g20 trouble

lol, only in britain are there organised protests

in other countries, they have full blown mass riots, and they don't stop until they have heads on sticks :D
 
Been a bit of argy-bargy with the police apparently, few things being thrown, smoke bombs mentioned...
 
Dolph said:
Labour put all the regulation in place that presided over this fiasco, they are ultimately responsible for that.
Click to expand...

What regulation? They removed regulations, that was the whole problem! They made it easier for people to borrow and for banks to lend. The banks demanded less regulation, so Labour gave them what they wanted.

They have also insisted on implementing massive unfunded spending policies, encouraging debt in the public sector as well as encouraging people to take more and more debt.
Click to expand...

Yes, and let's remember that the banks have never encouraged people to take more and more debt.
 
Pth big fuss about nothing, the camera shots make it look like there's millions of people in the City but really isn't that many people, probably more police tbh
 
Evangelion said:
What regulation? They removed regulations, that was the whole problem! They made it easier for people to borrow and for banks to lend. The banks demanded less regulation, so Labour gave them what they wanted.
Click to expand...

Labour set up the FSA and set up it's remit as financial regulator. If that remit was wrong, then it's Labour's fault, not the banks.

And even with the relaxed regulations, most banks have been fine, a few ex-building societies, and RBS have been the problem by misusing the freedom provided.

Is that a regulator problem, for failing to regulate, or a bank problem? If it's a bank problem, is it all banks or just the ones that made stupid decisions?

Yes, and let's remember that the banks have never encouraged people to take more and more debt.
Click to expand...

And people have never taken more than they could afford, what's your point?

The responsibility for this issue falls on everyone, but only one party has the monopoly of force to control things. If they fail to do so, whose fault must it be?
 
Just walked to Tesco to get some foodage, the streets are pretty empty, didnt have to que up for the self service. looked like there was a fair amount of people at bank though.
 
Just put BBC News on xD

It's brilliant ! Everyone at the "climate camp" looks like tramps or students :)

I see ginger people !
 
Dolph said:
So nothing to do with Labour's economic mismanagement of the economy then?

Labour put all the regulation in place that presided over this fiasco, they are ultimately responsible for that.

They have also insisted on implementing massive unfunded spending policies, encouraging debt in the public sector as well as encouraging people to take more and more debt.
Click to expand...

Strange this... during the Tory years of North Sea oil, the state saw diddly squat because it was all going to Tory party funders and such like.

Strange you mention the regulation in place... in fact it was Jackson (Tory) in 1994 who introduced the Free Credit and Loan system... to surprise surprise make the banks (and financial industry) more powerful. Low and behold we have a situation now where our economy has been weakened due to negligence of the Conservative party funders from the heads of: RBS, Halifax, LloydsTSB, Natwest etc etc.

The fact is that as Gordon Brown has stated fairly recently, Britain is in quite a good position in relative terms, we have low national debt and last i checked was only 47% (£697.5bn) Sauce: ONS, this is remarkably low considering:

1) France and Germany (the other EU big three) have their Nat Debt over 60%
2) That despite the hundreds of billions spent by Labour in this "fiasco" we are still only 2.6% of GDP in debt above what the Country was when Labour took over from the Conservatives
3) Our foreign debt has shrunk: BBC: The Myth of Record Debt
4) Labour have made up until recently there be less people out of work than at any other point, even during the 80's with millions of jobs going there was still 3million+ out of work!

Its like i always say with the Conservatives the clue is in the name Conservatives
 
Saw a little bit of this on the news at work. All I could see were drugged out freaks doing some sort of dance.

Bunch of retards! Oh well, at least them being wasters leaves more jobs available to people who want them!
 
Dolph said:
Labour set up the FSA and set up it's remit as financial regulator. If that remit was wrong, then it's Labour's fault, not the banks.

And even with the relaxed regulations, most banks have been fine, a few ex-building societies, and RBS have been the problem by misusing the freedom provided.

Is that a regulator problem, for failing to regulate, or a bank problem? If it's a bank problem, is it all banks or just the ones that made stupid decisions?

And people have never taken more than they could afford, what's your point?

The responsibility for this issue falls on everyone, but only one party has the monopoly of force to control things. If they fail to do so, whose fault must it be?
Click to expand...


The banks were in the wrong, they chose granted through more free practice policy not to show the extent of the trouble they were in. I wouldn't go blaming my mortgage company though if i was unable to pay the mortgage due to me spending more than i could fiscally afford.

Most banks haven't been fine though really hence Barclays etc making mass redundancies (something echoing around the world) the main issue is that people have lost faith in the economy, thus money is having less worth as effectively all money is based on is faith

The issue is all banks have made stupid decisions, they've all (with very few exceptions) continued to lend lend lend and whats more continue to lend people have defaulted on 5/6/7+ payments and failed mortgages, become bankrupt etc.

I agree with the last statement, the banks shouldn't be lending more than people can afford to pay back. For example my mortgage is very difficult to manage since my wife went on maternity, but i don't blame the mortgage company, and didn't get a bail out (free) from them to cover any loss in my food consumption, i/we chose this path and we are dealing/paying with/for it.
 
lucasade1 said:
What a complete farce. Bankers and city workers being told by their employers to try and not stand out by wearing a suit? Why? So to avoid trouble from a few unemployed communists? They certainly wouldn't stop me.
Click to expand...

maybe most city workers cant be bothered dealing with the hassle, and just want to goto work?

not everyone who works in the city works in the financial sector you know...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom