Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Cameron Has The Answers To The Credit Crisis

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm...16/cccam116.xml

There are things that should be done immediately. For a start, we need to act against creeping unemployment. At the moment, too many sound companies face liquidation because they cannot get access to credit. And we all know what liquidation normally means - closure and job losses.

That's why we will consult on taking the best aspects of the American Chapter 11 system, which gives these companies breathing space to restructure their debts and rescue their business - and their employees' livelihoods.

Of course, we should not save all companies. Some will fail and go bust. When that happens, we need to make sure our welfare system is fixed so it gets people back into work as soon as possible. And this means harnessing the power of private and voluntary providers to give people the tailored support they need to find work.

Next, we need to address the housing market. Last October, we announced a fully-funded stamp duty cut taking nine out of 10 first-time buyers out of this tax altogether. What's the Government waiting for? They could - and should - do this straight away.

Next, savers. People need the reassurance that if another bank goes bust, their hard-earned cash is protected. That's why we're saying, before parliament goes into the summer recess, we should legislate not only to protect the first £50,000 for each saver in the event of their bank collapsing, but to make sure they get this money quickly.

Then we need action on the biggest concern for most people - the cost of living. Of course, there's no magic wand that will bring down the cost of food and oil. But one of the biggest burdens on people is tax.

And here, even though the cupboard is pretty bare, government can act. That's why we're consulting on a fair fuel stabiliser, so when oil prices increase, the duty is actually cut. If the Government had introduced this at the Budget, fuel today would be 5p cheaper at the pumps.

So there are things we can be doing straight away to help employees, housebuyers, savers and families. But to make this economic recovery last, we also need a plan for the long-term. And that means two vital things.

First, after a decade of reckless Labour spending, we've got to start living within our means. That's the only sustainable way to reduce the demand for taxation, cut the cost of living and sort out our public finances. This won't be easy. In the decades ahead, there will be pressure to spend more on the essentials. So how can we square this circle?

Our overall method is to ensure that government grows more slowly than the economy over the cycle, so bringing down the share of national income taken by the state. This gives room for cuts in taxes and debt. That's what we mean by sharing the proceeds of growth.

And we will continue to deliver this commitment over the long-term by attacking the causes of rising public spending. So we will cut the cost of social failure - the crime, worklessness and family breakdown - by being as radical in social reform as Margaret Thatcher was in economic reform.

We will address the problem - and cost - of unreformed hospitals and schools, by introducing more choice and competition.

And we will cut the cost of bureaucracy, waste and inefficiency by entrenching the culture of spending money more wisely across government departments.

Second, we need to set ourselves on the path to economic growth. We've got to stop relying on the finance and housing sectors to drive our economy forward.

Instead, we must put our faith in a much broader economic base that includes science, engineering and manufacturing. We need a government that gives these industries the tools to succeed.

That means less tax and regulation. But it also means good transport, universities and schools so they attract the best people from around the world and turn innovation into commercial application.

Taken together, these elements don't just show that we have a clear alternative to this bankrupt government who are bankrupting our economy. They show that it's the Conservative Party that has the ideas for sustainable growth long into the future.

So there it is then problem solved. Boy have I been worried over nothing the above is just so simple.

So what we need is less regulation, isn't that precisely what's helped cause all of this poor regulation of the financial sector.

Obvious stuff that we need to diversify the UK economy and not rely on the financial sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm...16/cccam116.xml

So there it is then problem solved. Boy have I been worried over nothing the above is just so simple.

So what we need is less regulation, isn't that precisely what's helped cause all of this poor regulation of the financial sector.

Obvious stuff that we need to diversify the UK economy and not rely on the financial sector.

Well there's regulation and regulation isn't there. The red book for example, the tax code rules, has expanded hugely under Gordon Brown with all his obsessinve tinkering. There is undoubtedly a lot of room for simplification and removal of petty stuff.

However, I don't have much confidence that the tories will walk the walk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm...16/cccam116.xml

So there it is then problem solved. Boy have I been worried over nothing the above is just so simple.

So what we need is less regulation, isn't that precisely what's helped cause all of this poor regulation of the financial sector.

Obvious stuff that we need to diversify the UK economy and not rely on the financial sector.

So have the Conservatives given up on market forces

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, conservatives suggesting tax cuts as a solution, its all topsy turvy... but i agree less tinkering less tax, reduce the cost of fuel/transport....

Edited by moosetea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Second, we need to set ourselves on the path to economic growth. We've got to stop relying on the finance and housing sectors to drive our economy forward.

