there is no clear overall majority then we will get a more open and honest debate. Radical legislation will not be passed, but do we really want radical legislation or sensible, considered management of the country?
The best thing you could do with our parliamentary system is to ban parties from forcing their members to vote in a certain way. You may have voted for an individual member of parliament, but the party leaders will tell him how to vote on particular issues. Worse still members can change allegiance from one party to another, so even if you voted for the party rather than the individual member you can end up with something you didn't vote for. Why this should be allowed without it's automatically forcing a by election I don't know. It's once change to legislation I would definitely be in favour of.
...was looking forward to scenes of the opposite actually. Irate Cameron and Clegg trying to kick the door down while Brown chucks some dishwater from the window above the door, then the door gives way, all three disappear into the house, Brown's dragged quite literally kicking and screaming from No.10 and the rest would probably resemble the ending of The Flintstones credits.
Doesnt the existing prime minister have to resign his position even if the other party wins an overall majority? I'm pretty sure they do.
There was no saving face or jumping before pushed. Everyone knew the conservatives and liberal democrates were on the verge of announcing a deal - he was probably informed before closed doors before anyone else, so he could then get round to see the queen a.s.a.p so there was still time for cameron to get round there to confirm he is in a position to form a government the same night without keeping the old dear up past her bed time.
ID cards due to strong government -pah. Try some hard Criminal (in) Justice Act smashed through by the last lot and used now to arrest you for pretty much anything.
AC cause oops here come the boys in blue
No more Brown, no more Mandy, no more Balls, no more Smith.
I for one am glad the witch and his evil monkeys are dead and I didn't even need to drop a house on them.
What they giveth with one hand, they taketh away with the other... plebs just have the illusion of being better off...
There's a lot of political commentary on these here articles, can we have some icons related?
Unless they put a stake through his heart - he's going to turn up in the tory cabinet in the next few years!
I'm glad Mandy doesn't have any power over the country any more also.
He makes Michael "Something Of The Night" Howard look like a fucking Care Bear in terms of 'people you instinctively know, on a subconscious level, that are just plain wrong'.
My only fear is that I'm not 100% sure if he's eligible to run for Labour leader, and when LibCon get booted for cutting spending (I'd like to give the voting population more credit, but I can't...) then he might end up as PM...a thought to put a rictus on the face, and a stain in the pants, of anyone with an IQ greater than twenty six.
Esp when he's having a bad hair day...
He's there for the duration, and that smell isn't going away any time soon.
I reckon he'll get tasked with implementing Biometric ID Phase 2, after the Sir Humphreys get through explaining to the young lads how government really works.
Be careful when you are driving the stake & make sure that, twice disgraced, Mandy doesn't have his hand in your back pocket already....
As the Merry Andrew (http://www.synonyms.net/synonym/twat) insists on signing himself as the "Dark Lord", where's the appropriate icon?
The people of Britain, now living together in ConDemNation
Home office website says they're going
Let's hope they tear down the surveillance state
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017