Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
noddys ryde
05 Nov 09 07:20
Joined:
Date Joined: 15 Feb 02
| Topic/replies: 1,864 | Blogger: noddys ryde's blog
.............by throwing more petrol on the debt fire.
At some point these failed policies will really hurt the ordinary people of this country. Civil unrest is possible.
By then bottler will be picking his bogeys at home in Scotland.
I'm alright Jock.
Pause Switch to Standard View Pain postponed
Show More
Loading...
Report Occam's Razor November 5, 2009 7:29 AM GMT
Would you have let all the banks go under? Millions lose their homes and proper unrest happen.
Report noddys ryde November 5, 2009 7:39 AM GMT
I would have regulated the banks and controlled public expenditure.
Report ribber November 5, 2009 7:55 AM GMT
I would have regulated the banks and controlled public expenditure.

would have, could have, should have.
If you were calling for more regulation of the banks 3 years ago, you must have been one of the very few.
Report noddys ryde November 5, 2009 8:07 AM GMT
self certificated and 120% mortgages were obviously crusing for a bruising.I never agreed with setting up the FSA which was costly and made up of second raters who could not hack in the real world- somewhere for the thick kids of the ruling elite to while away time at our expesse.
I am sure the BOE would not have allowed such excess.
And as for uncontrolled public spending and the constantly fiddled golden rule then opposition to that excess is well documented.
Report ribber November 5, 2009 8:09 AM GMT
The public spending budgets that the Conservatives pledged to match up until the crash?
Report blackburn1 November 5, 2009 8:20 AM GMT
I'd have regulated them less but stressed they were on their own. Knowing you have a safety net gives a false sense of security
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com