fatboy47 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:30 pm

Twas ever thus.

One of Mrs Thatchers first plays in 79 was to get rid of all the sensible credit restrictions that existed at that time.

Getting the plebs deep in debt makes them far easier to control...a good first step if you want a major wealth redistribution.

Margaret Thatcher started the process but it was Labour from 1997 who put it on steriods. De-regulating the Financial Services industry with "light touch legislation" and creating an independent Bank of England as well as an economy based on really big consumer debt, which led to the 2008 crash.

The Third way was largely designed to allow capital to create the wealth that then funded social projects. But it didn't work because the banks went and crashed the global economy with their greed is good philosophy. And let's be honest that's pretty much what most of us would expect banks to do given half a chance.

In compensation for a crashed global economy, ten years of austerity and Trussonomics we did get Sure start for the middle classes and PFIs.

So, yay go-Labour....!

100%. The problem is she's wanting to be Thatcher II more than be her own person and make her own decisions. Maybe she knows she's out in 2 years and wants to make a name for herself.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:04 pm

Factual Frank’s gonna Factual Frank.

Muchacho just can't help himself... Or is Steve Simpson, I can't keep up!

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 6:56 pm

To be fair to Truss, I’m not sure you can blame ALL the current woes on her.

If there’s a correction, I won’t blame her two weeks in to her premiership.

The current fiasco is entirely down to her putting a madman in charge of the economy, as she owed him one. Unchecked by anyone, he just announces it and clears off and her too. I think it can safely be pinned on her.

jen1066 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:37 pm

Good! You're an absolute pain in the backside. I'm free to air my views, and you just think you are more intelligent than you are. Really do my tits in.

Thing is though you are on some sort of imaginary list that's supposed to block but weirdly he seems to still know exactly what you are posting & still interacts so either the facility doesn't work as it should or he's spouting complete b*llocks, extremely strange fella he's far from alone to be fair.

I was brought up under the motto out of debt out of danger and it's something I've always encouraged my children to live by.
I feel desperately sorry though for young people now trying to get onto the property ladder either by renting or buying as these costs are ridiculous and house price inflation is mainly due to some ridiculous credit deals concocted by spivs backed by so called expert politicians sat in the treasury quaffing champagne with so called market experts who are as competent as a chimpanzee with a pin and a copy of the FT shares page.

ClaretPete001 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:04 pm

Margaret Thatcher started the process but it was Labour from 1997 who put it on steriods. De-regulating the Financial Services industry with "light touch legislation" and creating an independent Bank of England as well as an economy based on really big consumer debt, which led to the 2008 crash.

The Third way was largely designed to allow capital to create the wealth that then funded social projects. But it didn't work because the banks went and crashed the global economy with their greed is good philosophy. And let's be honest that's pretty much what most of us would expect banks to do given half a chance.

In compensation for a crashed global economy, ten years of austerity and Trussonomics we did get Sure start for the middle classes and PFIs.

So, yay go-Labour....!

Here we go again. Labour crashed the world economy in 2008, just as they put the country on three day week and caused widespread power cuts in the seventies. Just get your facts straight before you utter such bilge.

dermotdermot wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:35 pm

Here we go again. Labour crashed the world economy in 2008, just as they put the country on three day week and caused widespread power cuts in the seventies. Just get your facts straight before you utter such bilge.

If you read it again you'll see that they didn't claim Labour crashed the economy.
Labour gave the banks more freedom, it was the banks who did it.

Labour were at fault for arrogantly claiming they'd ended the boom and bust nature of the economy and then not preparing for an inevitable crash.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:37 pm

If you read it again you'll see that they didn't claim Labour crashed the economy.
Labour gave the banks more freedom, it was the banks who did it.

Labour were at fault for arrogantly claiming they'd ended the boom and bust nature of the economy and then not preparing for an inevitable crash.

