Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
ralphmalph

Treasury Bullied Imf In 2006 To Say All Was Rosy In The Uk Garden

Recommended Posts

It is the FT so type "FT IMF admits wilting under official pressure" into google and click on the link.

Basically the IMF told the treasury read Brown, Balls and Miliband that we were on an unsustainable course re the financial system in 2003 and they had to take actions to fix it. At the review in 2006 on the actions meant to sort out the issues raised in 2003 the treasury bullied the IMF into producing a report that said all is fine when they had run a simulation with the FSA that had the result that Financial armmagedon would be unleashed on the UK and its population. We all know what happened in 2007.

If you click on the link in the FT article then you can read the damning IMF report and its "well we knew there was a problem we were just to weak to stand upto the bullies, but then nobody else did" mea culpa.

It is about time Brown and his cohorts all faced a jury of 12 good men and true.

PS basically the problem was a simple one raised in 2003. The UK population was not saving enough to fund the banks activities so the banks went for wholesale funding from foriegners that could be turned of instantly in a crisis so bankrupting the banks. Well guess what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The IMF recently reiterated UK Plc's top rating and upgraded the negative outlook. Based on what, exactly, I have no idea. Certainly not our deficits, housing market, balance of trade and jobs outlook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had an independent central bank responsible for financial stability. It was there ready to douse the flames.

They kept the pumps turned on full, but filled the bowsers with fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the FT so type "FT IMF admits wilting under official pressure" into google and click on the link.

Basically the IMF told the treasury read Brown, Balls and Miliband that we were on an unsustainable course re the financial system in 2003 and they had to take actions to fix it. At the review in 2006 on the actions meant to sort out the issues raised in 2003 the treasury bullied the IMF into producing a report that said all is fine when they had run a simulation with the FSA that had the result that Financial armmagedon would be unleashed on the UK and its population. We all know what happened in 2007.

If you click on the link in the FT article then you can read the damning IMF report and its "well we knew there was a problem we were just to weak to stand upto the bullies, but then nobody else did" mea culpa.

It is about time Brown and his cohorts all faced a jury of 12 good men and true.

PS basically the problem was a simple one raised in 2003. The UK population was not saving enough to fund the banks activities so the banks went for wholesale funding from foriegners that could be turned of instantly in a crisis so bankrupting the banks. Well guess what happened.

Proof that Brown and Balls knew it! Finally!

"Nobody saw it coming" my @rse!

Official, documented evidence now.

We do need a full Public Inquiry on this credit bubble.

Most important part, below:

In particular, the constant sparring over the public finances between the IMF and Gordon Brown’s Treasury, when Ed Balls, now shadow chancellor, was a key figure, contributed to fund officials being insufficiently robust with the Bank and the FSA.

(...)

So intimidated were IMF staff, the report says, that they did not challenge the Bank sufficiently on the credit boom. “Some have argued that these pressures reduced staff’s appetite to challenge UK authorities regarding monetary policy, financial risk or regulatory issues,” the report adds.

This is really very important people! ( If we had a decent press it would spread from the FT to the more mainstream, popular papers and TV news... Let's see... )

LINK to the original report from the IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office: http://imf-ieo.org/eval/complete/pdf/01102011/Crisis_BP5_UK_Bilateral_Surveillance.pdf

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(...)

It is about time Brown and his cohorts all faced a jury of 12 good men and true.

PS basically the problem was a simple one raised in 2003. The UK population was not saving enough to fund the banks activities so the banks went for wholesale funding from foriegners that could be turned of instantly in a crisis so bankrupting the banks. Well guess what happened.

+ 1

"Nobody saw it coming"? This official report proved otherwise. Brown and Balls were warned by the IMF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brown had all the warnings

All the proof is at the above thread.

In 2003 they knew the economy was in trouble so the BoE created a credit bubble to keep growth on track. It was all a scam, short termism at it's best and the suckers racked up the debt.

And why don't we get a Public Inquiry?

Well firstly because the then opposition, now government, didn't criticise enough at the time, and is rightly afraid that the Inquiry would show that too.

But why the press is not pressing for am Inquiry now? Yes, I know, they failed too, but it s unlikely that an Inquiry would blame the papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMF grunts say "Wasn't me guv, I told 'em, honest I did"

China's rigged surpluses, inconsequential labour costs, free money flows etc etc makes everything else irrelevant.

We know that what the BoE does is irrelevant - you never stop saying it. If it hadn't been a securitisation bubble it would have been something else.

