AND HERE WE GO - THE 2019 GENERAL ELECTION THREAD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 18645
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hobbit said:
The global crash was triggered by the collapse of the sub-prime mortgage market in the USA. Gordon Brown's failing was overextending, believing the boom would go on longer. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but I'd ask the question would anyone take out a huge loan on the back of potential earnings in a volatile jobs market. He was a bit reckless.
Click to expand...
I’ve no doubt Brown and the Labour Party have to bare a major chunk of the responsibility as it was on their watch.
But it’s easy to look back at the facts and see it was not exactly as the tories or the media portrayed it at the time, just think of the “note” and “gold” stories that still persist to date.
 
pauldj42 said:
I’ve no doubt Brown and the Labour Party have to bare a major chunk of the responsibility as it was on their watch.
But it’s easy to look back at the facts and see it was not exactly as the tories or the media portrayed it at the time, just think of the “note” and “gold” stories that still persist to date.
Click to expand...

I don't really apportion a huge amount of blame to Labour, just some. They were a victim of that perfect storm... maybe shouldn't have sold the life belts though.

The 'note' is a non-story really but it makes good soundbite politics. The 'gold' is something different though. You could borrow against the gold price, but you can't now its been sold. And you can't borrow against bonds quite so easily. Selling all the gold was stupid in the extreme. There was enough evidence from the countries around the world that showed the value of having a gold reserve... Brown was stupid.
 
Hobbit said:
I don't really apportion a huge amount of blame to Labour, just some. They were a victim of that perfect storm... maybe shouldn't have sold the life belts though.

The 'note' is a non-story really but it makes good soundbite politics. The 'gold' is something different though. You could borrow against the gold price, but you can't now its been sold. And you can't borrow against bonds quite so easily. Selling all the gold was stupid in the extreme. There was enough evidence from the countries around the world that showed the value of having a gold reserve... Brown was stupid.
Click to expand...
Again though Bri, with a little research you will find varying “experts” saying Brown was right or wrong on the gold.
Even today I believe we are still receiving interest on the bonds and at the time a few European countries were reducing their gold reserves, vast amounts of gold sat in vaults earning nothing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-analysis-financial-bullion-a8909611.html?amp
 
pauldj42 said:
Again though Bri, with a little research you will find varying “experts” saying Brown was right or wrong on the gold.
Even today I believe we are still receiving interest on the bonds and at the time a few European countries were reducing their gold reserves, vast amounts of gold sat in vaults earning nothing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-analysis-financial-bullion-a8909611.html?amp
Click to expand...

That article does say we are still well down, just not as bad as some say.

There are two elements to a bond, the value and the interest. Short term bonds, which he bought, don’t give the best return but are less risky in terms of tie in.

However, today’s short term bond might be bought for £100. You gain 5% in interest taking it to £105. Do you have £5 to spend? Yes, but when the bond matures in 6 months what’s the market rate to buy the next bond? £105? But how do you buy the next bond if you’ve spent the £5?

Truthfully, that’s simplistic but there’s an element of reality in there too. And I guess that’s where part of the “still down” comes from. Another way to confirm that is to look at how the value of gold has risen.

As to the ability to borrow against the gold he retained... have a look at the value of the gold after he flooded the market... it’s in the article.

He made a questionable short term gain, which he spent, for a significant long term loss.

And as my first sentence says, the article you used in Brown’s defence still says he made a loss.
 
Old Skier said:
Is that the one that says, "a website by the Conservative Party"
Click to expand...
Indeed it is right under picture of Corbyn.

However they're not the only ones at it, because if you go to the website the www.torymanifesto.com someone has done the same thing with a picture of Boris and slating the tory manifesto even though that hasn't been released yet 🤷‍♂️

This is literally the most immature and childish GE ever known, sadly social media and the Internet age is making it all the more easier for idiots to take away from the actual political stand points and make it nothing more than a playground debate.
 
Wolf said:
Indeed it is right under picture of Corbyn.

However they're not the only ones at it, because if you go to the website the www.torymanifesto.com someone has done the same thing with a picture of Boris and slating the tory manifesto even though that hasn't been released yet 🤷‍♂️

This is literally the most immature and childish GE ever known, sadly social media and the Internet age is making it all the more easier for idiots to take away from the actual political stand points and make it nothing more than a playground debate.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much of it is Party activists who initially chuck it up without prior knowledge. Question to ask the candidates if I ever see one.
 
Old Skier said:
I wonder how much of it is Party activists who initially chuck it up without prior knowledge. Question to ask the candidates if I ever see one.
Click to expand...
Johnson was asked about it last night, but unfortunately blamed brexit.
 
Old Skier said:
I wonder how much of it is Party activists who initially chuck it up without prior knowledge. Question to ask the candidates if I ever see one.
Click to expand...
If you do see one and get to ask the question I'd be interested in hearing the reply. Whoever has set them up it does have an impact of how some less clued up people on politics will vote. I'm seeing on my own social media feeds the plebs that are buying into both the misinformation sites and sharing them as ammo as to why not to vote for certain parties. Some people are more interested in propoganda than actually reading the manifestos and making their own minds up.
 
Corbyn's neutrality on Brexit by putting it back to the people - cant decide if that's an effective stance or not. In my mind Brexit was never really along party lines back in 2016, so why should it be now? Boris has clearly been advised to push this as a weakness of leadership on Corbyn's behalf but I dont htink that works other than with diehard Tories, to the floating voters in the middle that could equally be a strength - seems Corbyn has seen the parliamentary deadlock, listened to public opinion on Brexit and doesn't want to alienate leavers or remainers who could vote Labour, not an unwise move tactically. In contrast Johnson has aliented all Tory remainers, that's not to say they wont still vote Conservative, but his whole premiership is built on leave and therefore he can never truly show impartiality or listen to reason on the matter or change his position. One leader is in the middle, other one is hard to one side - who's position is stronger?
 
Found the money we need to fund the Labour manifesto


Think all these people can stump it up .. phew thought we had financial issues but we don’t 👍😎
 
pauldj42 said:
My blinkers are well and truly off, in all honesty I found your comments insulting, especially your attitude towards foodbanks and the homeless, so the long insulting rant for which I’d of received a ban, I deleted and thankfully Hobbit answered it far better than I ever could.
Click to expand...
No there not. I put it to you that you are completely blinkered when it comes to anyone criticising Labour policy. You can't even debate it without becoming personal even though you have stated you won't do this over and over on this site. I won't get drawn into a mud slinging fight with you just because I have a differing view.
 
Corbyn may indeed stay neutral in a second referendum if he gets in power but how many of his cabinet would. I cant see the likes of Starmer, Abbott and Thornbury being so.
 
SocketRocket said:
No there not. I put it to you that you are completely blinkered when it comes to anyone criticising Labour policy. You can't even debate it without becoming personal even though you have stated you won't do this over and over on this site. I won't get drawn into a mud slinging fight with you just because I have a differing view.
Click to expand...
Try reading all my posts rather than just the ones that suit, I’ve openly criticised the Party and Leadership and tried at times to present both sides of an argument.
You are completely one sided and have not once criticised the tories whilst constantly defending the liar-in-chief.
 
Given Corbyn’s record on attendance at memorials for murderers and voting record against uk interests, he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister. I won’t even start on his duff economics and antisemitism.

Hopefully, Labour will lose heavily and he and his nasty chums will be booted out of the Party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top