He/they implied it. The global banking crisis of 2008 was caused by Lehman Brothers filing for bankruptcy. This caused global markets to plummet. Gordon Brown actually dealt with it quite well, leading other countries to follow suit. Osborne and Cameron had an awkward moment, after they were elected, when a visiting Barrack Obama said that the world owed a debt of gratitude to their predecessor for coming up with a solution. They then started the process of leading the country into the perilous position it finds itself in now.

dermotdermot wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:52 pm

He/they implied it. The global banking crisis of 2008 was caused by Lehman Brothers filing for bankruptcy. This caused global markets to plummet. Gordon Brown actually dealt with it quite well, leading other countries to follow suit. Osborne and Cameron had an awkward moment, after they were elected, when a visiting Barrack Obama said that the world owed a debt of gratitude to their predecessor for coming up with a solution. They then started the process of leading the country into the perilous position it finds itself in now.

Wasn't just a single bank, it was the whole subprime mortgage set up that fell over and took the global economy with it and we got hit very hard because our banks were gambling on the subprime market.

He didn't imply it, you're just overly sensitive to any criticism of Labour, but they deserve it in this instance, get over it because it's always going to be mentioned.

If you're on about austerity, that was an EU requirement as part of the Maastricht treaty, our gov didn't really have much of a choice, the issue was they swung the axe too far.

IanMcL wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:08 pm

The current fiasco is entirely down to her putting a madman in charge of the economy, as she owed him one. Unchecked by anyone, he just announces it and clears off and her too. I think it can safely be pinned on her.

I agree they’ve collectively screwed up, more point is more specific that I wouldn’t blame her for a housing market crash. I think it’s been coming for a while because they previous PMs have allowed decades of cheap money to inflate house prices.

Now, relatively small movements in interest rates in historic terms (one post above saying interest rates used to be 10% - yet markets are in complete panic about 6%), seem to be a disaster. Why? Because everyone has over leveraged to buy houses they couldn’t afford.

I don’t think that’s Truss’s fault. But everything else is

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:01 pm

Wasn't just a single bank, it was the whole subprime mortgage set up that fell over and took the global economy with it and we got hit very hard because our banks were gambling on the subprime market.

He didn't imply it, you're just overly sensitive to any criticism of Labour, but they deserve it in this instance, get over it because it's always going to be mentioned.

If you're on about austerity, that was an EU requirement as part of the Maastricht treaty, our gov didn't really have much of a choice, the issue was they swung the axe too far.

Not at al sensitive to any criticism of Labour. I actually found myself voting twice for the Conservative party on account of detesting a certain individual that much. I just yearn for those halcyon days between 1997 and 2010 when hardly anything seemed to go financially wrong.

dermotdermot wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:30 pm

Not at al sensitive to any criticism of Labour. I actually found myself voting twice for the Conservative party on account of detesting a certain individual that much. I just yearn for those halcyon days between 1997 and 2010 when hardly anything seemed to go financially wrong.

Are you forgetting the 2007/2008 financial crisis?

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:36 pm

Are you forgetting the 2007/2008 financial crisis?

Or Iraq 2003

Brown selling our gold reserves when gold was at its lowest value ...

But apart from those things yayyyy bring back those Halcyon days

Bosscat wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:41 pm

Or Iraq 2003

Brown selling our gold reserves when gold was at its lowest value ...

But apart from those things yayyyy bring back those Halcyon days

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:36 pm

Are you forgetting the 2007/2008 financial crisis?

Well I didn’t think that it was as bad as people made out. It was dealt with. What affected me more was the way the banking system changed after Osborne became chancellor. Suddenly gone was the one to one annual meeting with a bank manager and in was being ushered off to a call centre in somewhere like Birmingham where I had to deal with a series of young spivs who failed to grasp any understanding of my business at all and insisted that I replayed a large amount of money over a two year period. They spoke in terms of so many ‘k’s and, if I failed to make the payments, I would have to deal with the recovery mob and that, apparently, wasn’t a pleasant experience. I dealt with it though.

