News2 mins ago
New conservaties
28 Answers
Is the Tory complaint about Labour's idea to sell of assets justified?
Given that they sold most everything in the 80s for a fraction of it's true value to fund tax cuts for the rich.
Given that they sold most everything in the 80s for a fraction of it's true value to fund tax cuts for the rich.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. 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.Yes and No.
Complaints against the sale are not justified as you point out such complaints would be the highest hypocrcy - You won't hear those from Top Tories.
Careful to distinguish complaints from the Tory Party with those of their friends in the press.
Complaints that this is a short term measure and will not have a significant effect on the defecit? - maybe but it's not claimed to be
The Tories own package only amounts to 7% of what is needed - nobody has yet put through a comprehensive set of figures.
As Tesco say Every little helps!
I'm pretty certain the Tories would do the same.
Complaints against the sale are not justified as you point out such complaints would be the highest hypocrcy - You won't hear those from Top Tories.
Careful to distinguish complaints from the Tory Party with those of their friends in the press.
Complaints that this is a short term measure and will not have a significant effect on the defecit? - maybe but it's not claimed to be
The Tories own package only amounts to 7% of what is needed - nobody has yet put through a comprehensive set of figures.
As Tesco say Every little helps!
I'm pretty certain the Tories would do the same.
kinell
Because they would get a very low price if they could sell them at all at the moment. The banks are assets and they will be sold, but only when it is deemed the best price can for them.
The UK deficit is about £100bn - £70billion of that is our stakes in these banks. At some point these assets will be realised and we should get some of our money back. It would be foolish though to sell now.
Because they would get a very low price if they could sell them at all at the moment. The banks are assets and they will be sold, but only when it is deemed the best price can for them.
The UK deficit is about £100bn - £70billion of that is our stakes in these banks. At some point these assets will be realised and we should get some of our money back. It would be foolish though to sell now.
Why doesn't Brown admit that his socialism policies have got this country into so much debt. He is forever trying to stretch the elastic band that creates more problems than it solves. As recognised selling these assets is a short term measure that will only slightly overcome the present credit deficit but the reasons for being in this mess will reoccur next year. If the social security budget is greater than either the defence or education budgets something must be going horribly wrong. Its a reduction in this handout society that needs to be tackled whether its the 10 million unemployed, the overgenerous tax allowances for middle classes or just overall spending thats got us in this mess. Sweeping it under the carpet for others to pick up the tabs won't do.
kinell
This is from july. If we sold the £70 billion shares now, we would lose £11 billion. If we wait, we could even make a profit. The £100 billion deficit sounds a lot, but a large part of it is made from re-saleable assets, the only problem (for Labour and the Government) is that now is not the time to sell.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/13/lloyds-rbs-rescue-ukfinancialinstruments
This is from july. If we sold the £70 billion shares now, we would lose £11 billion. If we wait, we could even make a profit. The £100 billion deficit sounds a lot, but a large part of it is made from re-saleable assets, the only problem (for Labour and the Government) is that now is not the time to sell.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/13/lloyds-rbs-rescue-ukfinancialinstruments
Im not sure there was a better way to handle the banking problem. Ordinarily a government would just let a failing company fail; but since virtually the whole population has money in banks, just letting them collapse could have been a disaster. The real problem was letting them get into such a mess in the first place. I believe that was a result of the Big Bang deregulation of the City of London - carried out by the well-known socialist Maggie Thatcher.
In fact, this pepped up the City so much that US banks pleaded to be allowed the same freedoms so they could compete. The Clinton administration said okay. It was the US financial institutions, now free to do what they liked, that then got into trouble, which washed across the Atlantic onto our shores. Maggie certainly changed the economy!
In fact, this pepped up the City so much that US banks pleaded to be allowed the same freedoms so they could compete. The Clinton administration said okay. It was the US financial institutions, now free to do what they liked, that then got into trouble, which washed across the Atlantic onto our shores. Maggie certainly changed the economy!
rov1200
I don't understand your metaphor. There isn't a fire in the kitchen. Our debt, though huge, is currently under control and manageable, and there are plans afoot to reduce it.
There was no alternative to spending the £70 billion. At the best earliest possible moment, they will be privatised again and most of the £70 billion will be recouped.
Selling the £16 billion of assets is a desperate measure but preferable to severely cutting spending and raising income tax greatly, which will stifle the recovery. Cuts and tax rises will still be needed, but in tandem with £16 billion in asset sales will not have to be as drastic as the Conservatives plan.
I don't understand your metaphor. There isn't a fire in the kitchen. Our debt, though huge, is currently under control and manageable, and there are plans afoot to reduce it.
There was no alternative to spending the £70 billion. At the best earliest possible moment, they will be privatised again and most of the £70 billion will be recouped.
Selling the £16 billion of assets is a desperate measure but preferable to severely cutting spending and raising income tax greatly, which will stifle the recovery. Cuts and tax rises will still be needed, but in tandem with £16 billion in asset sales will not have to be as drastic as the Conservatives plan.
jno - A significant part of problem was continuation of the status quo; kudos Blair/Brown. New Labour bought into the economic model, literally.
Hindsight is not necessary for those of us who despaired for decades at the unregulated economic reliance (nay Government promotion) of the credit culture thus allowing it to become the hideous monstrosity that sparked the banking crisis.
Hindsight is not necessary for those of us who despaired for decades at the unregulated economic reliance (nay Government promotion) of the credit culture thus allowing it to become the hideous monstrosity that sparked the banking crisis.
ABerrant, I agree about the continuation of status quo (I've had several arguments with Kromaracum about deregulating the banks) but I told you so is not going to buy the baby a bonnett.
Both main parties were largely in support of the policy (Tories would've deregulated further in their quest to "cut red tape") so given that both major parties were wrong about the banking system, given that globalised banking has brought problems to us all, once the banks went broke, what other cause of action would be preferable?
When the banks return to profit will the state recieve a dividend?
Both main parties were largely in support of the policy (Tories would've deregulated further in their quest to "cut red tape") so given that both major parties were wrong about the banking system, given that globalised banking has brought problems to us all, once the banks went broke, what other cause of action would be preferable?
When the banks return to profit will the state recieve a dividend?
"I told you so" is as significant a statement to make as any other by a person (us aka the vast majority) not in a position to change the policy decisions of those in power, be they Red (aka Noo Purple), Blue (aka Noo Green) or any other hue.
"They" got us into this mess and "they" will either make the situation better, worse or no different.
"They" got us into this mess and "they" will either make the situation better, worse or no different.
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.