Who is most hated - Thatcher or Blair

[turbobloke]

crankedup said:

legzr1 said:

Isn't this the 'race to the bottom' that people have been warning of since the coalition took power?

Minimum wage earners having to defend their right to withdraw labour whilst the top 5% of earners moan that their tax is paying for their over-generous pensions.

It's as corrupt as the worst of the bankers excesses.

This is only of interest to those caught in the net of 'race to the bottom'. For those currently fortunate enough to escape the net these people do not recognise a problem. Its the usual short term selfish attitudes often expressed by the unaffected, dressed over with excuses such as 'global competition'.

What is the source of government net income that pays for everything?

Taking the so-called race to the bottom as like a depressurised aircraft losing altitude to get down to higher oxygen levels, before that can happen the 'caring left' presents as wanting adults to put oxygen masks on the children first, when they need to go on the adults first in order to save both. There is then a false argument that this is uncaring on the part of adults because while it actually works it looks bad, won't somebody think of the childwen etc etc but without prioritising help for those on whom others depend, there is greater suffering and loss.

The priority for government must be to make sure that those who pay for everything are not prevented from doing so by being hit too hard. This may well promote emotive whining rather than rational thought in some quarters, whining which needs to be ignored.

[crankedup]

Rovinghawk said:

andymadmak said:

Anyway, it's pretty clear that the "banking crisis" was a product of more than one factor.

There's sufficient blame/culpability for everyone to have a share. I include those who borrowed money that they shouldn't have.

Those devoid of financial acumen need to have systems in place for their own protection. Never swim with the Great White sharks, unless your in a cage.

[crankedup]

turbobloke said:

crankedup said:

legzr1 said:

Isn't this the 'race to the bottom' that people have been warning of since the coalition took power?

Minimum wage earners having to defend their right to withdraw labour whilst the top 5% of earners moan that their tax is paying for their over-generous pensions.

It's as corrupt as the worst of the bankers excesses.

This is only of interest to those caught in the net of 'race to the bottom'. For those currently fortunate enough to escape the net these people do not recognise a problem. Its the usual short term selfish attitudes often expressed by the unaffected, dressed over with excuses such as 'global competition'.

What is the source of government net income that pays for everything?

Taking the so-called race to the bottom as like a depressurised aircraft losing altitude to get down to higher oxygen levels, before that can happen the 'caring left' presents as wanting adults to put oxygen masks on the children first, when they need to go on the adults first in order to save both. There is then a false argument that this is uncaring on the part of adults because while it actually works it looks bad, won't somebody think of the childwen etc etc but without prioritising help for those on whom others depend, there is greater suffering and loss.

The priority for government must be to make sure that those who pay for everything are not prevented from doing so by being hit too hard. This may well promote emotive whining rather than rational thought in some quarters, whining which needs to be ignored.

I certainly wouldn't disagree with your widely understood prognosis, for me its all about %, time values and a host of other variances.

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

Those devoid of financial acumen need to have systems in place for their own protection. Never swim with the Great White sharks, unless your in a cage.

And yet you repeatedly overlook the fact that the banks were forced to lend to people with little financial acumen...

[crankedup]

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Those devoid of financial acumen need to have systems in place for their own protection. Never swim with the Great White sharks, unless your in a cage.

And yet you repeatedly overlook the fact that the banks were forced to lend to people with little financial acumen...

So all the wrapping of bad debt selling on, the fiddles and downright criminality within the industry seems overlooked. You point to a 'few' involved.

[turbobloke]

crankedup said:

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Those devoid of financial acumen need to have systems in place for their own protection. Never swim with the Great White sharks, unless your in a cage.

And yet you repeatedly overlook the fact that the banks were forced to lend to people with little financial acumen...

So all the wrapping of bad debt selling on, the fiddles and downright criminality within the industry seems overlooked. You point to a 'few' involved.

Where are these convicted criminals? The army you can see appears to be invisible to others.

