For the first time in my life, I think I will vote Labour

[vulture]

 

[DerbyGull]

.

They are taking steps to win the election not to repair the country. This zero interest rate and quantative easing policy is totally bizarre and its only point is to keep the economy staggering along on its last breath until the May election.

You seem quite knowledgeable about politics AT, i'm not really at all so i can't judge whether the aformentioned are having good effect or not. Though 0% interest rate is surely good for people struggling with their mortgage and without it surely loads more people would have ended up homeless. Labour's premiership has not really effected me and my interests lie with the banks they saved cos i've got shares with them and want them to recover.

 

[DerbyGull]

Well then why don't you vote Lib Dem, then when there's a hung Parliament you'll probably get your wish.

Will see when the time comes

 

[Uncle C]

This country currently has a credit rating of AAA which is good for us when we pay interest on current loans or extend these loans as planned up to £1.3 trillion.

One of the biggest worries is that this could be downgraded if we are not, as a nation, seen to be taking steps to reduce debt.

There is a general feeling that Labour's strategy will result in this happening. This will cause the cost of borrowing to go up and inflation to go up as the value of the pound falls off the cliff.

You can then forget all the chancellors predictions, Britain and the pound will be f***ed.

 

[Arthritic Toe]

we know what happened, the interesting question is why. You say brown should have stopped the problem earlier, but my question is how? In a free market economy, how do you stop a bank giving someone a mortgage?

When cable said what i said, of course brown knew he was right. He couldn't admit it because that kind of global realisation is the tipping point that brings the whole house of cards down. It happened anyway of course, but brown must have been hoping he could avert it, a hope that proved futile. His efforts since then to limit its effects and restore the economy have been hailed by the rest of the world, and as others have pointed out, our economy is recovering whilst greece and portugal burn and bring others down with them. Brown must be one of the most economically savvy prime ministers we've had. The alternative is osbourne.

Having said that i'm voting lib dem for environmental reasons amongst others. But my constituency allows that. No way do i want tories back

Brown changed the Bank of England's 2% inflation target to track CPI instead of RPI. This caused interest rates (and mortgage rates) to be a full 1% lower than they would otherwise have been. This change in itself caused the debt bubble to be inflated massively.

How do you stop the banks from giving people a mortgage? In a free market, they lend responsibly or they go bust. Trouble is, they were too big to go bust so and we had to bail them out. The FSA was set up (by Gordon) to regulate the banks, but it didn't act in the face of ridiculously irresponsible lending. Again the buck stops with Gordon.

 

[DerbyGull]

Which is good news but is a credit to the Lloyds good banking management. They were a well run bank previously who were pressured by the Government to buy a failing bank. This nearly took them under and needed the Government to bail them out. Hardly a positive for the Government !!!

So you've seen Labour fail and now you want THEM to fix it ? Why didn't we keep Micky Adams then - he failed and so should have stayed to fix the problem ?

Yes credit to the LBG management. You seem more knowledgeable than me WS so i'll take your word for it. But i think the idea was, was to get as many people owning their own homes as possible, rather than renting, i guess that was clearly a Utopia that sadly started in America and worked it's way over here.

Who knows maybe MA would have turned it around for Albion (though i'm glad we have one of the COOLEST managers in the world), you just don't know. Managers aren't given enough time full stop, and people can't take the rough with the smooth alot of the time. YES i would like to see LABOUR fix it!

 

[Rookie]

On the contrary, most, if not all, of the people I know that work in the NHS readily admit it is far better now than it was prior to 1997. Yes, there is wasted money and it could be a lot better but in their view, it was definitely a lot worse.

As for some of these comments about when we went into recession and when we went out this are completely irrelevant. What is important is how the recession affected the economy, ie how does our unemployment compare with other economies, how mucy did GDP reduce compared to others etc.

Will have to agree to disagree because pretty much every single person I know who works in the NHS (Doctors and Nurses) are not happy with the way it works now days. To much management and cooking of the books to meet targets are two things that crop up a lot

 

[Arthritic Toe]

You seem quite knowledgeable about politics AT, i'm not really at all so i can't judge whether the aformentioned are having good effect or not. Though 0% interest rate is surely good for people struggling with their mortgage and without it surely loads more people would have ended up homeless. Labour's premiership has not really effected me and my interests lie with the banks they saved cos i've got shares with them and want them to recover.

The trouble is, its only putting off the pain until later. Interest rates will have to rise eventually. Yes - it may allow people on the edge to pay down just enough of their mortgage or get out of arrears enough to avoid reposession, but with little or no wage increases this is debatable. Its also very unfair on savers who are effectively paying for this, i.e penalising the prudent to pay for the feckless.

 

[Uncle C]

Labours economy saving measures have papered over the cracks just long enough to get them to the next election.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Yes credit to the LBG management. You seem more knowledgeable than me WS so i'll take your word for it. But i think the idea was, was to get as many people owning their own homes as possible, rather than renting, i guess that was clearly a Utopia that sadly started in America and worked it's way over here.

Who knows maybe MA would have turned it around for Albion (though i'm glad we have one of the COOLEST managers in the world), you just don't know. Managers aren't given enough time full stop, and people can't take the rough with the smooth alot of the time. YES i would like to see LABOUR fix it!

People owning their own home is generally a government aspiration, normally a Tory government, rather than the banking sectors aim. Alledgedlly the Lloyds board were very split on taking over HBOS - before they were very profitable and it was clear that they would struggle after the takeover. I wouldn't be surprised to see Lloyds board members made Lords or given knighthoods as it helped Brown out of a very sticky situation albiet temporarily.

