Dear George

[mattx]

Dear George, I wrote to you a while ago asking that you stop 'playing around' with the country's economy. But oh no, whilst you and your rich chums have enjoyed your tax breaks you awarded yourselves, today we find out that the economy has shrank by 0.3% over the last 3 months. Stick to folding towels at Selfridges, surely you can manage that because numbers arn't really your strong point......Idiot.

[Michael]

I have to admit, it's not looking rosey in George's world, but I gather he's still going to carry on anyway.

 

This just confirms once and for all, there is an even worse Chancellor than Gordon Brown! :doh:

[Robz]

I have to admit, it's not looking rosey in George's world, but I gather he's still going to carry on anyway.

 

This just confirms once and for all, there is an even worse Chancellor than Gordon Brown! :doh:

 

Gordon Brown = put us in the recession + debt crisis AND sold off our gold at its lowest ever price

 

George = Getting us out of the sh!t

 

 

I vote George.

[laserblazer]

I didn't realise that the reason saving interest are so low is because the government has given the banks billions to loan to small businesses, the banks are just keeping the money and therefore don't need any more from savers.

[Michael]

Gordon Brown = put us in the recession + debt crisis AND sold off our gold at its lowest ever price

 

George = Getting us out of the sh!t

 

 

I vote George.

 

Apart from what he's doing is essentially cutting everything out, so he lives on bread and butter. A compromise is needed so at least you can give yourself a good meal. That's the best way I can explain it.

 

Another way to look at it - companies look closely what the Government are doing and see they're not investing, so how on earth the Government expect companies (despite sitting on cash) to invest... they're not thinking logically and again, you have to question how many MPs have actually run a business before. Practically zero, so that lack of knowledge is clearly making a big difference.

 

The numbers speak for themselves - a triple dip on the horizon, the threat of the UK losing our AAA status. It'll mean borrowing will go up for you and me.

[Earthling]

Gordon Brown = put us in the recession + debt crisis AND sold off our gold at its lowest ever price

 

.

 

I really ought to start watching the news more. All this time, I've been thinking it was bailing out the banks to the tune of several tens of billions (whatever) that had got us into this mess.

 

A true moment.

[aerospacemango]

Gordon Brown = put us in the recession + debt crisis AND sold off our gold at its lowest ever price

 

George = Getting us out of the sh!t

 

 

I vote George.

 

As long as you continue to swallow the tory party line, that's what you will believe.

 

It was actually the Sub-Prime markets in the good ole US of A that ditched the world into recession....But don't let the truth stand in the way of party politics, eh?

[andyturpie]

We all as individuals have to take a slice of responsibilty for the mire we are in. Too many of us living their lives on the old flexible friends, we complain that we are poor, but we have luxuries like large screen TV's, all the best gadgets and are part of the throwaway society. We don't really know the meaning of poor, like our parents and grandparents. I see Osbourne only reacting to society's actions.

[Michael]

It did start in the USA - wrapping up bad assets as good ones and selling them on... it was only a matter of time before some poor bank actually looked at it carefully, then realised they'd bought millions of these all with the same problem. All economies are essentially linked with each other, more so the USA as they're the largest economy (at the moment).

 

At this point it was too late, the damage had gone unnoticed for years and politicians did what they thought was right rather than stepping back and looking at the bigger picture. Gordon Brown didn't create the problem, but you could argue they were running the country and setting the policies for banks to follow. The Government stupidly (and still stupidly) trust the banks too much even today which is why progress is painfully slow.

[mthomas08]

I have to admit, it's not looking rosey in George's world, but I gather he's still going to carry on anyway.

 

This just confirms once and for all, there is an even worse Chancellor than Gordon Brown! :doh:

 

+1 on this.

[Robz]

As long as you continue to swallow the tory party line, that's what you will believe.

 

It was actually the Sub-Prime markets in the good ole US of A that ditched the world into recession....But don't let the truth stand in the way of party politics, eh?

