Why shouldn't I vote lib dem?

StevieJ

Pobby wrote: »

I don`t understand all this Vince Cable obsession. There were enough people a number of years ago, including myself, that could see what was going with lending and the run away housing market. You didn`t have to be a genius. It`s a shame that no one, it would appear, had enough average intelligence in our ruling party to see the same.

So you knew that the UK banks had their balance sheets stacked with US sub-prime debt? because that is what created the recession not a few over zealous UK loans, good post from here from Aelitaman.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=31351141&highlight=#post31351141

Pobby

StevieJ wrote: »

So you knew that the UK banks had their balance sheets stacked with US sub-prime debt? because that is what created the recession not a few over zealous UK loans, good post from here from Aelitaman.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=31351141&highlight=#post31351141

Take your point. However, I came across a number of cases of, well all I can say is sub prime loans, given out here in the U.K. I think there were more than a few over zealous loans. My contact in the USA told me incredible stories regarding her mortgaging business but certainly I have one relative and at least one friend who have " creative " home loans.

A._Badger

StevieJ wrote: »

So you knew that the UK banks had their balance sheets stacked with US sub-prime debt? because that is what created the recession not a few over zealous UK loans, good post from here from Aelitaman.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=31351141&highlight=#post31351141

Presumably, the name 'Northern Rock' is unfamiliar?

The US banks didn't do this on their own, you know. They had plenty of willing help from an (effectively) unregulated UK banking sector, to which a government desperate for a boom, turned a blind eye. Or worse.

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

Presumably, the name 'Northern Rock' is unfamiliar?

The US banks didn't do this on their own, you know. They had plenty of willing help from an (effectively) unregulated UK banking sector, to which a government desperate for a boom, turned a blind eye. Or worse.

Good job the Tories were not in power then, can you have something less regulated than unregulated?

Homebuyers could get less protection when they take out a mortgage under Tory plans to slash red tape, saving British industry £14 billion a year.
Conservative MP John Redwood, who heads the party’s economic competitiveness policy review group, will say on Friday that there is no need to regulate mortgages because the lender, not the customer, takes the risk.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/mon...cle2251766.ece

Mr Cameron is believed to be fully behind Mr Redwood's programme in what will represent a significant shift to the Right at a time when his leadership has come under fire from his own side and his party is trailing Labour in the polls. George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, is expected to join Mr Redwood for the document's launch on Friday.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-red-tape.html

A._Badger

You're avoiding the issue. Nice try, but no cigar. NR happened on McBean's watch. What the Tories may, or may not have done, is utterly irrelevant.

Pobby

The borrower takes the risk? Um, not so in the 90`s crash. I know a number who lost their homes. I know of one person that repaid the shortfall in fall when it was auctioned off.

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

You're avoiding the issue. Nice try, but no cigar. NR happened on McBean's watch. What the Tories may, or may not have done, is utterly irrelevant.

What issue, I thought Labour were the over regulatory Stalinist party, now you are saying they don't regulate enough.:eek:

Bigdaddy

At least the LibDems try to differentiate from the other two main parties...I have liked the LibDems for a while, but do not believe they have a credible leader in Nick Clegg, he lacks authority. David Cameron makes me cringe, he actually thinks the electorates are stupid by using his PR gimmicks and soundbites, the guy is incredibly insincere...as for Gordon , well what I can say!

A._Badger

StevieJ wrote: »

What issue, I thought Labour were the over regulatory Stalinist party, now you are saying they don't regulate enough.:eek:

I didn't mention the Tories - that was your straw man. I simply pointed out the tank-sized hole in your claim that the recession was due to the activities of US banks. I pointed out the failure of NR and the government's complicity in lending policy.

Is it worth trying to have a sensible conversation, or does it always resolve to 'Tories - yah-boo'?

Masomnia

Swing it the other way.

Why should you vote Lib Dem?

A few years ago they wanted a 50p tax rate, then they didn't. They were very pro-Europe, now they're not. They wanted to scrap tuition fees for students, now they don't.

Their policies change with the tide, or whoever happens to be in charge. St Vince might have an economics degree but that doesn't mean he's always right, and that he would make a good leader/chancellor. Both Keynes and Hayek knew a thing or two about economics but they would've radically different things, with potentially radically different outcomes.

I honestly don't know what they stand for, as I can't keep up. What's the philosophy behind it?

It's a 'no' from me.

ETA: VC was always going to have an advantage earlier, as it's easy to say to Labour that they've !!!!!!ed up the last ten years, and easy to say to the Tories that they !!!!!!ed up the 18 years before that; whereas he couldn't be put under the same scrutiny.