Well no other bugger would have " loaned " us the money?
The Government have " loaned " the banks 90 billion quid, are you saying that people or Governments should not pay back money borrowed to them?
Whatever anyone may say without that money we would have been sunk. Peoples memories can be so short at times. :cry:
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Do you think Brown is doing a good job?
Sex God
I blame scampi fries..........
once upon a time the only pub snack you could get was the pork scratching, good honest working class salty pig one day you walked into the pub asked for a pint and a bag of scratchings only to be told all that was available was scampi fries;aspirational,middle-class scampi fries .....you weakened bought some next thing you know you're drinking third rate aussie chardonnay in some awful wine bar and calculating the price of your bt shares...
QED scampi fries caused the downfall of western capitalist society ......... commie plot ??
You bet damned clever us marxists
once upon a time the only pub snack you could get was the pork scratching, good honest working class salty pig one day you walked into the pub asked for a pint and a bag of scratchings only to be told all that was available was scampi fries;aspirational,middle-class scampi fries .....you weakened bought some next thing you know you're drinking third rate aussie chardonnay in some awful wine bar and calculating the price of your bt shares...
QED scampi fries caused the downfall of western capitalist society ......... commie plot ??
You bet damned clever us marxists
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
I dont know either but.....WITHOUT the Yanks money we would have lost the war. Hitler would have won. Looking at Brown and his cronies would we have been any worse off?
I think you'll find that then as today the U.S.A. has never really been too bothered who they sold arms to,capital has no conscience and America kept a foot in both the allied and German camps for as long as possible, only Pearl Harbour decided which side they landed on.I suspect they would have been more than happy to see Germany win in europe , if for no other reason than to see Stalin defeated.
America is an uber capitalist state...capital is a whore and has no conscience.....the servants of capital serve whoever pays best,there are no other criteria
Quote by Staggerlee_BB
America is an uber capitalist state...capital is a whore and has no conscience.....the servants of capital serve whoever pays best,there are no other criteria
Whilst not necessarily disagreeing with you I do wonder if you had an uncle Karl in your family
Communism was infinitely preferable of course as is any totalitarian regime run with an icepick.
All systems have the capacity to be infinitely good and all systems have the capacity to be infinitely bad and the difference between the two is the flaw in the human model
America actually operates an extreme form of socialism only it's called Globalism and it has the philosphy ..Whats yours is mine and whats mine is me own.
Am delighted to see that we are all expressing our divergent views here and respecting the rights of other people to differ without villyfying each other . Maybe it's the dawn of a new era
And ....
Incidentally the principle of home ownership has not in anyway led to house price inflation. Council stock was sold off at reasonable discounts to people who could then pass on a valuable asset to the next generation and thus was wealth creating. What should have happened was that this money should have been re-invested in new social housing ..it never was...The tories of course argued that the revenue was needed to clear the massive debts they inherited from the socialists(and around the loop we go again.)
What has caused rampant house price inflation was
A national shortage of housing stock(see above)!
...irresponsible lending and yes borrowing too!This is a classic example of what happens when you print worthless paper money...only it was called credit in this case.
And finally avaricious landlords buying not just one property as an investment or pension provision but dozens and dozens at escalated prices funded (in theory ) by high rents that cleared mortgages and left landlords sitting on large capital should never have been allowed it was manipulation of the market by Staggerlee's whore's pimps and here I so agree with him. So many are having to default on their mortgages now and my tear's won't be gatting a run on their behalf.
Sad to see figures for next year published to day indicate the house market will be even worse with house sales being down significantly yet again on this year(still not hopeful about that recovery next year Dean ) and repossesions at 75,000 twice this years figures ...lets hope they are all buy to let flats.
niceguysdoexist I have read your posts with interest and thought.
I don't understand all of what you say am still learning and questioning here.
To all I have enjoyed this thread as it has such diverse comments without conflict which I believe can only be good, long may it continue.
It has given me some thinking material and will be back with some questions on others thoughts.
One for the moment sorry!
Could state ownership work, I believe state ownership of utilities transport housing could work if managed right.
I do believe minds and mentality of people need changing as people working in private or public sector seem to think very differently. This is not a knock at anybody just a personal observation.
I don't understand all of what you say am still learning and questioning here.
To all I have enjoyed this thread as it has such diverse comments without conflict which I believe can only be good, long may it continue.
It has given me some thinking material and will be back with some questions on others thoughts.
One for the moment sorry!
Could state ownership work, I believe state ownership of utilities transport housing could work if managed right.