The problems are delineated above - how they manifest themselves is really giving far too much credit to Brown, Balls, Mervyn or anyone else.

Next up, some bloke in the UK Treasury will have been responsible for the Aussie housing bubble, the Vancouver housing bubble, the Cajas, Greece's overspending, oil at $147 a barrel, ipod sales etc etc.

This narrow parochial focus looks increasingly like insanity.

Brown was a dimwitted patsy - of course. All scams need a dimwitted patsy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMF grunts say "Wasn't me guv, I told 'em, honest I did"

China's rigged surpluses, inconsequential labour costs, free money flows etc etc makes everything else irrelevant.

We know that what the BoE does is irrelevant - you never stop saying it. If it hadn't been a securitisation bubble it would have been something else.

The problems are delineated above - how they manifest themselves is really giving far too much credit to Brown, Balls, Mervyn or anyone else.

Next up, some bloke in the UK Treasury will have been responsible for the Aussie housing bubble, the Vancouver housing bubble, the Cajas, Greece's overspending, oil at $147 a barrel, ipod sales etc etc.

This narrow parochial focus looks increasingly like insanity.

Brown was a dimwitted patsy - of course. All scams need a dimwitted patsy.

I have explained that to you before: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=158470&view=findpost&p=2873595

You failed to reply then, and I am sure you will not be able to disagree now:

It was our own fault, not "Chindia's". If they were to blame then why Germany, Switzerland and so many other countries didn't have a consumer boom fuelled by a credit/property bubble? Answer: Mainly because they had/have a regulated mortgage market.

The credit/property prices bubble started around 10 years ago, mainly in America and Britain when interest rates were pushed right down, initially as a reaction to 9-11, but then IRs were kept low for too long, as everybody was happy with it, from politicians (both Bush and Brown) and central bankers, to the people on the street. Everybody loves a bubble. Since the Dutch tulips.

Both countries had at their disposal many tools powerful enough to curb the bubble, from the broadest (base rates) to the more targeted (mortgage regulation, such as minimum deposits, maximum multiples of income, etc.), but for political reasons (broad sense, collective, nationally) both countries failed to stop the party.

It was not "Chindia's fault". It was our own fault.

RK grunts say "Wasn't us guv, it was Chindia's fault, honest! They print Sterling now, you know?"

Your narrow anti-"Chindia" focus looks increasingly like what?

Edit, to add this, below, for clarity:

(...)

China's rigged surpluses, inconsequential labour costs, free money flows etc etc makes everything else irrelevant.

(...)

This narrow parochial focus looks increasingly like insanity.

(...)

You need to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was our own fault, not "Chindia's". If they were to blame then why Germany, Switzerland and so many other countries didn't have a consumer boom fuelled by a credit/property bubble? Answer: Mainly because they had/have a regulated mortgage market.

But haven't German, Swiss banks etc... lent big to Eastern European nations who've had property bubbles? Partly because they couldn't lend at home and instead sought easy profits elsewhere?

The entire system is interlinked, the problem is greed and the need to generate ever greater returns, if you don't do it your competitors will. For the short term they'll end up with the higher share price, bigger profits, bigger bonuses etc... If your the CEO you'll soon be out of a job as the shareholders will want you out for not generating the profits....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the FT so type "FT IMF admits wilting under official pressure" into google and click on the link.

Basically the IMF told the treasury read Brown, Balls and Miliband that we were on an unsustainable course re the financial system in 2003 and they had to take actions to fix it. At the review in 2006 on the actions meant to sort out the issues raised in 2003 the treasury bullied the IMF into producing a report that said all is fine when they had run a simulation with the FSA that had the result that Financial armmagedon would be unleashed on the UK and its population. We all know what happened in 2007.

If you click on the link in the FT article then you can read the damning IMF report and its "well we knew there was a problem we were just to weak to stand upto the bullies, but then nobody else did" mea culpa.

It is about time Brown and his cohorts all faced a jury of 12 good men and true.

PS basically the problem was a simple one raised in 2003. The UK population was not saving enough to fund the banks activities so the banks went for wholesale funding from foriegners that could be turned of instantly in a crisis so bankrupting the banks. Well guess what happened.

Yes but the politician who stands up and declares that we need to mend our overspending ways and be more frugal guarantees he won't be be elected next time around!

Jimmy Carter famously did it on TV at the end of the 70s - he was absolutely right but it made him a one-term president.