 

 

Ultimately it was the labour government in charge of our country and thus in charge of those that operate within it. Yes the banks caused the recession but he certainly didn't do a thing to prevent it - ultimate responsibility was his.

 

Nor would we be in such a mess if the government of the time hadn't borrowed more than we could ever hope to pay back easily - its not the recession that's left us in this mess, its the amount our previous government borrowed.

 

Apart from what he's doing is essentially cutting everything out, so he lives on bread and butter. A compromise is needed so at least you can give yourself a good meal. That's the best way I can explain it.

 

Another way to look at it - companies look closely what the Government are doing and see they're not investing, so how on earth the Government expect companies (despite sitting on cash) to invest... they're not thinking logically and again, you have to question how many MPs have actually run a business before. Practically zero, so that lack of knowledge is clearly making a big difference.

 

The numbers speak for themselves - a triple dip on the horizon, the threat of the UK losing our AAA status. It'll mean borrowing will go up for you and me.

 

And yes he can do things better but who would you want trying to make those changes Gordon or George? one dip does not necessarily mean recession is on the horizon, we have to get used to things being different than before the credit crunch

Edited January 25, 2013 by Robz

[pcstru]

We all as individuals have to take a slice of responsibilty for the mire we are in. Too many of us living their lives on the old flexible friends, we complain that we are poor, but we have luxuries like large screen TV's, all the best gadgets and are part of the throwaway society. We don't really know the meaning of poor, like our parents and grandparents. I see Osbourne only reacting to society's actions.

 

Surely those who borrowed too much and lost their homes have borne the responsibility of their actions. Or if you borrow too much on your credit card you eventually end up facing balifs or bankruptcy - again appropriate consequences for the actions of the individuals. I don't see how you can blame individual borrowers for bankrupting the banks - that is the responsibility of the bank managers and it is a responsibility of such huge magnitude that they are paid millions to bear it. But you seem to say it's not their fault?

[andyturpie]

Surely those who borrowed too much and lost their homes have borne the responsibility of their actions. Or if you borrow too much on your credit card you eventually end up facing balifs or bankruptcy - again appropriate consequences for the actions of the individuals. I don't see how you can blame individual borrowers for bankrupting the banks - that is the responsibility of the bank managers and it is a responsibility of such huge magnitude that they are paid millions to bear it. But you seem to say it's not their fault?

 

Good point, but just because a bank offers a service or deal (lets say allow mortgages on ad hoc overtime payments) , we as individuals should be intelligent enough to stop and say "thanks for the offer Mr Banker, but no deal". Again banks did behave recklessly, but only dancing to the tune of the customers no demand, no reckless gambling.

[Michael]

And yes he can do things better but who would you want trying to make those changes Gordon or George? one dip does not necessarily mean recession is on the horizon, we have to get used to things being different than before the credit crunch

 

We're one more quarter away from a triple dip which I think is highly likely, simply because the Christmas season should create more sales and more growth. It didn't because confidence is extremely low, both with the public and in business in general.

 

In my opinion, I think the fundamental problem with the Chancellor role is that it's controlled by one person. There's obviously groups of professionals/experts who assist the Government in making decisions in the background, but theoretically any Chancellor can simply ignore all this and carry on. I'm finding it incredibly hard to believe these groups of professionals/experts are advising the Government to carry on cutting at the level they are.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there never has been a triple dip even with Word War I and II debts. That gives you an idea just how logistically complex this problem is and the final decision shouldn't be left to just one person appointed Chancellor.

[sonofsanta]

Gordon Brown probably shouldn't have sold all the gold off, and certainly shouldn't have announced that he was about to flood the market to plummet the prices just before he did.

 

But George Osborne is also a pillock for refusing to acknowledge the proof in front of his eyes and continuing to push forward with his austerity measures on the basis of a flawed analogy. The recent headline High Street closures that are still taking place, would, you might hope, be a wake up call, but I fear that the ghost-possessed-sausage that is our Chancellor is as oblivious and disconnected from reality as all our politicans are. If not more so.

 

The problem is I wouldn't want any of them running the economy.