I do believe minds and mentality of people need changing as people working in private or public sector seem to think very differently. This is not a knock at anybody just a personal observation.
Quote by kentswingers777
I dont know either but.....WITHOUT the Yanks money we would have lost the war. Hitler would have won. Looking at Brown and his cronies would we have been any worse off?
It's debatable whether we'd have been worse off under Hitler compared to being under Nixon/Reagan/Bush/Bush Jnr etc!
Quote by Peanut
I dont know either but.....WITHOUT the Yanks money we would have lost the war. Hitler would have won. Looking at Brown and his cronies would we have been any worse off?
It's debatable whether we'd have been worse off under Hitler compared to being under Nixon/Reagan/Bush/Bush Jnr etc!
I think most people would rather be on the side of Nixon/Regan or Bush than Hitler. Then again maybe not.
Nothing is perfect in this world it never was but... I or any of us can only imagine what it would now be like had Hitler have won.
I would think it would be a bit like Russia is. A lot worse than what we have at the moment. I do not know all the politics that went on during and after the second World War but...whatever we may think about the Yanks, it was their money and their troops that led Europe to victory. And for that as we sit on our comfy sofas or on our computers, or watching our nice big Plasmas, we should all be grateful....that's all I am saying.
Quote by kentswingers777
whatever we may think about the Yanks, it was their money and their troops that led Europe to victory.
It may have been their money but it was the blood of the Russians that led Europe to victory. Without one of the big three then Germany would have been successful in Europe and Japan would have been successful in the Pacific.
So to say we should thank the Yanks only is wrong. For winning the war all 3 nations need to thank each other. They are Great Britain & Empire (In no small part the Canooks, Aussies, Kiwi's, Kings African Regiments, Caribeans, etc) USA and Russia
Dave_Notts
Warming the Bed
Yes all of them desrve round of applause and pat on the back. Did you know the Nazi's put an end to swinging in germany in the 30's, Hitler was a complete arsehole.
Quote by kentswingers777
I dont know either but.....WITHOUT the Yanks money we would have lost the war. Hitler would have won. Looking at Brown and his cronies would we have been any worse off?
It's debatable whether we'd have been worse off under Hitler compared to being under Nixon/Reagan/Bush/Bush Jnr etc!
I think most people would rather be on the side of Nixon/Regan or Bush than Hitler. Then again maybe not.
Nothing is perfect in this world it never was but... I or any of us can only imagine what it would now be like had Hitler have won.
I would think it would be a bit like Russia is. A lot worse than what we have at the moment. I do not know all the politics that went on during and after the second World War but...whatever we may think about the Yanks, it was their money and their troops that led Europe to victory. And for that as we sit on our comfy sofas or on our computers, or watching our nice big Plasmas, we should all be grateful....that's all I am saying.
I can't say I'm grateful to the yanks for anything. As far as the war goes, in my view it was the Russians that put paid to Hitler's boys the Yanks came in late and did a clean-up of what was left after the Russian front decimated the Germans.
Quote by Evane
Yes all of them desrve round of applause and pat on the back. Did you know the Nazi's put an end to swinging in germany in the 30's, Hitler was a complete arsehole.
Sounds like the sort of thing the bible-bashing Bush would like to do.
There are many similarities (too many for comfort) between the Bush administration and Hitler's Nationalist Party.
Warming the Bed
Its never a good idea to admit you are grateful to the Yanks for anything, if you do you will hear about it all the time in an annoying grating voice.
Quote by Theladyisaminx
One for the moment sorry!
Could state ownership work, I believe state ownership of utilities transport housing could work if managed right.
I ramble on far too much so looking for a quick answer
No! Well I don't think so ...why ..
State run enterprises have historically become inefficient dinosaurs as governments shied away from making hard decisions of funding them appropriately for fear of upsetting the electorate with unpopular increases in service charges or taxes. If any cash was generated rather than re-invested it was salted away to fund other more needy areas of public finance consequently state run industries became out dated underinvested and uncompetitive.
Properly managed maybe transport and utility provision could work in theory , in practice, for those reasons above it can't.
Tliam, your far too young to recall British rail, British gas,British coal all nationalised industries sold off by the Tories and latterly Labour primarily to raise funds to cover holes in public finance. They were never successful industries under state ownership
Sex God
Quote by niceguysdoexist
One for the moment sorry!
Could state ownership work, I believe state ownership of utilities transport housing could work if managed right.
I ramble on far too much so looking for a quick answer
No! Well I don't think so ...why ..
