Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2024 20:21:57 GMT
Well the last 14 years have demonstrated in spades that the former Tory reputation for sound economic management is about as deserved as a knighthood for Gary Glitter. And Labour will crash the economy like they did in 2008 ^ Neither should be anywhere near the levers of power, as Thomas often points out He also frequently points out that the Tories are far less bad than Labour, which if anything suggests that he has been living on a different planet these past 27 years. Most of us do not live in the same reality as him on this one.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 16, 2024 20:29:05 GMT
True, labour bear none of the blame for 2008 Labour persisted with Thatcherite policies of deregulation which gave too much license to greedy bankers, and in that way contributed to the problem here. But it was a result of them being too un-Labour and too Thatcherite in policy terms. No, they had no control over international banks trading from the UK. To try and limit their foreign trading would have been illegal. New Labour did ban self assessment mortgages.
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on Jul 16, 2024 20:54:42 GMT
Labour persisted with Thatcherite policies of deregulation which gave too much license to greedy bankers, and in that way contributed to the problem here. But it was a result of them being too un-Labour and too Thatcherite in policy terms. No, they had no control over international banks trading from the UK. To try and limit their foreign trading would have been illegal. New Labour did ban self assessment mortgages. If the foreign trading of British based banks diluted the strength of the bank's balance sheet, then regulation could have been put in place to require the banks to, for example, recapitalise to reduce the risk.
I think the problem with the argument that British banks were similarly regulated to banks in many other jurisdictions, with the notable exception of Canada and Australia, is that London was at least on a par with New York in terms banking influence and could have influenced tougher regulation without too much damage to the Industry. Further, it doesn't help it was the Bankers not Labour argument when Howard Davies warned of the toxicity of CDOs years before the GFA and his successor is on record complaining that Brown, Balls etc. warned the regulator off tight regulation preferring the light touch.
While it's certainly true the bankers behaved irresponsibly, Labour has to take a fair chunk of the blame for allowing them to do so.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 16, 2024 20:59:07 GMT
We've done this to death just weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 17, 2024 8:04:13 GMT
= destruction of the green belt I said elsewhere , labours great plan for house building , in England that is , is to relax planning laws , and hope , with a wing and a prayer , that private building companies are going to build a mix of social and private housing that is affordable. I suspect England will end up with yet more low quality unaffordable housing on flood plains . Thank fuck they aren't anywhere near Scottish house building , and last time they were , they built fewer houses than thatchers tories . Mind as well the friends of the labour parties minions in scotland building primary schools ( and other stuff) on the hated PFI , such as ox gangs primary in Edinburgh , which was so badly built by Labour Party donors and suckers who ran these building companies a wall fell down with no brick ties in it. Clueless clowns , who are merely in power to maintain the status quo and managed decline. Dont expect any vision or radical thinking on any subject.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 17, 2024 8:11:22 GMT
As I said , piss taking about the euroes aside , the one good thing for us political geeks now the euroes have ended , and the public dont have their bread and circus , is that labours brief respite and honeymoon period is over , and everyone will now focus on what these clowns in government are up to.
I wonder how far they are going to get with the chattering classes and public screaming at least we aren't the tories as things fall apart around them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2024 8:16:27 GMT
Labour persisted with Thatcherite policies of deregulation which gave too much license to greedy bankers, and in that way contributed to the problem here. But it was a result of them being too un-Labour and too Thatcherite in policy terms. No, they had no control over international banks trading from the UK. To try and limit their foreign trading would have been illegal. New Labour did ban self assessment mortgages. They also reduced regulations on our own banks on our internal trading. This would have made no difference to the start of the crash which began in the USA, but proper regulations might have left our own banking system less exposed to it and thus less costly for taxpayers to rescue. Note that they reduced regulations. Assuming that the ones they cut were not illegal in the first place, they must have cut legal regulations.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 17, 2024 17:29:08 GMT
No, they had no control over international banks trading from the UK. To try and limit their foreign trading would have been illegal. New Labour did ban self assessment mortgages. They also reduced regulations on our own banks on our internal trading. This would have made no difference to the start of the crash which began in the USA, but proper regulations might have left our own banking system less exposed to it and thus less costly for taxpayers to rescue. Note that they reduced regulations. Assuming that the ones they cut were not illegal in the first place, they must have cut legal regulations. I've seen that suggested many times, but never seen any evidence that it would have made a material difference. Especially as the banks were acting criminally anyway.
