Guest sibon Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 The banks were supposed to have been regulated by . . . . guess who:( I noticed: we were a big player in the financial markets globally. The u s finance houses contributed to the recession also. I accept that, but we should have been in a better financial position, but Brown et al had sold all our gold reserves at the bottom of the market. there is nothing left in the pot after their mismanagement. Having claimed to have got rid and of boom and bust, they left us with an almighty scary bust. Ours is nowhere near the most scary bust. You've been reading this forum too much. Check out the condition of the US finances. Some eyewatering numbers there. When you've done that, have a look at Spain, Ireland, Greece. Bloody Brown, couldn't even organise a proper bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 Ours is nowhere near the most scary bust. You've been reading this forum too much. Check out the condition of the US finances. Some eyewatering numbers there. When you've done that, have a look at Spain, Ireland, Greece. Bloody Brown, couldn't even organise a proper bust. Our boom was not as great as theirs. Saying we are not as bad Spain Ireland or greece is not very encouraging Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 Our boom was not as great as theirs. Saying we are not as bad Spain Ireland or greece is not very encouraging Oh, I don't know:) Where would you like to be now? Madrid, or here. I'm not suggesting that everything is Hunky Dory, by the way. Just that the coalition seem to be taking the opportunity to disengage the state from all sorts of things. I'm not convinced that is the right thing to do. I've started a thread about it, but it is sinking like a stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penno Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 The last Labour government is not a stance you agreed with then? Making many many people, even good earners, dependent on benefits, state handouts and non-jobs created in the public sector paid out of taxes just to create false employment. The result of which was the massive deficit and trajic consequences that will follow. The Tories and Libs are only doing what is absolutely to try to get our economy back on an even keel. They don't want to give people less money it is because they have to repair the damage done by Labour and the Brown Mess he left us all in. You are obviously quite happy for the Eton set to govern in such a way that there best interests are restored and protected. I have always thought that a vote for the Tories is a vote for mistaken self interest but we shall have to wait and see. I think Brown has probably more integrity than most in politics. Mistakes yes but always protective of working class interests. Please remember that one way or another you have to give people the means to consume or the economy goes into reverse and everybody suffers. The best way to do this is by providing jobs of course. The Tory government intends to solve the deficit problem [a world wide problem] by reducing the number of jobs available and forcing people off benefits and into jobs. Can you see the flaw in this strategy?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 You are obviously quite happy for the Eton set to govern in such a way that there best interests are restored and protected. I have always thought that a vote for the Tories is a vote for mistaken self interest but we shall have to wait and see. I think Brown has probably more integrity than most in politics. Mistakes yes but always protective of working class interests. Please remember that one way or another you have to give people the means to consume or the economy goes into reverse and everybody suffers. The best way to do this is by providing jobs of course. The Tory government intends to solve the deficit problem [a world wide problem] by reducing the number of jobs available and forcing people off benefits and into jobs. Can you see the flaw in this strategy?. When you and I as taxpayers are paying someone on benefits 30 something thousand pounds, cant you see that is unsustainable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 Oh, I don't know:) Where would you like to be now? Madrid, or here. I'm not suggesting that everything is Hunky Dory, by the way. Just that the coalition seem to be taking the opportunity to disengage the state from all sorts of things. I'm not convinced that is the right thing to do. I've started a thread about it, but it is sinking like a stone. Oh here definitely, or Berlin, or France, or Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, holland, denmark, sweden, finland etc (not iceland though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penno Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 When you and I as taxpayers are paying someone on benefits 30 something thousand pounds, cant you see that is unsustainable? What is the alternative?. People have to live and look after their kids and in doing so put the money back into the economy so that others can keep their jobs. Whether they need £30000 to survive sounds excessive but I cant categorically say that it is. If people cannot get sufficient to live on legally they could be tempted to get it illegally following the example of some well heeled types at the top end of society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 What is the alternative?. People have to live and look after their kids and in doing so put the money back into the economy so that others can keep their jobs. Whether they need £30000 to survive sounds excessive but I cant categorically say that it is. If people cannot get sufficient to live on legally they could be tempted to get it illegally following the example of some well heeled types at the top end of society. The alternative is to make people work.And that is what the coalition is attempting to do. Those that can will and those that cant will continue to receive their benefits.There are also those who really want to but dont know how to. It is that group that needs to the most support and that will cost the most money to get in to work, but if it is done properly now it will be beneficial to all; society, the individual and the finances. You know the only reason that this is all so hard to do now is a psychological one.When you look back years ago people used to be on benefits when they needed to be.It was generally accepted that when you left school you either went to college or Uni or you got a job or an apprenticeship.Either way you were doing something and the state just intervened if you were in dire straits.Many now think it is their right to have benefits. They are actually entitled and, in the literal sense they are, but morally, in my opinion the ones that can work are not, so, a seismic shift needs to be made. This can be done starting with the benefits advisers. They need to have extensive training in how to manage and motivate people. It seems there is just too much acceptance of what they are told. I may be wrong as it may have changed recently, but if it has, how come there are still so many long term benefit claimants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penno Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 Espadrille I agree with what you say but in a period of reducing job opportunities even the people who desperately try to get back into work have great difficulty in getting a job. I do not advocate idleness as an option and there should be some way of ensuring that people retain there self esteem and encouraging them to keep trying at something rather than settle for being benefit takers as a career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoop Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I too thought they would hsve axed it. Well this is intresting as while i agree with this in principal, putting it into pratcise would i think interfear with human rights, not to say how much trouble policing it would be!! I don't think it would be too difficult - we just need to start to back to a position where people accept that as well as human 'rights' they have human 'responsibilities'. So if you choose to have children, its your responsibility to provide for them - child benefits and other benefits should be capped so that having more children becomes less lucrative than having one or two. I only have one child, not though choice - I'd love at least two more, but because I would struggle financially with more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.