State run enterprises have historically become inefficient dinosaurs as governments shied away from making hard decisions of funding them appropriately for fear of upsetting the electorate with unpopular increases in service charges or taxes. If any cash was generated rather than re-invested it was salted away to fund other more needy areas of public finance consequently state run industries became out dated underinvested and uncompetitive.
Properly managed maybe transport and utility provision could work in theory , in practice, for those reasons above it can't.
Tliam, your far too young to recall British rail, British gas,British coal all nationalised industries sold off by the Tories and latterly Labour primarily to raise funds to cover holes in public finance. They were never successful industries under state ownership
Brtish Rail .....the railways now cost the tax payer more in subsidies per annum than they ever did when nationalised..trains are less frequent less reliable and more expensive to use.
British Coal .....as a state owned UN-subsidised industry british coal competed successfully for many years with heavily subsidised coal from abroad
British Gas ......are you really trying to compare the awful profiteering industry of today with the flawed but publicly owned industry of the past??
I may have ignored the ill informed crack about totalitarian regimes but really buying into thatcherite propaganda about privatisation tut tut
British industries were privatised for ideological and not fiscal reasons.
The ONLY effective way to run both the utilities and the transport system is as national monopolies the only organisation able to do this fairly is government.
Since privatisation ...
is your gas cheaper ??
is your water cheaper ??
is your electricity cheaper ??
are the buses and trains you use cheaper ??
introducing competition and market forces has increased the cost of all these essential services to all their users.
P.S. they kind of fucked the N.H.S. too
Quote by niceguysdoexist
One for the moment sorry!
Could state ownership work, I believe state ownership of utilities transport housing could work if managed right.
I ramble on far too much so looking for a quick answer
No! Well I don't think so ...why ..
State run enterprises have historically become inefficient dinosaurs as governments shied away from making hard decisions of funding them appropriately for fear of upsetting the electorate with unpopular increases in service charges or taxes. If any cash was generated rather than re-invested it was salted away to fund other more needy areas of public finance consequently state run industries became out dated underinvested and uncompetitive.
Properly managed maybe transport and utility provision could work in theory , in practice, for those reasons above it can't.
Tliam, your far too young to recall British rail, British gas,British coal all nationalised industries sold off by the Tories and latterly Labour primarily to raise funds to cover holes in public finance. They were never successful industries under state ownership
:shock: To young
ThanksI was 15 when the Tories won in 1979 I do remember them not working then, but surely couldn’t they see what went wrong then and put things right it just needs good management in place.
Plus peoples attitudes need to change that are public sector workers.
Just because it failed before is it not worth trying again?
btw ramble on I enjoy reading your responses it makes for an interesting discussion.
Which good management would that be ?
Going to employ some good bank management ?
You know, those guys who buy unsecured dept to bankrupt themselves ?
Going to employ some good "investment" management ?
The same guy/s who ran a 50 billion-dollar pyramid selling scheme that got conveniently overlooked by the organisations supposed to protect people from scams ?
Face it, good management is a misnomer.
Good managers are only good until someone discovers just HOW bad they are.
Management in this country has an inbred loathing of employees.
It also has an inbred loathing of obeying laws, any laws, but particularly laws designed to control their natural ability to leg it down the road with others cash.
Going to employ some good bank management ?
You know, those guys who buy unsecured dept to bankrupt themselves ?
Going to employ some good "investment" management ?
The same guy/s who ran a 50 billion-dollar pyramid selling scheme that got conveniently overlooked by the organisations supposed to protect people from scams ?
Face it, good management is a misnomer.
Good managers are only good until someone discovers just HOW bad they are.
Management in this country has an inbred loathing of employees.
It also has an inbred loathing of obeying laws, any laws, but particularly laws designed to control their natural ability to leg it down the road with others cash.
Quote by blonde
:giggle: :giggle: :giggle:
That's not labour .......... that's the Sun Newspaper ......... if you can call it a Newspaper!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Think I have been down this road with others, and am not going there again. Four million readers probably think it is though.
Plus you obviously do not know who Gaunty is...........tut tut tut tut.
Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Brtish Rail .....the railways now cost the tax payer more in subsidies per annum than they ever did when nationalised..trains are less frequent less reliable and more expensive to use.
Don't disagree with you that the rail networks cost us megabucks in subsidies but this is mainly as a result of privatising a dysfunctional and under invested industry....
Quote ..
