City slickers...

[Davy51]

We have been told that the recent banking & stock market turmoil has been created as a moneymaking exercise by financial hedge fund "short selling", surely this amounts to fraud if it affects the financial security of companys ,investors & pension funds,or will these thieves be protected by the cloak of financial whiz kid respectability within their avaricious institutions?

[Paul Kennedy]

Short selling is not illegal....albeit it might be considered by some to be immoral. On Thursday the Financial Services Authority took meaures to stop short selling.

 

For those not sure what short selling is, it is where somebody borrows shares from a shareholder and sells them to a buyer at the current market price, they then hope that the share price falls and indeed it has been suggested that they encourage a price fall, at which point they buy enough shares to give back to the original shareholder...along with a fee for borrowing the shares.

[Davy51]

Ok ,so all is well in the City then.

[Paul Kennedy]

No. Our financial services industry is burdened by bad and doubtful debts ( so called toxic mortgage debt)....of its own making and encouraged to make "dodgy" loans by our Government over the last 10 years in order to "grow" the economy.

 

In the US, their Govenment has now created a financial institution to take such debts off the balance sheets of their banks....and the cost about $700 billion, which they hope to recoup by selling them on when market conditions improve. What a mess...and what a waste of money.

[observer]

In the financial world, as in Parliament; a lack of concise regulation allows immorality to thrive.

[Dave P]

Is this capatalism collapsing ? Ironic don,t you think that when the HBOS / Barclays deal was announced "thousands of jobs at risk " resulted. These will no doubt result from branch closures rather than the top end of the merger. Still we have the tories way ahead in the polls to sort this out - let me think now, 3 million unemployed, record levels of inflation, record levels of borrowing, poll tax, ah yes the good old days !

[observer]

Alas, this time they can blame the unemployment on a global economic crisis, rather than an instrument of their own policy!

[asperity]

And there aren't already 3 million unemployed? Oh no sorry, most of them are "incapacitated"

[observer]

There the left overs from the last (Maggie's) case of mass unemployment!

[asperity]

Still blaming Maggie after all these years?

[observer]

Historical fact Asp; it's her legacy.

[asperity]

Historical fact, the country has lost more of its manufacturing base SINCE she went than before. Cry over that fact.

[KeithR]

As a direct result of her policies

[asperity]

Obviously was (and still is) a VERY powerful woman to be still affecting the country after so many years. Of course this wouldn't have anything to do with the policies of the present government being unable to do anything about her "legacy" despite being in office for over 11 years with a large working majority. :wink:Sometimes you have to stop living in the past, fighting old fights, and look forward. Unfortunately all Prudence Brown has given us to look forward to are higher and higher taxes for less and less return.

[observer]

As I keep saying, but it doesn't seem to be being digested: she set the scene for the politics that have since followed by all PMs; indeed Bliar was probably her chief disciple, and don't you remember Brown's first act as PM - to invite her to Number 10. Perhaps the key example of her continued legacy is the Income Super-Tax Rate - which used to be 84%, she brought it down to 60% then to 40%, and we know that since then the wealth gap has gotten wider and wider, with fat cats and celebs raking in ?millions for little or no contribution to the Nation's wellbeing.

[asperity]

And as I said she was chucked out of Downing Street 16 years ago, so don't try and say that her policies were so wrong that every other PM since was forced into following them. That doesn't make sense. If they were so wrong then any government with the majority that this one has enjoyed would have had no problem reversing them. You can't have it both ways. The fact is that when Maggie came to power the UK was a basket case and her policies, like them or loathe them, lifted the country out of the doldrums. Now the Labour party has managed to dump the country back into the mire again without doing anything to right social injustice. In fact they have embraced the celebrity culture with alacrity.

[observer]

She set a cultural trend that was followed by the masses from then on, of individual self interest, beggar thy neighbour, which permeated every facet of our society and was readily adopted by New Labour. Alas it's now come back to bite us, in the avaricious antics of the City, the home ownership bandwagon, privatisation etc. And now in the light of the bubble bursting, the public mood is beginning to change - but tragically, there is no alternative for people who have seen that light, as all three Parties are still locked into the myth.

[asperity]

So it wasn't Maggie, it was the masses (whoever they are) following each other like sheep. So you may as well blame the media because they tell the great unwashed what trend they should be following today. I think you've got your mindset stuck in a "Hate Maggie" track Obs, and its blinding you to the real causes of problems in the 21st century. Maggie is no longer relevant.

