Liverpool FC Forum

by **Reg** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:44 am

Look at the economic position we're in today because of poor democratic governance caused by 'government by opinion poll' rather than economic and political necessity. Labour enjoyed economic success during the global boom however when debt levels reached dangerous levels they made no attempt to slow down growth or increase the cost of money as this would have lost votes. Instead they let the ship sail on into the storm - Gordon Brown as treasury minister was fully and undeniably aware of the situation when he became PM but took no measures whatsoever to avert disaster.

Democracy works like all things, when it is competently run. But if you do not 'manage' democracy inevitably things go wrong and it takes a strong PM to separate what is good for the country and what the voters like. Margaret recognised that distinction, Blair and Brown simply played the opinion polls.

by **Kenny Kan** » Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:40 am

Just to pick you up on your last sentence there Reg.

Thatchers economic record, enjoy...

1980. Inflation at 20%

1981. Negative growth, investment down 11% on 1979 interest rates at 18%. Mass civil unrest with riots in Liverpool, Birmingham and London.

1982. £ in free fall, unemployment continues to rise, corporate bankruptcies number 11,131 for the year (Still a record today)

1983. Unemployment hits 3 million, manufacturing output 30% below that of 1978.

1984. Interest rates at 12%, unemployment continues to rise, BT flogged off.

1985. £ hits a new low of $1.05, unemployment hits 3.5 million.

1986. 1p cut in income tax (Gen election soon)

1987. Black Monday 26% wiped off the stock exchange.

1988. Interest rates at 13%, British Steel flogged off, income tax cuts for the wealthiest announced.

1989. Interest rates at 15% growth at lowest since 1982. Ten water companies flogged off amis huge criticism they were sold far too cheaply (Thatcher needed quick cash) Chancellor Lawson resignes in protest, Chancellor Major takes over at the onset of Thatchers second recession.

1990. Inflation at 11%, electricity industry flogged off.

1991. UK still in recession, growth for the year was -2% (thats minus 2%) Home repossessions peak at 79,000 for the year.

Not the best legacy left by Thatcher is it Reg, arguably it has been said, Britain has never fully recovered from her Monetarism control.

Back on topic

The GFC was triggered by the banking system in the States where mortgage repayments couldn't be met, house prices plummeted the banks repossessed the house and land but the properties were worth less now than when the mortgages had first been lend-ed out. The banks then had a liquidity crisis - this then came to be known as the credit crunch. The US federal bank tried to bailout the banks and with the US at the time being the #1 economic monster of the world this repercussions began to wade across most developed countries, with banks all over the world vying to bailout these big financial institutions. In essence these financial firms were reckless with their lending on Wall St and mortgages, similar stories happened here (UK) too. Doesn't some Icelandic bank still owe thousands to British investors, the Northern Rock went under also, even the RBS was government run for a short time there, hence why they were getting twitchy feet demanding their money back from H&G.

That isn't democracy that has lead us to where we are today - it's the sheer nature of greed in CAPITALISM that's lead most up the creek and without a paddle.

Governments have deficits and the labour government did spend up eating into that deficit more, however without the GFC it would have been more of a sustainable deficit - and deficits aren't always necessarily bad for a home economy.

by **Reg** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:01 am

I don't dispute the numbers mate, but that was the need and the consequence of changing the economic model. Do you remember the constant British Leyland strikes that detroyed our car industry, the power cuts, governments being held to ransom by unions?

Sure the numbers are bad, but the British people allowed our country to sink into the chaos that called a painful remedy and one that initiated the financial boom of the next 20-30 years. What we achieved in our restructure of labour law, the unions and freedom to manage was the envy of europe (France and Germany especially) and still is today.

Two sides to every coin mate.

by **worcester_red** » Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:00 pm

Reg wrote:I don't dispute the numbers mate, but that was the need and the consequence of changing the economic model. Do you remember the constant British Leyland strikes that detroyed our car industry, the power cuts, governments being held to ransom by unions?

Sure the numbers are bad, but the British people allowed our country to sink into the chaos that called a painful remedy and one that initiated the financial boom of the next 20-30 years. What we achieved in our restructure of labour law, the unions and freedom to manage was the envy of europe (France and Germany especially) and still is today.

Two sides to every coin mate.

Hear hear

Liverpool FC Forum

Obituary-very interesting

Who is online