It was bad enough having American egalitarian delusion at the root of the crunch and crash (aided and abetted by other players along the way) the last thing we need now is more childlike emotion-over-reason in the form of Miliband's egalitarian deliusion. That'll slow down the recovery even more than that intelligent fool Clegg has managed so far.

It must be worth a bit of unwarranted Thatcheresque hate from the emoters to get the country back on its feet sooner rather than later.

[Kermit power]

andymadmak said:

crankedup said:

SIDICKS believes the banking crisis was only caused by a few naughty people employed within the industry

For somebody who preaches 'show us your evidence' your own evidence to support your assertions seems somewhat thin!

And you think that the banking crisis was caused by lots of naughty people, indicative of a culture of naughtiness ( to use your vernacular) within the banking sector. I could put a rofl smilie to that just as easily. Your opinion is no more valid in this regard that Sidicks. However, the balance of evidence presented to date would seem to suggest that Sidicks view is probably the more accurate. Hundreds of thousands of people are employed in the banking industry and there has been nothing shown to date that would suggest that a majority, or even a significant minority were involved in anything hooky. Bizarrely your own beloved Coop bank seems to have been amongst the most culturally corrupt, so perhaps your judgement might not be the most reliable arbiter of things in this matter?

Anyway, it's pretty clear that the "banking crisis" was a product of more than one factor. Politicians on both sides of the Atlantic played a mighty role too. I could go so far as to say that without the likes of Clinton, Brown et al and the actions that they took for political gain which sowed the seeds of the catastrophe that followed then there would have been no banking crisis. But that would be just my opinion, and you'd be quite within your rights to rofl smilie me for expressing it.

And let's not forget the ratings agencies, who took all of those toxic loan derivatives and blessed them with AAA credit ratings.

The upshot of this was that in many cases, bankers (whom Cranked Up would have us believe were corrupt, incompetent or both) were nothing of the sort. They were going to the ratings agencies to perform their due diligence (which is, after all, what the ratings agencies are for) and being told "everything's rosy - invest away".

How the ratings agencies have been allowed to continue operating seemingly totally unaffected by the whole scandal is totally beyond me.

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

So all the wrapping of bad debt selling on, the fiddles and downright criminality within the industry seems overlooked. You point to a 'few' involved.

The wrapping of debt and selling on is a standard practice for risk management. It is for investors to ascertain whether the debt is 'bad' and what price to pay for that debt. If the investor has not done appropriate due diligence that is the fault of the investor, no one else.

Of course if the bank has mis-sold to the investor by providing false details about the underlying risks then that is entirely different.

Again, you make vague references to 'fiddles' and 'downright criminality' without explaining or justifying your claims.

These can readily be discounted as tabloid journalism rather than credible things worthy of further discussion.

[Kermit power]

crankedup said:

legzr1 said:

Isn't this the 'race to the bottom' that people have been warning of since the coalition took power?

Minimum wage earners having to defend their right to withdraw labour whilst the top 5% of earners moan that their tax is paying for their over-generous pensions.

It's as corrupt as the worst of the bankers excesses.

This is only of interest to those caught in the net of 'race to the bottom'. For those currently fortunate enough to escape the net these people do not recognise a problem. Its the usual short term selfish attitudes often expressed by the unaffected, dressed over with excuses such as 'global competition'.

How on earth is it "dressed over with excuses such as global competition"???

What else do you think it is?

Look around your home. How many of the electrical goods were made in the UK? How much of the clothing?

Of course, all of those items could have been made here with workers paid £7 per hour instead of £7 per day, but if they had, would you have been willing to pay £1,200 instead of £400 (or however much it cost) for your TV?

Assuming for a minute that you personally would have been prepared to pay the extra price of manufacturing goods here rather than in a globally competitive market, how much more would your employer need to pay you to make sure that you could maintain a sustainable existence, given your new magnanimity towards your fellow workers?

The sad fact is that unless people in this country are prepared to pay more for goods manufactured in this country (and they're not), then there is absolutely no way of avoiding global competition.

[legzr1]

crankedup said:

This is only of interest to those caught in the net of 'race to the bottom'. For those currently fortunate enough to escape the net these people do not recognise a problem. Its the usual short term selfish attitudes often expressed by the unaffected, dressed over with excuses such as 'global competition'.