Instead, we must put our faith in a much broader economic base that includes science, engineering and manufacturing. We need a government that gives these industries the tools to succeed.

That means less tax and regulation. But it also means good transport, universities and schools so they attract the best people from around the world and turn innovation into commercial application.

Great so what are they proposing to do? Are they going to half fee's for science and engineering graduates whilst using other courses to subsidise them via increased fees? Are they going to protect the term engineer? Are we going to reintroduce a rail freight network? Are we going to stop allowing nimby's preventing the building of nuclear power stations and wind farms? Are we going to make people responsible for their actions (this includes the city)?

Answer yes to ALL of the above and they have my vote. I doubt he has the cojones to do any let alone all of them.

:angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that private/voluntary sector stuff drives me up the wall

Every time they start with that tosh we end up with sub-standard services that actually cost more! Yes the public purse needs to be slashed but it's actually the pseudo-business model in public services that have caused a lot of the problems, in stark contrast to a real company (in the private sector) it results in a massive increase in bean-counting management. That's where the money's gone (oh and all those munitions of course, though I suppose that keeps the economy ticking over) and it's why, I'm afraid, Mr Cameron (and the rest of parliament) can go and boil his head!

edit - for full rant clarity

Edited by Sceptacled Bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great so what are they proposing to do? Are they going to half fee's for science and engineering graduates whilst using other courses to subsidise them via increased fees? Are they going to protect the term engineer? Are we going to reintroduce a rail freight network? Are we going to stop allowing nimby's preventing the building of nuclear power stations and wind farms? Are we going to make people responsible for their actions (this includes the city)?

Answer yes to ALL of the above and they have my vote. I doubt he has the cojones to do any let alone all of them.

:angry:

Agreed, they arnt going to do any of that, nothing useful, just P*ss around the edges, no doubt a few head removals in the public sector and some tax cuts for big buisness. More of the same to benefit a few chums in the City. The very fact that they picked our friend Kirsty big knickers as a special housing adviser says it all. They have no housing policy, unless that is they are planning to cut stamp duty at the top end and subsidise the builders bank accounts. They have no real energy policy, which in fact will be the next big thing, not even a 20p tax cut will sort out the petrol crisis in the long run, and subsidies for road transport will come long before rail expansion/improvement. They are not interested in promoting and channeling real education into whatever is needed to make Britain a better place to live or for the world, eg engineering, science, real medicine etc etc all these things are just seen as adjuncts to the real business of the UK which as we all know is just finance.

The problem is, that they are only interested, like all politicians, in votes. Everyone wants cheap car transport, cheap and plentiful loans, no one will listen to reality, nor vote for their own long term good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great so what are they proposing to do? Are they going to half fee's for science and engineering graduates whilst using other courses to subsidise them via increased fees? Are they going to protect the term engineer? Are we going to reintroduce a rail freight network? Are we going to stop allowing nimby's preventing the building of nuclear power stations and wind farms? Are we going to make people responsible for their actions (this includes the city)?

Answer yes to ALL of the above and they have my vote. I doubt he has the cojones to do any let alone all of them.

:angry:

If only . . . personally I think that doesn't go far enough, offer free fees & decent means tested bursaries to do science, engineering etc and abandon this ludicrous and arbitrary target of 50% of people in tertiary education no matter how much that dumbs everything down. Plus they need to give universities more funding for each science student to get high quality facilities, it costs more to train people like that and universities need to get the appropriate level of funding to do it well, not to mention more funding for hiring world class scientists.

Does anyone read new scientist? It's ridiculous how insultingly low the salaries are for top class PHD holders, no wonder people aren't drawn to careers in science, if they knew that they could start those careers debt free though it'd make all the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If only . . . personally I think that doesn't go far enough, offer free fees & decent means tested bursaries to do science, engineering etc and abandon this ludicrous and arbitrary target of 50% of people in tertiary education no matter how much that dumbs everything down. Plus they need to give universities more funding for each science student to get high quality facilities, it costs more to train people like that and universities need to get the appropriate level of funding to do it well, not to mention more funding for hiring world class scientists.

Does anyone read new scientist? It's ridiculous how insultingly low the salaries are for top class PHD holders, no wonder people aren't drawn to careers in science, if they knew that they could start those careers debt free though it'd make all the difference.

They have screwed science at undergrad level, but for doing a PhD the UK is generally pretty good, fees & a stipend are paid and it can be done in 3&4 years which is a big advantage over US and most european ones.