|
|
|
Post by brownlow on Jul 17, 2024 18:57:08 GMT
They also reduced regulations on our own banks on our internal trading. This would have made no difference to the start of the crash which began in the USA, but proper regulations might have left our own banking system less exposed to it and thus less costly for taxpayers to rescue. Note that they reduced regulations. Assuming that the ones they cut were not illegal in the first place, they must have cut legal regulations. I've seen that suggested many times, but never seen any evidence that it would have made a material difference. Especially as the banks were acting criminally anyway. Countries which deregulated/financialised less than Britain proved more resilient when the GFC came. Britain never recovered. Or do you mean that you've never seen evidence that financialisation continued under Blair/Brown?
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 17, 2024 19:55:02 GMT
I've seen that suggested many times, but never seen any evidence that it would have made a material difference. Especially as the banks were acting criminally anyway. Countries which deregulated/financialised less than Britain proved more resilient when the GFC came. Britain never recovered. Or do you mean that you've never seen evidence that financialisation continued under Blair/Brown? The countries less reliant on banking suffered less.
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 17, 2024 20:41:54 GMT
Yes. And Labour kept pushing for reorientation of the economy - to be overly reliant on the financial sector. A trend that started under Thatcher and has continued until present day
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2024 21:01:08 GMT
They also reduced regulations on our own banks on our internal trading. This would have made no difference to the start of the crash which began in the USA, but proper regulations might have left our own banking system less exposed to it and thus less costly for taxpayers to rescue. Note that they reduced regulations. Assuming that the ones they cut were not illegal in the first place, they must have cut legal regulations. I've seen that suggested many times, but never seen any evidence that it would have made a material difference. Especially as the banks were acting criminally anyway. It has been mostly suggested by experts in the field who certainly know more than me and whom I trust to know more than you, as you clearly have a political motivation in seeking to exonerate New Labour from blame for pursuing ever further Thatcherite deregulation. In essence, Thatcherism is bad unless New Labour was doing it, in which case it must be good or at least blameless. That appears to be a common strand in your thinking which displays an apparent inability or at least unwillingness to be even-handed in a non-politically biased way.
|
|
borgr0
Observer
+++
Posts: 1,188
|
Post by borgr0 on Jul 17, 2024 21:19:32 GMT
That reminds me, Zany, Ctoo would be a good fit for this place. I've missed arguing with him about how great Blair was.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2024 21:38:07 GMT
That reminds me, Zany, Ctoo would be a good fit for this place. I've missed arguing with him about how great Blair was. Lol, yes. It quietly amused me that he regarded anyone with a good word to say about Labour under Corbyn as some sort of biased cultist, and yet most of us were demonstrably far more able to recognise many of Corbyn's obvious flaws than he ever was Blair's. I once spent the best part of an entire page trying to get him to acknowledge any error or flaw under, or mistake committed by, Blair and he was utterly unable to do so. It is as if in his eyes there have only ever been two utterly flawless people to have walked the earth - Jesus Christ and Tony Blair. And yet - snigger - he seemed to think the rest of us were the biased ones, if not cult followers of this or that person. But at least he debates intelligently, the above notwithstanding, so I still think he would be a reasonably good fit here. I am not his favourite person but would be happy enough to see him here.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 17, 2024 21:47:06 GMT
Yes. And Labour kept pushing for reorientation of the economy - to be overly reliant on the financial sector. A trend that started under Thatcher and has continued until present day Yes, trouble was we had no assets left (Coal tin iron etc) we couldn't compete with China etc in manufacturing and were not as big as America with its buying power etc What could we switch to.
|
|