Mister M Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Apart from Brown being happy with treating the banks at arms' legnth Labour's problem was that they'd done a Viv Nicholson and spent, spent, spent so when the rainy day came there was nothing to fend it off with.. One conservative estimate suggests that it cost £850 billion to bail out the banks, which post war (or pre war) kept that kind of money back 'for a rainy day'? Besides which banks are always crowing about the hidden hand of the market, and not being profligate. They didn't mind a bit of profligacy when the government save their asses! Besides which the Tories agreed with Labour's spending plans, and would have gone even further in deregualting the banks, if George Osborne's pronouncements at the time were to be believed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 One conservative estimate suggests that it cost £850 billion to bail out the banks, which post war (or pre war) kept that kind of money back 'for a rainy day'? Besides which banks are always crowing about the hidden hand of the market, and not being profligate. They didn't mind a bit of profligacy when the government save their asses! So you don't agree that having a stash would have mitigated the whole affair? There's no denying the fact that Brown was in the hot seat when the stuff hit the fan..if he disagreed with the way banks were operating in the years leading up to it he was in the perfect position to do something about it having been both Chancellor and P.M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Ladd Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 So you don't agree that having a stash would have mitigated the whole affair? There's no denying the fact that Brown was in the hot seat when the stuff hit the fan..if he disagreed with the way banks were operating in the years leading up to it he was in the perfect position to do something about it having been both Chancellor and P.M. I fear there is absolutely no point in anyone trying to implicate the Tories in this debacle. The fact is that Labour had been in power since 1997. They were responsible. The Prime Ministers other title is "First Lord of the Treasury". Says it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I fear there is absolutely no point in anyone trying to implicate the Tories in this debacle. The fact is that Labour had been in power since 1997. They were responsible. The Prime Ministers other title is "First Lord of the Treasury". Says it all. And what would you have been crying about if they tories were in power in 2008; what would they have done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hauxwell Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 What, are, you, on, about? I think he is saying Blair is rubbish. Which I agree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted September 5, 2014 Author Share Posted September 5, 2014 I fear there is absolutely no point in anyone trying to implicate the Tories in this debacle. The fact is that Labour had been in power since 1997. They were responsible. The Prime Ministers other title is "First Lord of the Treasury". Says it all. New Labour are Tories. You need to have a bit of a rethink me old flower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 And what would you have been crying about if they tories were in power in 2008; what would they have done? And if Labour had been in power now what would the accounts look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Ladd Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 And what would you have been crying about if they tories were in power in 2008; what would they have done? What if? Is that your arguement? Ok, what if Hitler had won, or King Harold, you can what if till the cows come home inluding , what if you had voted Tory instead of for the incompetents of the left that you dont have the imagination to ignore. THE FACT IS Labour were in power, the buck stops with them and with you who support them. ---------- Post added 07-09-2014 at 12:17 ---------- New Labour are Tories. You need to have a bit of a rethink me old flower. incomprehensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 What if? Is that your arguement? Ok, what if Hitler had won, or King Harold, you can what if till the cows come home inluding , what if you had voted Tory instead of for the incompetents of the left that you dont have the imagination to ignore. THE FACT IS Labour were in power, the buck stops with them and with you who support them. ---------- Post added 07-09-2014 at 12:17 ---------- incomprehensible. Alright then, I'll remember that when you try it next ... and you will ---------- Post added 07-09-2014 at 16:49 ---------- And if Labour had been in power now what would the accounts look like? Better than they do now, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Gold Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Tony has no shame whatsoever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.