[Earthling]

I often wonder how things would have turned out if the government of the day had let Northern Rock go bust instead of bailing them out WITH OUR MONEY.

 

Would the rest of them have cleaned up their act a little? Would the UK have disappeared off the face of the Earth in a puff of fiscal smoke? Would the sky have fallen in, aliens landed, poles reversed and all the other Extinction Level Events that we were threatened with if we didn't bail out the banks with TAXPAYERS MONEY.

 

All I remember was being told that we must give ALL OUR MONEY to the banks to preserve our Cabinet Ministers' chances of that good old non-executive directorship on the board of .

 

Or something like that.

[pcstru]

Good point, but just because a bank offers a service or deal (lets say allow mortgages on ad hoc overtime payments) , we as individuals should be intelligent enough to stop and say "thanks for the offer Mr Banker, but no deal".

It seems that Banks themselves didn't understand the complex instruments they were trading. Yet you think the the man on the street should?

 

Again banks did behave recklessly, but only dancing to the tune of the customers no demand, no reckless gambling.

 

Banks sold complex instruments to each other and effectively to large institutional shareholders. They inflated their value and ignored the risk that posed to their own institutions, institutions which there were well paid to manage. We find out that they ignored no opportunity to illegally manipulate the markets (LIBOR) and investment banks were even selling investments to their customers which they were actually betting against (shorting). Sorry - but the only thing you or I can really do about that is to lobby our MP's hard so that these people are not allowed to get away with it this time or ever again. Sadly, instead of that, it seems people are actually swallowing the line that it was their fault all along. Bankers must be laughing out the other side of their massive bonuses.

[Robz]

 

 

But George Osborne is also a pillock for refusing to acknowledge the proof in front of his eyes and continuing to push forward with his austerity measures on the basis of a flawed analogy. The recent headline High Street closures that are still taking place, would, you might hope, be a wake up call, but I fear that the ghost-possessed-sausage that is our Chancellor is as oblivious and disconnected from reality as all our politicans are. If not more so.

 

The problem is I wouldn't want any of them running the economy.

 

 

 

Businesses are businesses, unless the government bails them all out some will undoubtedly fail its the nature of doing business they are affected by many factors, can't blame the government entirely for that. If I was the government I would do more to help smaller businesses like cutting business rates (which local councils have been increasing despite the problems).

 

And I agree I'd rather not have any of them either but better the lesser evil.

[pcstru]

I often wonder how things would have turned out if the government of the day had let Northern Rock go bust instead of bailing them out WITH OUR MONEY.

 

Many individuals - investors with NR, would have lost everything but perhaps worse there would have been a domino effect, so it wouldn't just have been customers of NR. So you might see your or your parents savings evaporate, good viable businesses close as their ability to buy stock evaporates. The consequences would have been fairly random - a lottery of loss. Better IMO to share the pain as long as we take steps to ensure it can never happen again. Sadly, the last bit seems to be a bit lacking. Rank, rampant greed used to be ugly - now just call it capitalism and ... well, that's all right then , go right ahead.

[Gibbo]

Dear George, I wrote to you a while ago asking that you stop 'playing around' with the country's economy. But oh no, whilst you and your rich chums have enjoyed your tax breaks you awarded yourselves, today we find out that the economy has shrank by 0.3% over the last 3 months. Stick to folding towels at Selfridges, surely you can manage that because numbers arn't really your strong point......Idiot.

 

No you didn't. You posted a thread on Edugeek, a forum he probably doesn't read.

 

Idiot.

[Theblacksheep]

We all as individuals have to take a slice of responsibilty for the mire we are in. Too many of us living their lives on the old flexible friends, we complain that we are poor, but we have luxuries like large screen TV's, all the best gadgets and are part of the throwaway society. We don't really know the meaning of poor, like our parents and grandparents. I see Osbourne only reacting to society's actions.

 

None of those caused International (not just america) banks to lend money they didn't have.

 

None of those caused financial investment companies to sell debt to each other for short term profit.

