The incoherence of the Brown regime's responses to the meltdown after their 11 years of incompetent financial regulation and policy choices is striking.
First everything is to be dealt with on a case by case basis (presumably to give the obsessive Leader time to read every last piece of paper and check the waste paper baskets of the civil servants).
Then the systemic effects of their 'light touch' (or not knowing, not understanding what they did know, and not caring anyway as long as they stayed in power, as this policy properly should be described), forced themselves onto regime attention so that Brown comes up with a plan to nationalise the banks, effectively without compensation. £400 billion is a joke.
Then it emerges that the entire Third Sector, and New Dawn authoritarian governance has put its pension funds, extracted by savage levels of regional and local tax-gathering, into a financial system even more lightly touched than his own, (which, inter alia, leaves a big question mark over what other extra- national black holes our hard-earned cash has been poured into). But Brown's response is to threaten a Nato ally with War on Terror reprisals.
Now he embarrasses us all by poncing round the world grinning and demanding attention 'I'm Leader. I'm Leader. Do what I'm doing. Nationalise the banks. Intern the terrorists on a small island -what do you mean they're on a small island already?'
All the time, the unemployed numbers rise through the millions, the infrastructure is not built, the investment for renewing manufacturing industry has been diverted to the housing bubble, the education system has been used for warehousing the young, inflation devours the wages of those who have them, and stunts the lives of those who do not. Pensions are destroyed, and the word 'destroyed' is chosen advisedly - for even public sector pension rights must be repudiated, their funding simply is not there; the funding of private pensions has already been annexed.
The coherent, systemic response to this folly is to call a general election, the electorate must assess the manifestos of the parties and underwrite their responses to our dire straits. A democratic choice must be offered and made. The argument that things are too serious for such a strategy now could not be more partisan. Things are too serious to continue with the politics of the madhouse.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
If we took him to a vet, could we get him put down?
He's stapled his hand to his papers he's so angry about Iceland, Elby.
In August 1998, Russia defaulted. The IMF, and others, between grants and loans, provided an aid package of the order $45 billion - the largest aid package ever provided by the IMF. Most of the $18 billion specifically from the IMF in itself its biggest contribution to a single country, never got to Moscow, never left America, but was drawn instantly by the Russian government to pay early-warned privileged holders of bonds.
Were there any privileged depositors of Northern Rock and Icelandic banks pre-warned to get their money out while less favoured depositors were encouraged, to keep up appearances and give them time? The Icelanders say they approached the IMF but had to turn to new friends when they were refused. Was that because those the IMF would have bailed out had got out already even as Brown's regime was not warning people not to pour money in?. The IMF Article IV Consultation of July 2008 and Public Information Notice of 19 September are remarkably upbeat considering the warnings that were coming out in UK parliamentary committees and in questions being asked in the Upper House.
His maniac aggression and war on terror usages suggest he got used. Unfortunately so did tax-payers.
Prime Mentalist indeed.
I would recommend googling
IMF WARNS UK
(No quotes).
All that has befallen us he was warned about, including sub-prime mortgages.
What a surprise. Yet he can drop the price of oil at a wave of his majestic hand.
Next. Wine into water.
"The coherent, systemic response to this folly is to call a general election, the electorate must assess the manifestos of the parties and underwrite their responses to our dire straits. A democratic choice must be offered and made. The argument that things are too serious for such a strategy now could not be more partisan. Things are too serious to continue with the politics of the madhouse. "
Trouble is Hats, Cam'ron isn't putting forward his agenda to deal with our problem.
He really needs to say what the Tories would do - as the party of business - not just sit and apply his attitude to the dreadful bruin, and his spongers.
Are you saying, Scrobs, that you want to look before you leap into voting Conservative? We are past considering policies. We are considering ways of thinking and doing. How can the Conservatives make specific policy without examining the books, which they must fear are quite quite terrifying.
They could promise to leave the European Union, dismantle the appointed systems of regional government, renegotiate the pension terms of public sector employees and current pensioners, dismantle the state education system, renew local democracy, reinstate the rule of law, end national and contributions to supra-national data identity bases, use fiscal and policy measures to refound and encourage manufacturing and infrastructure, but then they have said all of that, haven't they?
Except for leaving the EU. On that I don't believe any longer there is a middle way; it's in or out. And they will have to get off the fence.
What do you want them to offer? We are just as much responsible for discussing and choosing as the Conservative party is. You are right, it's time to stop moaning and time to start making a contribution to what needs to be done.
Post a Comment