Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Brown and the Banks

143 replies

Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 22:20

www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=453203&in_page_id=2

I know there wil be a chorus of cynical voices echoing Tory grumbles (I have been told by an insider that the Tories are despeeratley praying for disaster in the economy - our economy - their economy - just so they can play the 'I told you so' card) of unfair use of taxpayer money, which completley ignores the payoff at the end if this works. This move will radicalise the banking system, and for the better.

I think this plan is a stroke of genius. I am in awe of GB's balls. I really hope it works and am almost sorry it's taken a global recession to do this, as it needed doing anyway.

OP posts:
Cloudhopper · 18/01/2009 22:23

Why isn't pay in banks mentioned? Do the PAs still get 50k per annum and back office staff get huge bonuses?

Living where I live (SW London), it is no mystery why the whole thing was unsustainable. I knew so many people of modest talent who have been paid literally millions.

The thought of some of the people I know in the poorer parts of the country bailing the system out from their taxes makes me feel ill.

I know I am oversimplifying. But despite masses of detailed reasons why this had to be done, I still get no sense that anyone has resolved the fundamental point.

OHBollox · 18/01/2009 22:25

Dear God I cannot believe anyone thinks this is a good idea ? I stated a few months ago the bail out wouldn't work, sometimes I hate being right.

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 22:35

It might all go tits up - but desperate times call for desperate measures, and this might just work. I hope it does, for all our sakes

OP posts:
OHBollox · 18/01/2009 22:36

I hope it fails for my children's sake, I do not want them paying for the whole of their working lives for this bunch of clowns mistakes, no more boom or bust ? Hilarious.

Cloudhopper · 18/01/2009 22:39

Is GB not just in complete denial about the whole thing, having masterminded the huge boom in the first place?

I interpret this as his attempt to convince us all that he was right.

And as such I fear more for us than other nations. He is binning the rule book as far as economics is concerned. Isn't there just a chance that it will prolong the agony, or nationalise it? He is nationalising risk - if you gamble on a profit, you can't guarantee your gamble will pay off. End of story.

Except now the people who never wanted to gamble in the first place have been dragged into it all.

retiredgoth2 · 18/01/2009 22:41

...I would dearly like to think that this will work.

However, I do not.

....I fear the banks will munch up all the cash offered, belch contentedly, and murmur that they are still a bit hungry really.

OHBollox · 18/01/2009 22:41

It will lead to inflation that is the plan, that way the savers will be forced to spend because they will see no interest, followed by inflation and that way we will spend our way out of the recession not heard a dickie bird about the 3 million unemployed though, would be much keener to hear what he plans to do about that.

WinkyWinkola · 18/01/2009 22:44

LOL @ retired goths.

I don't think GB masterminded the boom in the first place at all. I think he inherited it and enjoyed its run.

But I do think he could have done more to reign it in before all went kaputt. Actually, it should never have started in the first place....not that I'm an ardent saver and have been known to be a bit reckless

I really hope like MonkeyTrousers, GB's plan is a stroke of genius. I really don't want to see creepy david cameron wanky pants in a position of power.

WinkyWinkola · 18/01/2009 22:45

Yes, 3 million unemployed is a serious serious issue. Dark days.

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 22:53

You also think Brown is a genius if you think he 'masterminded' a global economic boom years before he was in office, just so it could fail when he was in, CH

OP posts:
Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 22:53

That is a valid worry Goth

OP posts:
Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 22:55

You know all those 3m unemployed do you Oh?

OP posts:
OHBollox · 18/01/2009 23:00

I'm sorry what is your point MT ? I know my husband has been made redundant (worked for an USA manufacturing company, UK no longer competitive), my friend's husband has been made redundant (one year old child, another on the way, worked for MFI).
So that's 2 too many in my own immediate circle.
Oh and the real figures are nearer 11 million if you count the inactive adults such as those on disability etc, all need feeding and housing one way or another.

Waswondering · 18/01/2009 23:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OHBollox · 18/01/2009 23:05

Mutals tend not to take stupid risks with sublime lending though in my experience.

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 18/01/2009 23:06

I have been made redundant also.

If you had talked about your personal expereince, it would have sounded more genuine, is all. As it is, use of '3m unemployed' tag is just redolant of tabloid emotionalism. That's just how it struck me.

OP posts:
OHBollox · 18/01/2009 23:16

I'm sorry but you sound like the one repeating the emotionalism, I genuinely cannot believe that you are being taken in by this, just shows how effective the whole labour spin machine has been, as if we didn't know.

WinkyWinkola · 18/01/2009 23:21

I reckon just wait and see.

I've never personally had faith in the Tories and their spin machine to look after anyone but the rich. That's why I hope GB is right.. .. . .. .But I'm not sure about anyone anymore.

OHBollox · 18/01/2009 23:26

They are all as bad as each other.
Personally the only way I can see that we all "win" for want of a better description is to refuse to play the game. Get out of debt (including mortgages) as fast as possible and then consume as little as possible removing the need to earn and therefore pay taxes.
If we all did that they'd be forced to start playing fair too.

WinkyWinkola · 18/01/2009 23:28

Well, I reckon OH, that you're partly right. Reduce the need for banks. Make them beg for custom instead of ripping people off. Back to the mattresses!

bunny3 · 18/01/2009 23:31

Wot OB says. Our children will be paying for this fuck-up. We have already forked out £37billion to bail out the banks. What did that achieve??

How about some tax breaks for small business instead? They are falling like dominoes.

Quattrocento · 18/01/2009 23:34

"Mutals tend not to take stupid risks with sublime lending though in my experience."

The sublime sub-prime

I do object to the way that everyone gets really irate about banks and bankers as though they were the ones with the monopoly on greed.

We used to have a lot of mutual societies - remember them? They were called building societies. They used to lend money to people for mortgages (mainly) and take deposits from savers. They were well regulated (or at least better regulated than banks) and not able to raise lots of money on the money markets.

What happened to them all? Well all the people who belonged to the mutual societies (us) thought they could make a quick buck by demutualising. Some people became carpetbaggers and held deposits in a number of building societies.

I'm afraid we all conspired in this economic crisis ...

bunny3 · 18/01/2009 23:40

I disagree Quattrocentro. We live within our means, dont borrow more than we can afford to repay and have money saved in the bank. If everyone did the same, this crisis would not have happened. We did not cause it but we will be paying for itnot only through taxes but through the interest rates on savings.

retiredgoth2 · 18/01/2009 23:40

....if we can have sublime lending, can we not also have subliminal lending?

Might be the only way....

bunny3 · 18/01/2009 23:41

ridiculous lending?