 

None of those caused our banks to fiddle rates between themselves.

 

 

Its a great excuse for silly cuts, great excuse for giving the banks billions and forcing the rest of us to pay it off.

[tmcd35]

I suppose the torries selling off profitable companies we owned when they were in power is some how different and yet this is some how forgotten in a scented haze of ignorance?

 

No, it had not been forgotten

 

I doubt any 1 party can be 100% in line with your views and so you have to take the 'best of whats on offer' view and pick the one that represents your views the best.

Very true, but at least I can name 1 party 100% not in line with any of my views...

 

The system is borked.

Totally but what you gonna do? I thought the LD's had it right at the last general election. Looks like a lot of the country agreed with me at the time - just no where near enough, voting LD gave us a Tory coallition monster. Oh well, live and learn. The systems broke and you can't fix it...

 

 

Right here, right now Id say we were better off under the monarchy and would sack the lot of the money grabbing leeches and let the King/Queen rule for 5o years then have a vote if we want to go back to the retards in westminster.

 

Mmm, I can imagine the success of some of King Charles policies...

[andyturpie]

Gordon Brown probably shouldn't have sold all the gold off, and certainly shouldn't have announced that he was about to flood the market to plummet the prices just before he did.

 

But George Osborne is also a pillock for refusing to acknowledge the proof in front of his eyes and continuing to push forward with his austerity measures on the basis of a flawed analogy. The recent headline High Street closures that are still taking place, would, you might hope, be a wake up call, but I fear that the ghost-possessed-sausage that is our Chancellor is as oblivious and disconnected from reality as all our politicans are. If not more so.

 

The problem is I wouldn't want any of them running the economy.

 

 

The problem is that High Street closures are taking place is because they played ball and paid all their taxes. Major on line only retailers having been exposed as tax avoiding scumbags (no names), where their customers are guilty of accessory to tax avoidance. These customers are usually the one's that kick off when there are cuts backs in services and on infrastructure. These customers usually call someone to say their "stuck in traffic" but won't admit they are "part of the traffic", these customers complain on one hand about wishing the nanny state would but out of their lives on one hand but scream "What is the government doing?" on the other.

 

These customers are you and ME. These customers are society.

[SYNACK]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/ it's not just a movie, it is an enditement of society. Nostradamus eat your heart out.

[localzuk]

The problem is that High Street closures are taking place is because they played ball and paid all their taxes. Major on line only retailers having been exposed as tax avoiding scumbags (no names), where their customers are guilty of accessory to tax avoidance. These customers are usually the one's that kick off when there are cuts backs in services and on infrastructure. These customers usually call someone to say their "stuck in traffic" but won't admit they are "part of the traffic", these customers complain on one hand about wishing the nanny state would but out of their lives on one hand but scream "What is the government doing?" on the other.

 

These customers are you and ME. These customers are society.

 

The problems with the high street are not just down to taxes. They are down to many things, such as local authority planners not understanding the pressures on retailers and pushing prices up for their rates when they clean up their town centres, the landlords for the properties did similar things also.

 

The next issue was the lack of understanding by retailers of their competition and their own failing business models. They grew large, but not agile. So, by the time they saw the problems approaching they were too late. They'd signed long leases on properties, expanded and consolidated their warehousing etc... to such an extent that a drop in sales basically made it impossible for them to shrink back down.

 

A few such retailers - GAME, Comet, HMV, Peacocks, Jessops, La Senza, etc... they all did the same thing. They grew without being able to shrink. They didn't maintain working capital sufficiently, instead relying far too much on credit which inevitably dries up.

 

Sure, we are somewhat culpable as shoppers, for using cheaper sources, but when we see companies failing to adapt, why should we continue to support their broken businesses? I used to pirate music, I couldn't support the music industry because they simply wouldn't change and were unwilling to embrace the digital world. Now? I am a paid subscriber to Spotify and have been for about 3 1/2 years now. I've played 10s of thousands of tracks on that system, and have paid about £400 to do so. They'll continue to get my money too.