Bosscat wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:41 pm

Or Iraq 2003

Brown selling our gold reserves when gold was at its lowest value ...

But apart from those things yayyyy bring back those Halcyon days

Hello BC. How are you?

We were talking finances and Gordon Brown only sold off half of the gold reserves and, when he did, the other half went up in value and ended up being worth more than than the whole lot was worth in the first place. A good bit of business. We still have more gold reserves than most countries in the world even now. I thought that you would have been intelligent enough to know that.

The 2007/08 financial crisis and the aftermath were huge.

dermotdermot wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:57 pm

Hello BC. How are you?

We were talking finances and Gordon Brown only sold off half of the gold reserves and, when he did, the other half went up in value and ended up being worth more than than the whole lot was worth in the first place. A good bit of business. We still have more gold reserves than most countries in the world even now. I thought that you would have been intelligent enough to know that.

I see the sense of humour bypass worked Dermot ... hows that cat

I see that your charisma bypass worked, BC. The cat got poked in the eye when it tried to do the same to a magpie.

Duffer_ wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 6:46 pm

If only most of the Boomers had the principles and convictions of their youth, rather than pulling up the ladder on university education costs, closing the door on defined benefit pensions, and advocating nimbyism whilst counting their property profits.

It would be a lot easier for this generation if my parents' generation weren't so selfish.

When Boomers left school in the mid sixties only 4% went to university, the rest of us had to get a job. So cut the crap with your imaginary grievance,
Is that enough bite for you.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:24 pm

I agree they’ve collectively screwed up, more point is more specific that I wouldn’t blame her for a housing market crash. I think it’s been coming for a while because they previous PMs have allowed decades of cheap money to inflate house prices.

Now, relatively small movements in interest rates in historic terms (one post above saying interest rates used to be 10% - yet markets are in complete panic about 6%), seem to be a disaster. Why? Because everyone has over leveraged to buy houses they couldn’t afford.

I don’t think that’s Truss’s fault. But everything else is

The politics are banned here, so best not pursue. However, the actions have sharpened all the minds who cause ups and downs and that is as a result of her watch

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:17 pm

Thing is though you are on some sort of imaginary list that's supposed to block but weirdly he seems to still know exactly what you are posting & still interacts so either the facility doesn't work as it should or he's spouting complete b*llocks, extremely strange fella he's far from alone to be fair.

He's just one of those. I have to put up with them with work every day. Annoying, but you learn to tolerate them.

jen1066 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:37 pm

Good! You're an absolute pain in the backside. I'm free to air my views, and you just think you are more intelligent than you are. Really do my tits in.

Well, based on previous experience of your, er, "views", I don't think you'll be around for long

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:59 pm

The 2007/08 financial crisis and the aftermath were huge.

This

I don't think people have worked out yet just how much damage it did to have a huge recession after bailing out the banks

Yes, the banks had to be bailed out, but the resulting austerity was too deep and too long and people haven't really recovered from that

levraiclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 02, 2022 10:08 pm

When Boomers left school in the mid sixties only 4% went to university, the rest of us had to get a job. So cut the crap with your imaginary grievance,
Is that enough bite for you.

Why so touchy? Sure, approx 4% went to university at the start of the 1960s but it rose significantly during the Boomer entry period and was close to 15% by 1970. I'm not aware of any other near fourfold generational increases. And in any event, they did alright with pensions, property and pillaging.

I am not knocking anybody who has worked hard for their lot, or anybody who has been unable to work for that matter, whatever their age. I just object to the older generations patronising younger ones, particularly without any empathy for their economic plight which is, in part, of their doing. Generational equity is important and we'd all do well to remember it's those that come after us that we need to care for us in later years.

MOD: Some posters appear to be on the lookout to deliberately turn sensible threads into ones with political agendas. To be clear, this does appear deliberate, despite numerous warnings in the past. Sorry but it’s another locked thread!