Who is most hated - Thatcher or Blair

[legzr1]

Rovinghawk said:

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.

No figure then?

Figures.

[legzr1]

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?

A Labour/SNP coalition doesn't fill me with glee if I'm honest but the cost would almost be worth it just to see the frothing from a few on here.


Almost...



I'm not cagey about anything.
You presumed my allegiances once and this is only the second time you've mentioned it.

As it happens, it's none of your business and adds nothing to the discussion.

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

A Labour/SNP coalition doesn't fill me with glee if I'm honest but the cost would almost be worth it just to see the frothing from a few on here.

Under that scenario, most of us would be sufficiently mobile to be watching the disaster from afar and laughing at the outcome!

legzr1 said:

I'm not cagey about anything.
You presumed my allegiances once and this is only the second time you've mentioned it.

As it happens, it's none of your business and adds nothing to the discussion.

It's not hard to make a credible assumption.

[Rovinghawk]

legzr1 said:

No figure then?

My crystal ball's off for recalibration at the moment. I can't predict the future without it.

[legzr1]

sidicks said:

Are you using the slang definition of 'member'?

Is that your level?

Really?

What a thoroughly decent character you are.

There are many posters on here I disagree with but would gladly share a pint with, have a laugh and a light-hearted discussion.

You?

No.




A now long-retired work mate and an experienced soldier in some dirty, dirty wars would almost certainly describe you thus:

"See that sidicks? I've shot better s than that"

[legzr1]

sidicks said:

Under that scenario, most of us would be sufficiently mobile to be watching the disaster from afar and laughing at the outcome!

Oh please, please, please say it's true!

You'd leave?

Really?

Don't do a 'Daniels' and go back on your word now.




Excuse me, I'm off to do some canvassing...

[legzr1]

Rovinghawk said:

My crystal ball's off for recalibration at the moment. I can't predict the future without it.

Fair enough.

Tell me, what would you consider a 'fair' timespan before this coalition starts taking responsibility for the causes their actions are having rather than taking credit when it works/blaming 'those bds' when it doesn't?

12 months?

Another 5 year term?

[Rovinghawk]

13 years of screwing it up having inherited a superb set of books. I'd say a minimum of eight years to repair the damage. Your estimates might vary.

[legzr1]

Rovinghawk said:

13 years of screwing it up having inherited a superb set of books. I'd say a minimum of eight years to repair the damage. Your estimates might vary.

I don't have an estimate.

Wait and see I guess.

[ukwill]

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!

In the UK, the Financial Industry employs just over 1m people. Out of interest, what % would you say are complicit in causing the financial crisis?

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

Is that your level?

Really?

What a thoroughly decent character you are.

How quickly you forget....

legzr1 said:

sidicks said:

Finger in the air

I'd guess the middle one...

legzr1 said:

There are many posters on here I disagree with but would gladly share a pint with, have a laugh and a light-hearted discussion.

You?

No.

A now long-retired work mate and an experienced soldier in some dirty, dirty wars would almost certainly describe you thus:

"See that sidicks? I've shot better s than that"

Nice.

No danger of me having a drink with you - it's quite clear that, not only would you expect me to pay for all of the drinks, you'd then moan that I hadn't bought the peanuts too..

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

Fair enough.

Tell me, what would you consider a 'fair' timespan before this coalition starts taking responsibility for the causes their actions are having rather than taking credit when it works/blaming 'those bds' when it doesn't?

12 months?

Another 5 year term?

How long before you and your type stop blaming Thatcher??

[legzr1]

Oh, I get it - I make a vague reference to your (seemingly) M.O of 'I'm alright Jack' and you respond with insinuating I'm a cock?

Nice.

Real nice.


Send me a postcard when you fk off to pastures new.

[legzr1]

sidicks said:

How long before you and your type stop blaming Thatcher??

Thatcher?

Where?

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

Oh, I get it - I make a vague reference to your (seemingly) M.O of 'I'm alright Jack' and you respond with insinuating I'm a cock?

I'm not responsible for your false assumptions.

legzr1 said:

Nice.
Real nice.

And you've been so polite to me on this thread...

legzr1 said:

Send me a postcard when you fk off to pastures new.

Actually, I take it all back, you sound like a thoroughly nice chap after all.

I'm happy to buy the drinks (as long as I can offset them against tax)..

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 16th December 18:04

[legzr1]

sidicks said:

Actually, I take it all back, you sound like a thoroughly nice chap after all.

I'm happy to buy the drinks (as long as I can offset them against tax)..

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 16th December 18:04

Not sure how that works to be honest.

You could class it as 'entertainment' but, judging by your recent posts you'd be leaving yourself open to accusations of fraud.

Got any mates in Libor? Ask how they got away with it for so long (or, ask how they were caught).

[crankedup]

turbobloke said:

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.

Army that I see, do you know what your on about, I certainly don't.

The delusion was indeed very heavy in the air, just like the previous great crash.

It must always be remembered Thatchers great meddling resulting in de-regulation in the City, nothing unwarranted in this. Or was you thinking all is well in the Global economy.

[crankedup]

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Its no accident at all, I and millions of others blame the bankers if for no other reason then the fact that they were paid to do a job of work, they got caught out and are now rightly imo held in very low regard to be polite about it.

So don't be surprised if you get picked up on false statements.

Again, you want to blame the majority for the corrupt practices of a small minority. It makes no sense.

crankedup said:

It is still an ongoing investigation where the corruption has been found to exist Numbers of those brought to justice is minimal, this merely adds to the public disdain of the industry as a whole. Unless of course the reporting is entirely wrong and the industry is a pure and white as driven snow.

Yes, you believe all you read in the papers if it suits you to do so (and conveniently ignore all that does not). Strange that you see the lack of criminal convictions as supporting your own opinion not those who suggest that the abuse was not widespread. Given this illogical approach, nothing could ever change your opinion!

crankedup said:

I agree corruption within politics existed, at least those responsible have been brought to justice. Some others escaped though, much to the annoyance of some I guess.

The point of criminality amidst other industries is that it is the banking industry that affects every single person in the Country. Not the same thing with other industries, tesco for example.

I admire your staunch defence of the industry in which you work but it will be many years or some decades before the damage sustained to public confidence is repaired.

Indeed, but much of that is built on fiction rather than fact, as your posts demonstrate.

False statements or statements you do not like.

I'm not blaming the majority, that's a figment of your imagination. In fact I went out of my way in earlier threads that I was fairly sure that some decent honest people work in banks. That is based upon the balance of probabilities.

Fiction I suggest is your strong point. The bankers are identified, as a industry, as the lowest form of workers. To drop under the poor old estate agents in terms of being recognised as a respectable upstanding profession serving the community just about sums it up very nicely.
Go on walk down any high street proclaiming how badly treated in the public perceptions, bankers are treated. Take the tin lid.

[crankedup]

sidicks said:

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.

Indeed, unfortunately those investors were the financial pro's in the main, inter bank trading. Due diligence my arse, they for the most part were so over excited and arrogant they lost sight of all that stuff, but you know that. They assumed that they could dump the crap and hold the quality, fine but it all went wrong.

Yes I thought all the fiddles and downright criminality was well published, well it is and you know that. Stop being obtuse for a change.

[Guybrush]

Rovinghawk said:

13 years of screwing it up having inherited a superb set of books. I'd say a minimum of eight years to repair the damage. Your estimates might vary.

Quite. Isn't it amazing though, how conveniently short are some people's memories? The left are trying to place the blame for the current state of the economy (despite its improving) on the current government.