On GP we're agreed and for the record I thought MA was sacked far too early - should at least of had one whole season but that's distracting from the debate.

 

[beorhthelm]

we know what happened, the interesting question is why. You say brown should have stopped the problem earlier, but my question is how? In a free market economy, how do you stop a bank giving someone a mortgage?

... Brown must be one of the most economically savvy prime ministers we've had.

yet as naive as any ordinary person as the evidence of the past few years has shown.

how could he have stopped it? firstly by not joining in the borrowing binge himself and secondly by applying regulation. he chose light touch regulation because it helped promote a city friendly image and also encouraged everyone to jump on the house price bandwagon. im not really sure when it became Labour party policy to promote and encourage homeownership, im fairly sure once it was considered a little too tory if not vulgar. As for what was known, its easy in hindsight, but after Northern Rock things where a little more obvious, but noone changed a thing.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

yet as naive as any ordinary person as the evidence of the past few years has shown.

how could he have stopped it? firstly by not joining in the borrowing binge himself and secondly by applying regulation. he chose light touch regulation because it helped promote a city friendly image and also encouraged everyone to jump on the house price bandwagon. im not really sure when it became Labour party policy to promote and encourage homeownership, im fairly sure once it was considered a little too tory if not vulgar. As for what was known, its easy in hindsight, but after Northern Rock things where a little more obvious, but noone changed a thing.

You're probably right, but if had tightly regulated the industry, what kind of country would we live in? It seems that our economy is so based on financial services now that government has no choice but to let them have their excesses and hope it works out? Regulate it all, it all moves overseas and we would have massive job-losses anyway.

 

[Gwylan]

yet as naive as any ordinary person as the evidence of the past few years has shown.

how could he have stopped it? firstly by not joining in the borrowing binge himself and secondly by applying regulation. he chose light touch regulation because it helped promote a city friendly image and also encouraged everyone to jump on the house price bandwagon.

You're right that's what he should have done. But can you imagine the headlines in the Sun, Mail, Telegraph etc? They would have gone ballistic "Now Brown wants us out of our homes" "Old style politics of envy as Browns hits hard-working home owners" etc.

It was clear that the economy was over-heating and that the country as a whole was in too much debt - Vince Cable for one warned of that but he was in a minority party. David Blanchflower did and was derided for it as it was a message that no-one wanted to hear.

There is certainly a debate as to whether too many government decisions are made with a view as to how they will be seen in the popular press (that applies to Tory governments too) but that's another issue.

And to go back to the original poster: my mother who's 80 and has voted in every election since 1951, is thinking of voting Labour for the first time in her life - and that's not because of what Labour will do for young people.

 

[beorhthelm]

You're probably right, but if had tightly regulated the industry, what kind of country would we live in?

You're right that's what he should have done. But can you imagine the headlines in the Sun, Mail, Telegraph etc? They would have gone ballistic "Now Brown wants us out of our homes"

why does the answer to light regulation have to be heavy regulation? a few touches here and there might have just placed some sanity into the situation. for example, requiring properly audited accounts/evidence of earning for self-certs; prohibiting over 105% mortgages (allow for fee/cashback packages). even now after the event there is nothing in place, only the banks avserion to the risk that prevents them issuing such loans. there is still no regulation what so ever on the credit deafult swaps, as i understand only legal in a few countries, so no risk of them going elsewhere. Its fair to say everyone was blind to complete problem (US regulators had a single desktop to model the economy; no one out side the banks/insurers reall knew about let alone understood CDS), but Northern rock was an alarm bell and they carried on regardless and did nothing.

 

[Gwylan]

why does the answer to light regulation have to be heavy regulation? a few touches here and there might have just placed some sanity into the situation. for example, requiring properly audited accounts/evidence of earning for self-certs; prohibiting over 105% mortgages (allow for fee/cashback packages).

I think measures such as the ones mentioned would have had little effect on the mortgage market. AFAIK, there weren't too many mortgage companies pushing self-certification. I got three mortgages in the Noughties with three separate companies and had to prove mountains of proof as to earnings, I have no idea of the figures but my (total) guess is that self-certification mortgages account for about 1 percent of all mortgages.

Regulations on 105% mortgages (or indeed 100%) would have been a stronger step but that would have brought out the headlines from the tabs that I mentioned earlier.

Brown could also have brought in tougher taxes on buy-to-let properties - but that would have brought headlines about Labour raising taxes again.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

I do have a fairly good understanding of economic, further, if you look at the economic downturn that other Countries have endured, you can see that, relatively, we're doing better than most.

No we're not. We're a probably going to lose our credit rating, the cost of government borrowing is going up because the markets don't rate us and there is a fair chance of us being the only european country to slip back into recession. There are plenty of decent reasons why someone should wish to vote Labour but the economy is not one of them.

 

[KneeOn]

And what if this country ends up with a lost generation of unskilled workers with no prospects who are all on the dole?

You called?

 

[beorhthelm]

Brown could also have brought in tougher taxes on buy-to-let properties - but that would have brought headlines about Labour raising taxes again.

actually he done the opposite there, he allowed rental properties to be put into private pension funds, so they didnt pay tax on the revenue. arguably the largest single contributor to fueling the housing market, especially at the bottom end. but its ok, Darling has now introduced a stamp duty holiday to redress that

 

[Gwylan]

actually he done the opposite there, he allowed rental properties to be put into private pension funds, so they didnt pay tax on the revenue. arguably the largest single contributor to fueling the housing market, especially at the bottom end...

I know - an act of utter lunacy.

It's really an area that's ripe for redressing and it wouldn't be that unpopular a tax either.