Killer Bunny Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 What did Greensnot do when he took over - he let a stock market crash happen then a property downturn (in US they didn't really have a crash in the early 90s like us). Then he went on to be God-like as, after all he would claim, taking on such problems, it wasn't my fault... So, where are we now as Ben takes over? There's just been a stock market crash (cue Rolf Harris...'Can you see what it is yet...?). There's about to be an almighty crash all over which...if I were Ben... I would absolutely let rip. Why? 'Cos then I could 'sort it out'. It wasn't my fault. I inherited it. But I'll make sure it doesn't happen again. The falls will happen then I'll bring in stability etc etc He would then reign over growth for several years taking him to around 12 years in the job (crossing 3 or 4 presidential terms and at least 2 presidents) and be called a winner. He simply cannot fail if he drives the upcoming recession hard. That's what I'd do in his political shoes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Tickle Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Me too FP! Nothing like being the knight in shining armour to gain the populous eh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoredTrainBuilder Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 There's just been a stock market crash I must have missed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Bunny Posted November 4, 2005 Author Share Posted November 4, 2005 I must have missed it. Evidently you were watching continual reruns of Eastenders between 2000 and MArch 2003. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Those re-runs were good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonification Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Evidently you were watching continual reruns of Eastenders between 2000 and MArch 2003. I don't see it either... http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/...welve_month.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!) Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 I don't see it either... http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/...welve_month.stm wood and trees come to mind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonification Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 wood and trees come to mind The wishful-thinking-as-fact on this site amuses me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Bunny Posted November 4, 2005 Author Share Posted November 4, 2005 The wishful-thinking-as-fact on this site amuses me Of course there has been a rise since 2003 but that was only fuelled by ridiculously low IRs. My point is Ben will want to choke the recovery, get rid of the imbalances and blame it all on someone else like.. ooh, er, Greensnot of course. Now will the people who questioned my scenario comment on my thoughts of what Ben should do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Peter Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Now will the people who questioned my scenario comment on my thoughts of what Ben should do? Weren't they your thoughts on what Ben would do rather than should do? What you think he will do is based on what is good for Ben; what you think he should do should, presumably, be based on what would be good for the US. Or do these two things coincide? (unfortunately I don't know enough to offer any constructive criticism of your thoughts), Peter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Bunny Posted November 4, 2005 Author Share Posted November 4, 2005 Weren't they your thoughts on what Ben would do rather than should do? What you think he will do is based on what is good for Ben; what you think he should do should, presumably, be based on what would be good for the US. Or do these two things coincide? (unfortunately I don't know enough to offer any constructive criticism of your thoughts), Peter. Would do or should do in his position - same as. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!) Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 (edited) The wishful-thinking-as-fact on this site amuses me http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4406434.stm Edited November 4, 2005 by lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.