Greed ISN'T good is not what people want to hear in our culture.

Nothing must stop the aspiration. Debt is wealth.

Well - let me qualify that - it's not what they want to hear when the good times are rolling, they've a fistful of credit cards and nothing can ever go wrong.

Then when things do go wrong - it's 'why didn't you stop me?

If the Labour party had taken measures to regulate the city and curb excessive levels of personal debt, the screams would have been so loud you'd have heard them in Sydney (anti-business, anti-wealth, politics of envy etc. etc.)

Any politician who took measures to stop the good times rolling would have been falling on their sword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But haven't German, Swiss banks etc... lent big to Eastern European nations who've had property bubbles? Partly because they couldn't lend at home and instead sought easy profits elsewhere?

The entire system is interlinked, the problem is greed and the need to generate ever greater returns, if you don't do it your competitors will. For the short term they'll end up with the higher share price, bigger profits, bigger bonuses etc... If your the CEO you'll soon be out of a job as the shareholders will want you out for not generating the profits....

They may have, but what the borrowers do with it will depend on borrowers' wisdom, or lack of it. Some countries are better governed that others, and will invest resources more wisely, like in education, infrastructure, health systems, etc. You know the list. Others (many) will waste more. It is each country's responsibility to invest resources wisely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but the politician who stands up and declares that we need to mend our overspending ways and be more frugal guarantees he won't be be elected next time around!

Jimmy Carter famously did it on TV at the end of the 70s - he was absolutely right but it made him a one-term president.

Greed ISN'T good is not what people want to hear in our culture.

Nothing must stop the aspiration. Debt is wealth.

Well - let me qualify that - it's not what they want to hear when the good times are rolling, they've a fistful of credit cards and nothing can ever go wrong.

Then when things do go wrong - it's 'why didn't you stop me?

If the Labour party had taken measures to regulate the city and curb excessive levels of personal debt, the screams would have been so loud you'd have heard them in Sydney (anti-business, anti-wealth, politics of envy etc. etc.)

Any politician who took measures to stop the good times rolling would have been falling on their sword.

Yes, in general. Like I wrote above:

The credit/property prices bubble started around 10 years ago, mainly in America and Britain when interest rates were pushed right down, initially as a reaction to 9-11, but then IRs were kept low for too long, as everybody was happy with it, from politicians (both Bush and Brown) and central bankers, to the people on the street. Everybody loves a bubble. Since the Dutch tulips.

Both countries had at their disposal many tools powerful enough to curb the bubble, from the broadest (base rates) to the more targeted (mortgage regulation, such as minimum deposits, maximum multiples of income, etc.), but for political reasons (broad sense, collective, nationally) both countries failed to stop the party.

However, to qualify that a little bit: It is a bit unfair to blame the average man on the street, if our media / press failed to warn them. Both the opposition and our press failed to warn the nation about the credit bubble. Particularly the BBC. It was/is their job to watch the government.

And Brown removing housing costs from the inflation index in Dec 2003 was ... crossing the line. He needs to face trial for that.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may have, but what the borrowers do with it will depend on borrowers' wisdom, or lack of it. Some countries are better governed that others, and will invest resources more wisely, like in education, infrastructure, health systems, etc. You know the list. Others (many) will waste more. It is each country's responsibility to invest resources wisely.

But surely these countries should be regulating where internationally the banks can lend too and for what purpose. ie if German banks are lending to Polish consumers and pushing up Polish house prices then the German regulator should intervene?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...the slime bags may have been bullies (still are to cover their inadequacies)... but the real issue here is they have been fraudsters and liars in an attempt to save their political skins as they ruined the economy ...they are worse than the expense fiddlers and should face investigation and the courts....jail is too good for them...... <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely these countries should be regulating where internationally the banks can lend too and for what purpose. ie if German banks are lending to Polish consumers and pushing up Polish house prices then the German regulator should intervene?

The Polish regulator should intervene, not the German.

Firstly, if the Germans intervened, they would probably be accused of neo-colonialism - or worse, as in the German case I don't even know what the "neo-word" would be... Imagine?

Secondly: Regulate all private banks' creditors across the whole world?! All possible consequences? Now I think you are over-estimating even the German government/regulators' capacity/competence.

Individual countries are responsible for their own actions. And rightly so. Particularly democratic, western European countries such as Poland, in your example.

And they will learn with their mistakes - hopefully...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Blair/Brown had said in 1995 that they were going to re-regulate the city, ban CDO's etc, they would never have been elected.

