adrian29uk
New member
- Sep 10, 2003
- 3,389
One thing that bugs me is when people blame Labour for the financial. Where the banks not responsible for this?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Why does everyone blame labour for the financial mess?
- Thread starter adrian29uk
- Start date
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
yes they were mate but the media has to have someone tangible to blame so poor old GB got the job.
NMH
Banned
I blame Thatcher
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Gordon Brown was in charge when it happened, therefore he has ultimate responsibility. Rather like your boss is responsibe for the mistakes you make at work etc
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
The banks may have leant the money recklessly -however people borrowed money and spent it when they were unable to pay back.
It happened on their watch. Even though the other parties would have probably done the same thing they get the blame. The next government will become equally unpopular when they have to make big cuts in spending and increase tax revenue. It's probably best to be in opposition for the next 2 or 3 years.
porkypie
On the road to no where
Who's idea was it not to regulate the banks, was it labour who just let them off and do there own thing?
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,826
erm, because it happened while they were in power? after promising the end to boom and bust? after claiming to have engineered and economic miricle, actually fincanced with borrowing. and, following 10 years of spending and borrowing, the economics changed and there was found to be nothing spare in the accounts to change anything, because it was already all going to pay off the large national debt.
other than that, not not Labours fault at all.
other than that, not not Labours fault at all.
dannyboy
tfso!
it was a global recession, dont see obama getting blamed for it
seagull_special
Well-known member
If you take the credit when things are going well you have to take responsibility when things go tits up
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,826
you may recall he came to power after, rather difficult to blame somthing for what happend before they are in office.
dannyboy
tfso!
oh yeh , now wheres that face palm smiley. its early
MORTY
Well-known member
I blame Mcghee
Wozza
Shite Supporter
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,860
Well in his own words to the great and good in the City less than 4 years ago.
"To meet the challenge of global markets we created a single unified FSA.
In 2003, just at the time of a previous Mansion House speech, the Worldcom accounting scandal broke. And I will be honest with you, many who advised me including not a few newspapers, favoured a regulatory crackdown.
I believe that we were right not to go down that road which in the United States led to Sarbannes-Oxley, and we were right to build upon our light touch system through the leadership of Sir Callum McCarthy - fair, proportionate, predictable and increasingly risk based. I know Sir Callum is committed to reducing regulatory administrative burdens and the National Audit Office will now look at the efficiency and value for money of our system.
Let me say I see no case for a European single regulator and will continue to reject such a proposal, just as we will resist the new and unnecessary proposals to harmonisation corporate taxation in Europe.
It was to recognise risk, reward effort and encourage innovation that we cut the long term rate of capital gains tax for business assets from 40p to 10p and cut by 3 per cent and 4 per cent the rate of mainstream and small business corporation tax. And I will continue to look not only at the competitiveness of our tax system but I have also asked HMRC to ensure the administration of the tax system - its consistency, openness and responsiveness - is founded on strengthened consultation with you and a better dialogue."
So, GB introduced the FSA and ignored advice to tighten regulation and favoured a light touch regulatory system. He reduced taxes for the financial services sector and was evidently quite happy with their bonus culture.
So what do you think he was not responsible for again?
"To meet the challenge of global markets we created a single unified FSA.
In 2003, just at the time of a previous Mansion House speech, the Worldcom accounting scandal broke. And I will be honest with you, many who advised me including not a few newspapers, favoured a regulatory crackdown.
I believe that we were right not to go down that road which in the United States led to Sarbannes-Oxley, and we were right to build upon our light touch system through the leadership of Sir Callum McCarthy - fair, proportionate, predictable and increasingly risk based. I know Sir Callum is committed to reducing regulatory administrative burdens and the National Audit Office will now look at the efficiency and value for money of our system.
Let me say I see no case for a European single regulator and will continue to reject such a proposal, just as we will resist the new and unnecessary proposals to harmonisation corporate taxation in Europe.
It was to recognise risk, reward effort and encourage innovation that we cut the long term rate of capital gains tax for business assets from 40p to 10p and cut by 3 per cent and 4 per cent the rate of mainstream and small business corporation tax. And I will continue to look not only at the competitiveness of our tax system but I have also asked HMRC to ensure the administration of the tax system - its consistency, openness and responsiveness - is founded on strengthened consultation with you and a better dialogue."
So, GB introduced the FSA and ignored advice to tighten regulation and favoured a light touch regulatory system. He reduced taxes for the financial services sector and was evidently quite happy with their bonus culture.
So what do you think he was not responsible for again?
While in principal I am in favour of government for the majority over government for the greedy who already have everything they need, I can accept that cash should have been kept in the coffers. Just say 5% less spending over the last 10 years and we wouldn't be having to face what's coming soon.
The global recession
Hindsight is wonderful though, what's your excuse for not spending 5% less? I don't have one to be honest.
Joey Deacon's Disco Suit
It's a THUG life
- Apr 19, 2010
- 854
Hindsight is wonderful but if this Government is following Keynesian principles as it has claimed to get us out of this recession then you put money away for a rainy day. No excuses for not doing that. Absolutely none.