If there was any doubt then the last couple of pages in this thread has put us all right.

Seems like we're all children and can only be saved by the top 5% of adult tax-payers - please leave them alone, don't tax them too much and allow them to save us all.

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

If there was any doubt then the last couple of pages in this thread has put us all right.

Seems like we're all children and can only be saved by the top 5% of adult tax-payers - please leave them alone, don't tax them too much and allow them to save us all.

Ridiculous straw man argument, but not unexpected.

[turbobloke]

legzr1 said:

crankedup said:

This is only of interest to those caught in the net of 'race to the bottom'. For those currently fortunate enough to escape the net these people do not recognise a problem. Its the usual short term selfish attitudes often expressed by the unaffected, dressed over with excuses such as 'global competition'.

If there was any doubt then the last couple of pages in this thread has put us all right.

Apparently not, judging from the above posts - but there may be sufficient numbers in the electorate who remember the result of 1997-2010 and which Party was in office, emoting away on behalf of the poor bloody infantry and causing them more problems rather than finding any solutions.

[alock]

In a parallel universe...

crankedup said:

But you are missing the point I have made and explained! these Governments were weak, you said so yourself. My point is this, AGAIN, where was the legislation???? to reign in the over active Unions Banks. In the absence of any I say for the last time these Governments were weak. THAT IS MY STATEMENT, No point trying to broaden it out as I do not have any argument against the Thatcher Labour Government legislation, that did happen.

crankedup said:

We know how the three main culprits were all involved. But its the bankers unions who bear the brunt of the blame for the crisis and continuance of disclosures of serious malpractice and criminality confirms public opinion is spot on, the financial industry union has been utterly corrupt and its contempt for its customers the public exposed.

Maybe I'm missing some nuance to your arguments? You appear to be blaming the Tory government for not regulating against out of control unions and yet not blaming the Labour government for out of control banks.

[legzr1]

sidicks said:

Ridiculous straw man argument, but not unexpected.

Yes, based on an earlier ridiculous analogy from your bestest chum...

[legzr1]

turbobloke said:

Apparently not, judging from the above posts - but there may be sufficient numbers in the electorate who remember the result of 1997-2010 and which Party was in office, emoting away on behalf of the poor bloody infantry and causing them more problems rather than finding any solutions.

Thank The Lord the Tory-led coalition are here to save us all.

Four years and counting...

Please Sir, when will it all end?

[Rovinghawk]

crankedup said:

Those devoid of financial acumen need to have systems in place for their own protection. Never swim with the Great White sharks, unless your in a cage.

The whole mess started when the US passed some lovely legislation forcing banks to lend to the NINJAs.

[Rovinghawk]

legzr1 said:

Thank The Lord the Tory-led coalition are here to save us all.
Four years and counting...
Please Sir, when will it all end?

Thirteen years of profligacy takes more than four years to fix, especially when nobody wants to take the medicine & the LibDems hamper every move.

I'm sorry that the conservatives aren't fixing labour's mess fast enough for you.

[anonymous-user]

legzr1 said:

Thank The Lord the Tory-led coalition are here to save us all.

Four years and counting...

Please Sir, when will it all end?

Don't worry next year you'll probably get a Labour/SNP coalition who will lead you all to the promised land.

By the way all the T&G guys I know are proud of the fact, why are you so cagey about your union? My guess is you're more than just a member?

[sidicks]

fblm said:

Don't worry next year you'll probably get a Labour/SNP coalition who will lead you all to the promised land.

By the way all the T&G guys I know are proud of the fact, why are you so cagey about your union? My guess is you're more than just a member?

Are you using the slang definition of 'member'?

[anonymous-user]

sidicks said:

Are you using the slang definition of 'member'?

Ha, no. I have a few T&G in the family, even a convener. So many of Legz' phrases about sticking up for the little man against the Tory bds and no such thing as society etc... are such stock union soundbites it reminds me of dinner back home so I'm curious!