What would Mr Cameron have done differently?

[speedbirdone]

The tory Boy boys had 17 years to do something about it but didn't.

 

And Labour had 10 years but didn't do anything, could easily say they are both as bad as each other.

 

We can easily go around in circles all day useing that argument.

[*Belle*]

People borrowed money to start businesses and make more money (Greed). The tiger economies of the Far East, particularly China, undercut everyone and corner the market with cheap nasty goods ... end of. Could it be that simple?

 

Business, borrowing sensibly to expand or to finance projects is not greed its their life blood. China has begun its industrial revolution over the past few years and we have to get used to it. On certain levels, we can't compete. Maybe a generation down the line things will even out as the workers there demand more realistic wages, but that is not going to happen any time soon. China also has huge debts and may be hitting some problems next year.

[speedbirdone]

People borrowed money to start businesses and make more money (Greed). The tiger economies of the Far East, particularly China, undercut everyone and corner the market with cheap nasty goods ... end of. Could it be that simple?

 

Nothing wrong with people borrowing money to set up their own business and try to make a profit and hopefully better themselves or should all business be not for profit ones.

 

Reckless leading and borrowing that was the problem.

[Keith Rich]

If they would have done the same as labour that would imply they are no different to Labour, if they are no different to Labour why do you hate them so much? whist liking another group of people that are the same and do and act the same.

 

The point is that Tory nutters are always on this forum bleating about the debt we have which they blame on Gordon Brown. This obviously implies that had Cameron been in office he would have had another solution.

 

Several of the Tory inteligentsia have admitted that Dozy Dave would have done the same thing as Brown so the situation would have been just as bad.

 

It blows their argument out of the water. But of course they will refuse to admitt this because they believe only what they want to believe.

 

Why do I hate Cameron et al? Because they are taking money from the poor, the disabled and the vulerable to pay for the mistakes of their multi millionnaire banker friends. If you are not angry about this then you need to take a good look at yourself.

[Balpin]

Nothing wrong with people borrowing money to set up their own business and try to make a profit and hopefully better themselves or should all business be not for profit ones.

 

Reckless leading and borrowing that was the problem.

 

You are right, but you are missing the point.

The entire system is in a state of collapse.

The wolves are at the door, and there is nothing they can do about it this time.

In the 1930's capitalism was king of the world, as it is today, but then it was unchallenged.

Its pretenders will have its head in a very few years.

[speedbirdone]

The point is that Tory nutters are always on this forum bleating about the debt we have which they blame on Gordon Brown. This obviously implies that had Cameron been in office he would have had another solution.

 

Several of the Tory inteligentsia have admitted that Dozy Dave would have done the same thing as Brown so the situation would have been just as bad.

 

It blows their argument out of the water. But of course they will refuse to admitt this because they believe only what they want to believe.

 

Why do I hate Cameron et al? Because they are taking money from the poor, the disabled and the vulerable to pay for the mistakes of their multi millionnaire banker friends. If you are not angry about this then you need to take a good look at yourself.

 

Your not getting it are you, it's not the debt run up by bailing the banks out. It's the " other " debt that was run up in the 10 or so years before the banking crisis happened by Labours spend spend spend attitude that was a problem. I think we can all just about agree that the Tory's would have also bailed the banks out. Would the Torys have gone a spending spree between 1997 and the crisis if they had been in power. If the country was in a better financial postion before the crisis maybe we could have delt with the banking crisis better.

[MrSmith]

The tory Boy boys had 17 years to do something about it but didn't.

 

Do something about what?

[Keith Rich]

Your not getting it are you, it's not the debt run up by bailing the banks out. It's the " other " debt that was run up in the 10 or so years before the banking crisis happened by Labours spend spend spend attitude that was a problem. I think we can all just about agree that the Tory's would have also bailed the banks out. Would the Torys have gone a spending spree between 1997 and the crisis if they had been in power. If the country was in a better financial postion before the crisis maybe we could have delt with the banking crisis better.

 

A Labour government will always spend more than a Tory government because it spends on schools, hospitals and many other social services that we all use. The Tories run these things down and give the money saved as tax cuts to multi millionnaires.

 

Millions of pounds were wasted in the 80s paying benefits because of the record levels of unemployment under the Tories. The same situation is going to happen again because that utter fool Osborne thinks putting people on the dole saves money. He hasn't taken into account the amount of benefits that will need to be paid out to the thousands he is putting on the scrapheap who will never work again.

 

So as you claim to know about these things. What percentage of the debt is caused by the banking bailout and what percentage through Labour's normal spending. If you don't know this figure then your Labour's 'spending spree' is just something you have made up from the top of your head isn't it?

[MrSmith]

The point is that Tory nutters are always on this forum bleating about the debt we have which they blame on Gordon Brown. This obviously implies that had Cameron been in office he would have had another solution.

 

Several of the Tory inteligentsia have admitted that Dozy Dave would have done the same thing as Brown so the situation would have been just as bad.

 

It blows their argument out of the water. But of course they will refuse to admitt this because they believe only what they want to believe.

 

Why do I hate Cameron et al? Because they are taking money from the poor, the disabled and the vulerable to pay for the mistakes of their multi millionnaire banker friends. If you are not angry about this then you need to take a good look at yourself.

 

So are you saying the Tories and labour aren’t the same and have different policies which would have different outcomes, and if they have different policies something they didn't do that Labour did do could have changed events. It’s a pointless argument one party was in power when the crap hit the fan we can never know whether the crap would have hit the fan with a different government and a different set of policies.

[MrSmith]

A Labour government will always spend more than a Tory government because it spends on schools, hospitals and many other social services that we all use. The Tories run these things down and give the money saved as tax cuts to multi millionnaires.

 

Millions of pounds were wasted in the 80s paying benefits because of the record levels of unemployment under the Tories. The same situation is going to happen again because that utter fool Osborne thinks putting people on the dole saves money. He hasn't taken into account the amount of benefits that will need to be paid out to the thousands he is putting on the scrapheap who will never work again.

 

So as you claim to know about these things. What percentage of the debt is caused by the banking bailout and what percentage through Labour's normal spending. If you don't know this figure then your Labour's 'spending spree' is just something you have made up from the top of your head isn't it?

 

Which is the cheapest option for the tax payer giving someone £200 a week to sit at home or giving that same person £400 a week to sit in an air-conditions office doing nothing of any use.