Farage Ltd and Similar Watch

[Deutsch Wolf]

At the time that Labour were "wrecking the economy", the Tories were advocating less regulation of the financial sector and pushing the case for running our own economy along the same lines as Ireland's.

Gideon's words in 2006:

“Ireland stands as a shining example of the art of the possible in economic policy-making….With its vision of a highly- educated, innovative, open, dynamic, low-tax economy and relentless focus on the long-term drivers of prosperity, Ireland’s economic miracle has shown that it has the answers to the challenges of the new global economy.”

 

[Penk Wolf]

Labour certainly wrecked the economy. That is why after the 2010 election they spent the next 12 months apologizing for their ineptitude.

Conservatives removed the controls on the banks, not saying Labour would have controlled the banks any better than the FSA did, but they didn't have the chance.

To be fair, it was the sub-prime market that ruined the economy, so we can blame our good friends in the good old US of A rather than any party over here.

The only argument is which party would have brought the recovery around the quickest and in my opinion it took Con/Lib 3 years to what labour would have done 3 years ago. Deep cuts was never going to be the answer.

 

[andyc225]

The sub prime market for credit will never go away. It needs to exist but in a more tightly controlled manner. It remains to be seen how the transfer of the responsibility for Consumer Credit Jurisdiction from the OFT to the FCA will affect the market and the less scrupulous players in it. My dogs could've passed the fit and proper persons test at the OFT.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Maybe so, but did our banks have to get involved in it? Did RBS have to buy ABN Amro, without doing due diligence, who were also heavily involved in it?

 

[andyc225]

Maybe so, but did our banks have to get involved in it? Did RBS have to buy ABN Amro, without doing due diligence, who were also heavily involved in it?

The major banks were all involved in the sub-prime sector in some way or another. A lot of people seem to think this is all about toxic mortgages but it's more than just that. Their withdrawal from this market has left a gap that is being filled by some very unsavoury players. The objective of credit is to bring forward consumption and those who fit into the aforementioned category are at the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. In the society in which we live, people need to engage in symbolic consumption to feel that they're a "part of it", so to speak. Some people can't possibly be seen without the latest gadget or a shiny new car and whether they can afford it is a mere afterthought.

Simply put; for as long as these people exist, companies will exist to rip them off.

 

[Johnny75]

The only argument is which party would have brought the recovery around the quickest and in my opinion it took Con/Lib 3 years to what labour would have done 3 years ago. Deep cuts was never going to be the answer.

That's hilarious. Even the IMF says that's bollocks.

 

[visage]

That's hilarious. Even the IMF says that's bollocks.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/18/george-osborne-imf-austerity

 

[Johnny75]

You realise that article is from April 2013?

 

[Papper]

I don't see your point Papper. You can't force people into work if they don't want to. That's just life and the immigrants are fulfilling a need. We've been down this road before and it ends with neither of us agreeing. If UKIP's sole argument is that immigrants are fulfilling a need that UK residents could but don't want to then that's a pretty slim manifesto. And very small minded.

No you can't force people into work but it shows there are jobs out there. What you can do is stop paying the idle the benefits - which is what is happening. Of course we can accept it as part of life but then we start moaning that services get cut and you wonder why? Increased population, increased drain on public services - increased taxes or cuts? You choose .... The only winners are big business, wages fall etc etc. You can't just write 2.5M people off.

 

[arklowolf]

As I said.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rdon-Brown-I-made-a-big-mistake-on-banks.html

 

[Penk Wolf]

That's hilarious. Even the IMF says that's bollocks.

Must be right then....

 

[Penk Wolf]

That's hilarious. Even the IMF says that's bollocks.

What caused the deficit to take a huge jump 08/09? Was it because we were spending too much or was it because our income had fallen?

So, what do you do to correct it? Cut spending or try and build your income up?

Rocket science, it isn't.

 

[Johnny75]

If spending is the only one you can control then you cut spending. Spending the same and hoping businesses generate more GDP in a poor environment is lottery ticket stuff.

 

[Penk Wolf]

The government can dictate which industries will grow, they did it with the car sector and are now doing it with the construction sector. If they had done the help to buy scheme 2 or 3 years ago then we would have been well out of it by now.

The more you cut the less chance you have of ever recovering as the more you cut the more the income will reduce.

 

[Johnny75]

The government can dictate which industries will grow, they did it with the car sector and are now doing it with the construction sector. If they had done the help to buy scheme 2 or 3 years ago then we would have been well out of it by now.

The more you cut the less chance you have of ever recovering as the more you cut the more the income will reduce.

It has to be a combination of both. I agree with the help to buy scheme but stimulating growth in all sectors must be the way forward so if one sector goes down the others aren't brought down with it. Too much dependence and one sector for too long; manufacturing in the 70's, construction in the 80's and finance for the last 20 years. There seems to be little balance and that is as much to do with governments riding on the back of success.

The government is currently championing JLR but JLR are trying to saturate a sector to the point of no return very fast and when they reach there they will jettison all the jobs they don't need. It's government's role to balance that, which neither the Tories or Labour have done for half a century.

 

[Johnny75]

see above

 

[MARKakaJIM]

The help to buy scheme isn't all it's cracked up to be, it's being abused too easily. Rather than helping those who couldn't previously afford to buy at all get on the ladder you're getting people who could've bought a 2/3 bedroom house anyway using government money to now buy 4/5 bedroom ones instead.

It's just lining the pockets of the house builders and inflating an already stupidly priced housing market even further.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Maybe so, but there are so many other companies that are part of the house building chain that, who and why people are buying them are irrelevant. The only important thing was to get companies building houses again.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

They could've just given the money directly to the housing companies rather than through the buyers to do that though. Encourage them to build more affordable houses to try and counter the inflated prices and overall shortage of houses.

The current scheme helps boost the economy but a different structure could've helped with other issues too.

 

[Penk Wolf]

They could've just given the money directly to the housing companies rather than through the buyers to do that though. Encourage them to build more affordable houses to try and counter the inflated prices and overall shortage of houses.

The current scheme helps boost the economy but a different structure could've helped with other issues too.

They have to pay it back, don't they?