The major problem is when doing postdoctoral work there is often very little job security. As far as pay goes we were explicitly told having a PhD in physics will mean you earn less money as it will put your career several years behind someone who hasn't got one.

New scientist is terrible for jobs, physics world is generally better in terms of jobs and content and I suspect the same is true for other institute/society mags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They have screwed science at undergrad level, but for doing a PhD the UK is generally pretty good, fees & a stipend are paid and it can be done in 3&4 years which is a big advantage over US and most european ones.

The major problem is when doing postdoctoral work there is often very little job security. As far as pay goes we were explicitly told having a PhD in physics will mean you earn less money as it will put your career several years behind someone who hasn't got one.

New scientist is terrible for jobs, physics world is generally better in terms of jobs and content and I suspect the same is true for other institute/society mags.

Does it really matter where the jobs are advertised? The significant point to me is that employers value such highly educated (note that I didn't say qualified) candidates so lowly in the first place. I'm guessing that at least some successfully fill the posts.

Having said that, it scares me that people entering their honours year of electronic engineering cannot design or build a 3-component circuit (MOSFET, LED and voltage regulator). This is at one of the world's top 100 rated universities. Has education been dumbed down so much that it now requires a PhD to be considered equal to a good graduate of 15 years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron has the Answers to the Credit Crisis? Sorry, What were the questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm...16/cccam116.xml

The credit crunch started in the City. But it has now spread to every home and business in Britain.

Whether it's the families facing negative equity, companies which are cutting back or the pain millions feel at the check-outs, there can be little doubt of the difficult situation we face.

And, in this time of uncertainty, people are rightly asking politicians: what's your plan?

This is a particularly difficult question to answer when the state's coffers are empty, and we cannot, like other countries that have been more prudent, cut taxes. Gordon Brown's response is to blame oil producers, to blame the world for wasting food - in short, to blame everyone but himself.

Of course, the problems we face today are partly global. But remember, Germany used its strong financial infrastructure to save IKB from going bust. Here, it was Gordon Brown's system of bank regulation that failed to prevent the run on Northern Rock.

In Sweden, their budget surplus has led to tax breaks for hard-pressed families. Here, because Gordon Brown failed to save any money during the good times, taxpayers are being hammered.

And, in America, the hi-tech service industry is helping provide support in times of difficulty. Here, Gordon Brown's mania for taxation and regulation is seeing businesses leave our shores.

This alone is bad enough. But it's made worse by Gordon Brown's refusal to act now. Why is he doing nothing? The answer is predominately about politics.

His antennae are buzzing: to have a plan for the economy is to concede there's a problem; to concede there's a problem is to admit you didn't prepare us; to admit you didn't prepare us is to confess that the rock on which you built your leadership is a myth.

Whatever's going on in his head, our economy cannot wait for him to get his act together. So yesterday, I outlined the first parts of the Conservative Party's economic recovery plan.

Does the first part clarify this?

This is Cameron's plan for the salvation of the UK!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stamp duty cuts do nothing for first time buyers. If a buyer has an extra 5 grand in their pocket from the stamp duty cut, developers / sellers will raise their asking price by 5 grand.

End result - FTB pays same amount but tax payer has bailed out the developer.

Edited by r thritis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a manifesto for smaller government. The pork-barrel is empty and the only viable politics must reflect this. Regardless, won't be popular in the regions, I'd imagine...

And yes, remains to be seen whether or not it'd be bourne out in practice. Unemployment figures will rocket once the Treasury is instructed to disentangle itself (by reducing government-sponsored handouts and make-work programs) from the creeping paternalistic neo-socialism in which we find ourself today.

It doesn't matter who the actors are on-stage. This script is done, all that remains is performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all tinkering at the margins of a global meltdown to ensure that interests stay as they are currently vested (lets makes sure to ensure savers - don't get me wrong, I appreciate it, but it is just tinkering).

Quite frankly given the boom and bust and exponential profit mentality of most british business I can't see how his moves will help anything

There are things that should be done immediately. For a start, we need to act against creeping unemployment. At the moment, too many sound companies face liquidation because they cannot get access to credit. And we all know what liquidation normally means - closure and job losses.

That's why we will consult on taking the best aspects of the American Chapter 11 system, which gives these companies breathing space to restructure their debts and rescue their business - and their employees' livelihoods.

All this will do is help profiteers profit from nothing for a bit longer.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 399 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.