Beeching proposed that only drastic action would save the railways from increasing losses in the ,successive governments were more keen on cost-saving rather than elements of the report requiring investment. More than 4,000 miles of railway and 3,000 stations closed in the decade following the report, a reduction of 25 per cent of route miles and 50 per cent of stations. To this day in railway circles and among older people, particularly in parts of the country that suffered most from cuts, Beeching's name is still synonymous with mass closure of railways and loss of many local services.
British Coal .....as a state owned UN-subsidised industry british coal competed successfully for many years with heavily subsidised coal from abroad
Coal mining employed over 700,000 people in 1950 and 634,000 in 1960, but successive governments reduced the size of the industry. Closures were originally concentrated in Scotland, but then moved into North East England, Lancashire, and South Wales, and then into all the other coalfields in the 1980s. By 1984, the British mining industry was the most productive in the world. Despite this, demand for British coal was frustrated by large subsidies that other European governments gave to their coal industries (West Germany subsidised coal by four times as much and France by three times as much in 1984) and the availability of lower cost, open-cast, coal mined in Australia and the United States.
So the government of the day(both Labour and Tory) was seeking the cheapest source of fuel as coal(or coke) was the predominant fuel for Electricity production at the time. was this shortsighted ...maybe it was. However, subsidised foreign coal was a substantial reason for the closure of many pits
British Gas ......are you really trying to compare the awful profiteering industry of today with the flawed but publicly owned industry of the past??
Quote
The Gas Act 1986 led to the privatisation of the company, and on 8 December 1986 its shares floated on the London stock market. In the hope of encouraging individuals to become shareholders, the offer was intensely advertised with the "If you see Sid, tell him" campaign. The initial public offering of 135p per share valued the company at £9 billion, the highest equity offering ever at the time.
Incidentally £9billion in 1986 is worth about £20billion in todays terms or about the same amount Gordon has just knocked off VAT only he is borrowing it cos his state industry cupboard is bare.
I may have ignored the ill informed crack about totalitarian regimes but really buying into thatcherite propaganda about privatisation tut tut
It wasn't a crack ...merely pointing out that whatever system is followed corruption will make them effectively wasn't ill informed either in 1940 Jaume Ramón Mercader del Río Hernández murdered Trotsky ...Mercader was Soviet agent.
And I am no lover of Thatcher propoganda ..her government started deregulation which has subsequently been allowed to run out of control by BlairBrown Not only that but Thatcher left british manufacturing to market forces and the end of british industry started here . In my view this was the major flaw of the Thatcher years .
British industries were privatised for ideological and not fiscal reasons.
See above
The ONLY effective way to run both the utilities and the transport system is as national monopolies the only organisation able to do this fairly is government.
Since privatisation ...
is your gas cheaper ??
is your water cheaper ??
is your electricity cheaper ??
are the buses and trains you use cheaper ??
introducing competition and market forces has increased the cost of all these essential services to all their users.
No it isn't cheaper and don't we know it ...however it may be procured from the cheapest sources. I am not convinced that it wouldn't be more expensive under state ownership...if indeed we got it at all...remember powercuts in the 1970's under state 't forget that it's price is regulated by a state body.I do agree with you that there are excess profits washing around the industry that should be cleansed for such a basic commodity. Another fundamental issue I blame the governments of the day for; is the total failure to preserve self sufficiency on energy ...this is sheer lunacy Brown Blair Major and Thatcher are all guilty on this front I just hope we never fall foul of our total vulnerability over this
P.S. they kind of fucked the N.H.S. too
Yeah it is pretty fucked up ...maybe its about time doctors and not administrators ran medical care.
So glad we didn't mention British Leyland
Sex God
See now there's a thing i was born in Birmingham so British leyland............................well they made shit cars so no comment
Quote by blonde
Gaunty is that sad, bitter and twisted little man who used to be on the radio isn't he?
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
p.s. Happy Christmas
Yes your correct, he used to be on the radio, and soon to be back again by popular demand.
As for your other comments, do not agree at all.
Happy Christmas to you too. :kiss:
Sex God
Politicians are like butlers. If you notice them, they're not doing well.
I wanted to bump this back as time has moved on after first asking the question.
I believe he was slow in reacting but what he is doing now in the financial sense are the best moves for the long term future of this country.
What has happened was always going to happen it was only a matter of time before the bubble burst.
It is and is still going to be a hard bumpy ride but I still feel Brown is the best man for the job in hand to get us out of this recession.
I believe he was slow in reacting but what he is doing now in the financial sense are the best moves for the long term future of this country.
What has happened was always going to happen it was only a matter of time before the bubble burst.
It is and is still going to be a hard bumpy ride but I still feel Brown is the best man for the job in hand to get us out of this recession.
