Is the recession really Brown's fault?

Old_Slaphead

Wookster wrote: »

Sadly true - most people don't see that credit has masked the UK's non productiveness, and you don't see the media actively campaigning this.

Sad to say but the media also should share some responsibility. (Ok, let's blame everybody but me)

How many TV progs helped 'pump up' property prices.

How many newspaper headlines heralded the 'great news for borrowers' as mortgage rates fell - thereby allowing the naive mortgagees to keep bidding up prices?

Didn't the media fuel the spending is good - saving is bad culture ???

Rochdale_Pioneers

I just find it preposterous that the Tories are lecturing Brown on lax regulation and making themselves out to be the ones who would have been tough on the city.

Its complete cobblers. Every single policy statement they ever made on the city and regulation was that there was too much of it. Where would we have been had the Tories been in power and we'd had LESS regulation - thats what you want to ask yourselves. Brown clearly arsed it up along with all the other governments. How much worse would things have been with even less regulation in the city? Isn't that what all the hedge fund managers donating large sums to the Conservatives all wanted?

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

The recession is Global and would have happened anyway, but the UK would have been in a much better position to survive it if Brown hadn't given away all our Gold reserves at knock-down prices (after he announced he was going to sell it all, the price crashed, he sold it anyway against the advice of everyone), had he taken hold of the housing market and deflated it in a controlled way - or indeed not let it balloon out of control in the first place, had he not bloated the civil service and public sector with thousands of staff, had he not spent all of the tax money gleaned during the good times instead of putting a bit by for a rainy day, had he not carried out a raid on peoples pensions making them worth even less after the stock market crash and providing a disincentive for people to invest for their old age, had he not helped take us into two wars that have cost us billions of pounds, If he had put in better banking regulations we would not have had a debt boom, etc. etc.

No, the recession is not his fault. The fact that the UK was knackered before we even got into a recession is his fault.

I've no idea about all that gold stuff.

However, I do know that this government has rebuilt schools that desperately needed rebuilding. Some of them were slums after the Tories had been in power for so long. They have also refurbished schools. They have paid school staff well and provided them with equpiment & books they need to do their job. They have reduced class sizes particularly in Key Stage 1.

The Tories would have done none of this.

Whilst I know less about what has gone on in the NHS, they have also spent massive amounts in this area.

I believe that this government has tried to spend money helping people. As I've said before the Tories would have just P!!ss!d it all away on tax cuts for the rich, schools would still be in a dreadful state and they would not have left a particularly great legacy.

Generali

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

I've no idea about all that gold stuff.

However, I do know that this government has rebuilt schools that desperately needed rebuilding. Some of them were slums after the Tories had been in power for so long. They have also refurbished schools. They have paid school staff well and provided them with equpiment & books they need to do their job. They have reduced class sizes particularly in Key Stage 1.

The Tories would have done none of this.

Whilst I know less about what has gone on in the NHS, they have also spent massive amounts in this area.

I believe that this government has tried to spend money helping people. As I've said before the Tories would have just P!!ss!d it all away on tax cuts for the rich, schools would still be in a dreadful state and they would not have left a particularly great legacy.

Well when actually in power they paid down debt in good times and increased it in the bad. The Labour Government increased the debt in the good times and left the UK in the brown stuff.

Hardly a great legacy and one that seems set to haunt the UK.

lostinrates

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

. They have paid school staff well ......

I don't pretend to know about what key staff are paid, some say too much, some say too little, but it does seem that a lot of key workers were saying they couldn't afford a home in the areas they worked. So if paying them more perhaps they were not protectiong the purchasing power of that increased pay?

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

Well when actually in power they paid down debt in good times and increased it in the bad. The Labour Government increased the debt in the good times and left the UK in the brown stuff.

Hardly a great legacy and one that seems set to haunt the UK.

When exactly did the Tories pay down debt and how much did they pay down ?

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Generali wrote: »

Well when actually in power they paid down debt in good times and increased it in the bad. The Labour Government increased the debt in the good times and left the UK in the brown stuff.

Hardly a great legacy and one that seems set to haunt the UK.

We've been through that debate many times and you know that's not true.

Firstly, the UK deficit was less than most countries.

Secondly, how big your deficit is or isn't really isn't going to matter because the sums involved are so massive that a couple of billion either way really isn't going to make any difference. Lots of countries with surpluses will suffer just because they are overdependent on export markets.

I think the labour party did "fix the roof while the sun shined" and I certainly believe that the Tories wouldn't have bothered.

mbga9pgf

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I am not sure it would have made much difference. Conceivable he could have raised tax rates(or cut spending) by 1% of GDP from 2002-2007. But it would have made a minor difference to the current situation, probably reducing total government debt by 6-7%. I suppose it would have given more remove to manoever in terms of a fiscal stimulus now, but not a great deal.

I am not sure that if Brown had sought to raise interest rates, reduce credit and increase taxes in order to slow economic growth he would have been highly regarded and would have lost the election in 2005 to a Conservative government that would have promised lower taxes and less regulation.

how about legislating max 3.5X salary mortgages? how about minimum 10% deposits? How about banning ludicrous 125% together mortgages that Northern Rock were pumping out? How about including HPI in the Consumer price index?

How about limiting retail banks to standard lending practices and not diversifying into more risky investment banking practices?

THere was plenty he could have done. He chose not to as he was greedy for power and chose what would get him elected instead of what was good for the country. And for that reason, he makes me sick.

dealsearcher

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

However, I do know that this government has rebuilt schools that desperately needed rebuilding. Some of them were slums after the Tories had been in power for so long. They have also refurbished schools. They have paid school staff well and provided them with equpiment & books they need to do their job. They have reduced class sizes particularly in Key Stage 1.

The Tories would have done none of this.

Whilst I know less about what has gone on in the NHS, they have also spent massive amounts in this area.

I believe that this government has tried to spend money helping people. As I've said before the Tories would have just P!!ss!d it all away on tax cuts for the rich, schools would still be in a dreadful state and they would not have left a particularly great legacy.

To say the tories would have done none of this is pure speculation. Where they voted against bills it was usually because a bill had twenty points in it of which some they agreed with and some they did not. This meant they had to vote down the whole bill because of the bad points in it. Then Labour could say: 'the Tories voted against this and this'.

This government has spent a lot of our money. Have things improved? Has the spending been worthwhile? They talk a lot about spending loads of money, but the benefits are little.

StevieJ

mbga9pgf wrote: »

how about legislating max 3.5X salary mortgages? how about minimum 10% deposits? How about banning ludicrous 125% together mortgages that Northern Rock were pumping out? How about including HPI in the Consumer price index?

How about limiting retail banks to standard lending practices and not diversifying into more risky investment banking practices?

THere was plenty he could have done. He chose not to as he was greedy for power and chose what would get him elected instead of what was good for the country. And for that reason, he makes me sick.

Tories would have made mincemeat of interferring Brown, refer Redwood quote :rotfl: