Bankrupt Britain

[Bagpuss]

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publi...s/1997/048.htm

1997 = New Labour came to power.

The link mentions widening the scope of "supervision", albeit through a new Quango...

"For these reasons it will continue to be important under the new arrangements that the central bank is able to monitor, through the new regulatory body, the financial condition of individual institutions, as well as that of the system as a whole."

Sounds like an attempt to come to terms with 'new money'. However, I've no doubt the financial crisis would have happened anyway. Would the Conservatives really have put the brakes and all that money making, tax revenues etc. etc. I doubt it.

I blame Labour for not controlling domestic borrowing (by that I mean households) earlier (the signs were there as early as 2004 if not earlier). I don't blame them for the stupid exposures of the banks to investment vehicles that didn't exist during the tenure of the last government and it's time of influence over Banking.

You should note "Credit Default Swaps were invented in 1997 by a team working for JPMorgan Chase. They were designed to shift the risk of default to a third-party, and were therefore less punitive in terms of regulatory capital.


So talking about a system that worked in controlling something that didn't exist prior to NL is still a bit disingenuous, especially as a stick to beat them with.

[DimPrawn]

Simple matter is that BoE directly supervised banking system and regulated it before New Lie came to power.

1st thing New Lie did was replace BoE regulation with effectively no regulation. Funnily enough, when the regulator was removed, banks invented new ways to make money.

And here we are. Bankrupt.

Of course, being a Northern monkey, you'll have to blame Thatcher.

[Bagpuss]

Simple matter is that BoE directly supervised banking system and regulated it before New Lie came to power.

1st thing New Lie did was replace BoE regulation with effectively no regulation. Funnily enough, when the regulator was removed, banks invented new ways to make money.

And here we are. Bankrupt.

Of course, being a Northern monkey, you'll have to blame Thatcher.

We have recognised that changes in financial markets are blurring traditional distinctions between banks and other financial intermediaries. Nevertheless, banks remain of special systemic importance, because of their unique role as providers of liquidity, to both depositors and borrowers, including their central role in payments and settlements, and because their resulting unsecured exposures to each other make them particularly vulnerable to contagion from elsewhere in the system. For these reasons it will continue to be important under the new arrangements that the central bank is able to monitor, through the new regulatory body, the financial condition of individual institutions, as well as that of the system as a whole.

The above change seems to be trying to cover the new investments. It seems however, you would rather have kept the old system which ignores things like Credit Default Swaps? The very vehicles which brought the banking system to its knees. No point arguing with you, cliches, trolling, and bad jokes are your level.

In summary (I know you don't like to think):

"The banking system regulation worked before 1997"

A bit like saying:
My dog lead is good at controlling the dog I bought next year.

[AlfredJPruffock]

Sounds like an attempt to come to terms with 'new money'. However, I've no doubt the financial crisis would have happened anyway. Would the Conservatives really have put the brakes and all that money making, tax revenues etc. etc. I doubt it.

Too Right - the Tories would not have dared to be seen intervening with the unfettered deregulated free markets - they would have been cheeering the whole show on - as long as the punchbowl was freely flowing nobody wanted to spoil the party.

[DimPrawn]

And yours is chasing virtual skirt with your nob in your hand.

[tonyblair]

Hi,

Gordon devised many impenetrable schemes where we just said, yeah, all right Gordon, that sounds good, and off he went. He went into intricate detail, but never thought anything through properly. Does that sound like a contradiction?

You are contractors. You didn't like 'IR35'? Most of my government didn't like IR35. I bet you didn't know that. Gordon liked it though. Mopping up tax-dodgers, he called it. He also liked slipping his pet schemes through under the wire. He liked the subterfuge of it. Anyway, IR35 was a dog's breakfast. How many of you comply with it? Not many I bet.

I'm glad I'm out of it now. I'm jacking up my wealth speaking in the US. As well as the middle east thing. If the European Union come up with something concrete I might end up there, you never know. But not like Kinnock or Mandelson.

Tempus fugit. Good luck with the recession thing. I'm sure Gordon will "navigate you through the choppy waters". Ha ha! I remember when he was first given that line. It had to be explained to him three times before he'd use it.

[ace00]

They shoulda let ALL the banks fail after Lehmans collapsed.
.................
AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHH

WHS.
"Too big to fail"
Those words will live on in infamy.

[PM-Junkie]

I agree tory policy, particularly the crazy drive for home ownership and the draw-down of industry across various sectors, made the economy vulnerable to outside economic disasters - but it cannot be denied that labour's economic incompetence over the last 12 years has made the impact of the credit crunch far worse, and made it more difficult to recover.

Labour do not understand economics. Never have, never will.

[Bagpuss]

I agree tory policy, particularly the crazy drive for home ownership and the draw-down of industry across various sectors, made the economy vulnerable to outside economic disasters - but it cannot be denied that labour's economic incompetence over the last 12 years has made the impact of the credit crunch far worse, and made it more difficult to recover.

Labour do not understand economics. Never have, never will.

I agree with you to some extent, however, NL economics is not that different from Conservative economics (that's who they stole their model from). The problem lies with monetarism, it doesn't work. Not unfettered anyhow. We (including the US) have now reverted to a sort of new Kensian economics (which labour used to believe in) to tidy up the monetrist mess. Can the Conservatives come back in and revert to a failed philosphy? I don't think so.

[AlfredJPruffock]

Hi,

Gordon devised many impenetrable schemes where we just said, yeah, all right Gordon, that sounds good, and off he went. He went into intricate detail, but never thought anything through properly. Does that sound like a contradiction?

You are contractors. You didn't like 'IR35'? Most of my government didn't like IR35. I bet you didn't know that. Gordon liked it though. Mopping up tax-dodgers, he called it. He also liked slipping his pet schemes through under the wire. He liked the subterfuge of it. Anyway, IR35 was a dog's breakfast. How many of you comply with it? Not many I bet.

I'm glad I'm out of it now. I'm jacking up my wealth speaking in the US. As well as the middle east thing. If the European Union come up with something concrete I might end up there, you never know. But not like Kinnock or Mandelson.

Tempus fugit. Good luck with the recession thing. I'm sure Gordon will "navigate you through the choppy waters". Ha ha! I remember when he was first given that line. It had to be explained to him three times before he'd use it.

Scram - ya wee pompous Devil ye - git aff this site black burning shame on ye - Away !