News0 min ago
Motor industry going to pot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7891913.st m
Why are all the government initiatives directed at companies instead of creating a consumer led recovery to save the car plants and jobs?
Why are all the government initiatives directed at companies instead of creating a consumer led recovery to save the car plants and jobs?
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rov1200. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Its the alternative view, give the consumer the freedom and power to do what they want.
Of course these two words are alient to the control freak McBottle.
Thats why you have what you have, he wants to be able to say 'I led us out of economic disaater' he will of course forget the bit 'Mostly caused by me'
Of course these two words are alient to the control freak McBottle.
Thats why you have what you have, he wants to be able to say 'I led us out of economic disaater' he will of course forget the bit 'Mostly caused by me'
Give consumers money right now and they'll just hang on to it because there's little confidence and people are worried about losing their jobs.
If you got a windfall right now would you rush out and buy a new car?
To revitalise confidence we need to safeguard jobs which means putting money into companies.
Certain people seem desperate to try to find some way to blame Gordon Brown personally for a world wide financial crisis. But it's entirely due to a system that promoted short term gains over long term strategy and while people are looking to blame individual politicians or bankers or regulators they are missing that point.
It is the regulations themselves, the system that caused this and that particular blue touch paper was lit 20 years ago in the city big-bang
If you got a windfall right now would you rush out and buy a new car?
To revitalise confidence we need to safeguard jobs which means putting money into companies.
Certain people seem desperate to try to find some way to blame Gordon Brown personally for a world wide financial crisis. But it's entirely due to a system that promoted short term gains over long term strategy and while people are looking to blame individual politicians or bankers or regulators they are missing that point.
It is the regulations themselves, the system that caused this and that particular blue touch paper was lit 20 years ago in the city big-bang
Maggie can be blamed for a lot of things, why we no longer have a British Car Industry, why we have to buy trains from abroad, but not a world financial collapse.
She oversaw the last major recession we suffered. Strangely, I don't remember her give us all handouts to save British Leyland. I seem to remember the advice at the time to people who were losing their jobs was the helpful suggestion to take up cycling.
She oversaw the last major recession we suffered. Strangely, I don't remember her give us all handouts to save British Leyland. I seem to remember the advice at the time to people who were losing their jobs was the helpful suggestion to take up cycling.
Brown is doing something
Margaret Thatcher's philosophy was do nothing the market will normalise itself - minimum Government intervention.
That seems current Tory philosophy too but it's hard to tell - they don't seem to have one.
You have to ask yourself
"Do we want a Government that does something (even if you may think it should do something different) - or do we want a Government that does nothing"
Easy Question: Is there a Tory alternative?
Margaret Thatcher's philosophy was do nothing the market will normalise itself - minimum Government intervention.
That seems current Tory philosophy too but it's hard to tell - they don't seem to have one.
You have to ask yourself
"Do we want a Government that does something (even if you may think it should do something different) - or do we want a Government that does nothing"
Easy Question: Is there a Tory alternative?
A couple of points:
Just because the government is pouring money into an industry means nothing unless the consumer is willing to buy their product. eg as we have witnessed.
The savings rates are so low it is not currently worth saving. A quote of just 0.1% interest was quoted today. As savers outnumber borrowers by 7 to 1 it would be better to put it under the mattress. If the consumer was given a �2000 government discount on a new car could these savers apply their money more productively?
Just because the government is pouring money into an industry means nothing unless the consumer is willing to buy their product. eg as we have witnessed.
The savings rates are so low it is not currently worth saving. A quote of just 0.1% interest was quoted today. As savers outnumber borrowers by 7 to 1 it would be better to put it under the mattress. If the consumer was given a �2000 government discount on a new car could these savers apply their money more productively?
I don't think I am rov
http://www.uwex.edu/CES/CCED/downtowns/ltb/let s/0902ltb.html
OK this is the US but seniors make up les than 15% of spending - I doubt they make up a majority here.
http://www.uwex.edu/CES/CCED/downtowns/ltb/let s/0902ltb.html
OK this is the US but seniors make up les than 15% of spending - I doubt they make up a majority here.
Jake in 2002 those figures were probably correct and a similar % may apply to the UK. But then it was worth saving as interest rates exceeded inflation. Now the current inflation rate is 2.4% and the saving rates are below this so savers are losing money. Therefore this will lead to a change in strategy I believe. Pensioners will adhere to the slogan, "whats the point of being the richest man in the graveyard" and likely to change their normal frugal habits.
"Certain people seem desperate to try to find some way to blame Gordon Brown personally for a world wide financial crisis. But it's entirely due to a system that promoted short term gains over long term strategy"
Funny, no Canadian or Australian banks are in trouble. They still have similar rules to those GB scrapped in 1997.
The financial size of Wall St and Sq Mile have caused huge knock on effect across the globe. But our lax regulations and useless regulator are the major cause of our troubles. BoE warned GB in 1997 that his new system would cause problems.
Should have left alone not bailed them out. Billions were lost in mere hours for no gain.
Like any other business, the assets of banks in administration can be sold and the toxic debt just wipes out creditors and shareholders. Not much different to the 35p share price after the first bailout.
Deposits were always guaranteed by govt and paying these out would have been substantially cheaper.
Major shareholders should have been exercising their power to control the level of leverage and bonuses anyway.
To answer the original question - buying votes again. There is no price too high for GB to pay. . . . . with our tax money.
Real solutions are not populist, saving thousands of jobs across the country? or saving a few in marginal constituencies?
It's scandalous. It's our money and our childrens money and their childrens money.
Funny, no Canadian or Australian banks are in trouble. They still have similar rules to those GB scrapped in 1997.
The financial size of Wall St and Sq Mile have caused huge knock on effect across the globe. But our lax regulations and useless regulator are the major cause of our troubles. BoE warned GB in 1997 that his new system would cause problems.
Should have left alone not bailed them out. Billions were lost in mere hours for no gain.
Like any other business, the assets of banks in administration can be sold and the toxic debt just wipes out creditors and shareholders. Not much different to the 35p share price after the first bailout.
Deposits were always guaranteed by govt and paying these out would have been substantially cheaper.
Major shareholders should have been exercising their power to control the level of leverage and bonuses anyway.
To answer the original question - buying votes again. There is no price too high for GB to pay. . . . . with our tax money.
Real solutions are not populist, saving thousands of jobs across the country? or saving a few in marginal constituencies?
It's scandalous. It's our money and our childrens money and their childrens money.
1 to 17 of 17
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Jobs & Education19 mins ago
Will Starmer Have To Replace Lammy?
News19 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles26 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.