[wolfie]

Precisely the problem. Maggies legacy and policies lived on under Blair allbeit a watered down version. We have basically had tory policies for 26 years. They are now falling apart because of global problems and the electorate will then vote in the full blown Tory party as a solution. The mind boggles.

[Peter T]

One thing that you are leaving out. Money.

Nulab have done what they always do, and that is to leave a financial mess that will take the Tories and the country, several years of hardship to sort out.

 

THAT is the main difference between the two parties.

[observer]

Asp: it's actually an unintended compliment on my part, to attribute Thatcher with such a powerfull and lasting legacy; but as one of very few conviction politicians who made the top job, she certainly broke with the preceeding post-war concensus and took us in a completly different direction. Which leads me to suggest that that post-war concensus itself was a powerfull legacy, left by a Government of conviction polititions led by Clement Attlee, which gave and sustained the concept of the welfare state, which continued under subsequent "one Nation" Tory PMs. And yes, the process was no doubt reflective of the public's mood; from the desire to build a "land fit for heroes" by an electorate homogenised by common struggles and hardships in a war that left this Country almost bankrupt; who then handed the baton onto another generation that were ignorant of the class injustices and the economic hardships of the 30s, and grew up in a world of rising economic prosperity, where the notion of individual ownership and success became an attractive proposition.

[Rick]

asp & Peter T,

 

Your's both SPOT ON. Nulab have had 11 years to make their mark, but when their big ideas came to nothing (or worse, THIS), then their core supporters start blaming the party before them. Complete farce!. How far back do we go then, churchill, Cromwell, Neanderthal man??? From where I see things, Frugal, Fiscal & Prudence Brown has had 10 years as chancellor to "turn-around" Maggies wrong-doings and prepare us for the inevitable cycle of recession. We could all see it coming early last year, but that incompetent still encouraged massive lending & spending, even selling off our Gold reserves at far less than their true value. That was around the time he was crowing about how strong our economy now was, thanks to New Labour's policies (NOT maggies legacy). And the idiot is still harping-on about child poverty - what good is a free laptop & broadband for kids in a freezing cold house (not re-possessed yet) with no food???. What about Adult Tax-Payer Poverty? Priorities hmmmmmm. And don't even get me started on the good old "Tough On Crime" pledge - great idea that one with no prisons to shove 'em in. Flood the country with foreign criminals galore, catch & convict a fraction of them, then simply let them go again to rape & pillage our society. I suppose THAT's Maggies fault as well??? Yes, she did have her faults - no body's ever going to be perfect, but at least she had conviction in her policies and stood up to the likes of France & Germany. We've had 11 years of Poodles bowing down to other countries demands, giving away billions in foreign aid, when bodger & badger should have been concentrating on OUR country. If Tony B. Liar had spent less time flying all over the world to sort out other countries' problems, then just maybe he could have come good. Unfortunately, our own country took second place. Sorry folks, this is well & truly down to New Labour. They were claiming total success this time last year, but now it's all gone belly-up it just HAS to be someone else's fault doesn't it? Still, Brown & Darling have feathered their nests by giving the Scotch a better deal, I just wish they'd both hurry back home to reap their rewards.

 

"True Blue" I'm NOT, but there's no better party to turn things around at present. I have seen the pathetic mess that Labour have TWICE created, and therefor have no desire to see it again. We've all got hard times ahead, and I sincerely hope all those who voted them in are happy with their short-sighted choice.

 

Good Luck, you're going to need it!.

[wolfie]

One thing that you are leaving out. Money.

Nulab have done what they always do, and that is to leave a financial mess that will take the Tories and the country, several years of hardship to sort out.

 

THAT is the main difference between the two parties.

 

So why was the National debt that Labour inherited in 1997 the highest that it had been since the 80's standing at 44.8% of GDP

[Peter T]

Rick,

NOT a happy bunny, then? Good post.

 

Wolfie,

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

I am a recipient of Political policies, NOT a supporter.

Are you denying that Labour leave the incoming parties with a huge finacial mess to sort out?

[wolfie]

 

Are you denying that Labour leave the incoming parties with a huge finacial mess to sort out?

 

I'm not denying anything, I am responding to the fact that you say there is a difference between the parties and clearly if you regard the net debt that is left as being a financial mess then there is little difference.

 

The idea that Tories always hand over an economy "with public finances in good shape" is a myth.