They had to promise to leave the city alone before the press or bankers would support them.

Thatcher's de-regulation of the 1980's led directly to the great crash of 2007. It didn't need Brown to make it happen. Brown's crime was a sin of omission, not stopping it when he could have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Yeah, the IMF were spot on but unbelievably supine :-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2914081/Brown-raps-IMF-figures-on-Britain.html

After the crash there was all this talk of "early warning systems" and Brown going off to run the IMF, what a wheeze. That useless c*** f****d us good and proper alright, it's a shame the country is stuffed, otherwise we could just forget that reign of terror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Blair/Brown had said in 1995 that they were going to re-regulate the city, ban CDO's etc, they would never have been elected.

They had to promise to leave the city alone before the press or bankers would support them.

Thatcher's de-regulation of the 1980's led directly to the great crash of 2007. It didn't need Brown to make it happen. Brown's crime was a sin of omission, not stopping it when he could have done.

More than omission. In Dec 2003 Brown actively removed housing costs from the inflation index (RPI to CPI) to prevent the BoE from increasing the base rate in 2004 - a pre-electoral year.

Brown knew exactly what he was doing (short term) : increasing Labour chances in the 2005 election, and his chances of becoming Prime Minister.

And the nation's long term? Well, his "moral compass" was not working at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Treasury, Bank of England and Financial Services Authority concealed important information from the International Monetary Fund and put pressure on it to tone down warnings before the financial crisis, the fund’s independent watchdog has concluded.

Ok then list the all important information that they now know was being concealed from them. Not vague stuff but facts and figures. No point in holding breathe for the details it's unlikely such a transparent list would ever see the light of day these days. Facts are never ever presented, only vague woolly claims.

It's difficult to believe that they didn't have enough information to make a open criticism if they'd wanted to it's far more likely that they were quite content to let things just go along to suit the bankers etc. After all the people who run the countries run the IMF.

Another thing, aren't organisations like the IMF supposed to be stuffed full of people like those in the banks who are so important that they'll all go off to Dubai if they aren't given mega wages and bonuses. Shouldn't they be on the next flight if what's claimed is true.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Ok then list the all important information that they now know was being concealed from them. Not vague stuff but facts and figures. No point in holding breathe for the details it's unlikely such a transparent list would ever see the light of day these days. Facts are never ever presented, only vague woolly claims.

It's difficult to believe that they didn't have enough information to make a open criticism if they'd wanted to it's far more likely that they were quite content to let things just go along to suit the bankers etc. After all the people who run the countries run the IMF.

Another thing, aren't organisations like the IMF supposed to be stuffed full of people like those in the banks who are so important that they'll all go off to Dubai if they aren't given mega wages and bonuses. Shouldn't they be on the next flight if what's claimed is true.

The IMF were to sovereigns what the ratings agencies were to crappy banks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Blair/Brown had said in 1995 that they were going to re-regulate the city, ban CDO's etc, they would never have been elected.

...Brown didn't know what a CDO was even in 2007....and it was the growth of securitisation from 1997 the start of the BTL surge in this country which led to a UK factory for these poisoned balls ....you lefties try to blame Thatcher fore everything pre 2000 when it was all done in the name of Blair Brown and Balls....you guys are a joke ...... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Treasury, Bank of England and Financial Services Authority concealed important information from the International Monetary Fund and put pressure on it to tone down warnings before the financial crisis, the fund’s independent watchdog has concluded.

So the funds independent watchdog wrote the report 164.gif 2070.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the funds independent watchdog wrote the report 164.gif 2070.gif

...looks like Brown, Balls etc were as dodgy as the Greeks with a cover-up and witholding data from the IMF...could be a few investors in the Banks RBS, Lloyds HBOS and NR could have a case against these gangster politicians....time to sue and jail.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brown had all the warnings

All the proof is at the above thread.

In 2003 they knew the economy was in trouble so the BoE created a credit bubble to keep growth on track. It was all a scam, short termism at it's best and the suckers racked up the debt.

HA!!!!!!!!!!

I joined HPC in late 2003 having watched that amazing Money Programme about Mortgage Fraud/LIAR LOANS [see all below].....

I told my family and some friends -- We are heading for DISASTER. It was pure logic. :rolleyes: A 15 yr old GCSE Maths pupil could have seen it coming...

See Post #14 here - http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=159301&st=15&gopid=2891075&

Edited by eric pebble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 311 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.