Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

"The belief was the financial services and banking services were the new cash cows for Britains economy."

Fact: London and the South East produces the highest GDP per capita in the UK.
Fact: UK Financial services share of GDP is around 10% of total UK GDP
Fact: UK manufacturing still accounts for 26% of UK GDP
Fact: UK manufacturing has been in decline throughout the last 13 years of Labour government.
Fact: The first thing Brown did as Chancellor in 1997 was to pass control of interest rates to the BoE.
Fact: Brown told the BoE to set interest rates with the primary objective of controlling inflation based primarily upon inflation data that he had massaged. In other words, Brown was still in control of interest rates in all but name.
Fact: If interest rates had been higher and more in tune with reality throughout the noughties, the irrational exuberance we've witnessed would never have happened.
Fact: Brown has spent every penny we ever had, and then some.
Fact: The country no longer has a pot to p!ss in.
Fact: Brown is 100% responsible for the mess we're in now. It's not the banks' fault and it's moronic to suggest it's the fault of traders.

Fred.the Tories are led by a Rhinestone Delboy.an imitation diamondthat will end up glass paste!.I vote for going down the pub!.................BTW Lib Dems best ever chance to make some differencewait and see!

HilaryI was with you up until you said.It's not the banks' fault..at that point I lost the will to live..

Fred--'Prior to the 1997-2008, the Tories were responsible for the demise of much of the industrial bases of the UK'. I think you'll find the unions can take the credit for the biggest demise, in the 60's & early 70's.
'In the period 1997-2008 the majority of people in this country were doing well and their expectancies were on the up'. If that is true then maybe the strong economy and the excellent financial state of the country inherited by Labour was responsible for that.
2517

Of course it's not the banks' fault, Tabster. They're just a convenient scapegoat; It's important that the Government have somebody they can tell the people to blame.

That doesn't mean that I'm on the side of the banks. Some of them got themselves into a right mess and they should have been allowed to go bust in just the same way as any other business. No harm would have come of it longer term.

.

Hilary.

Are your last two postings your personal manifesto for the coming election?

I see the polls are beginning to suggest a substantial labour majority.

Wishy and Washy don't seem to "get it"!

What are the odds on a coalition government now.

A coalition government may have the courage to sort out the city, financial services, bonuses and salaries.

They then can blame each other for doing what is needed to be done.

If the Tories wanted a landslidethey should have selected Ken Clarkthey would have had my vote for certainand many friends of oursexperienced as Chancellor and Home SecretaryKen Clark has always come over as sensiblecalm honestand no arse licker as Chancellor Britain was set on a course of economic growth with low inflation under himHe bequeathed to Labour a golden economic legacythat took them 13 years to totally fcuk-upfour more yearsand we could go to Zimbabwe for aid?

"I see the polls are beginning to suggest a substantial labour majority."

The opinion polls are for idiots like you!

Hilary,

Like Clark you could be developing Alzheimer's disease.

A very short while ago on a different thread your were lauding the polls as indicating a massive tory election win.

Strange!

Don't make mistakes trading based on memory!

Enjoy the banter on here. No political allegiance, but Gordon Brown's unctuous pomposity makes me regret voting Labour in 1997.

When I was a lad in the 1950s banking was perceived as a nice safe job which paid peanuts, gave you a decent pension when you finished working for the same bank for 40 odd years and had about 5 women employees for every man.The culture was like a big family ( incest apart!) and indeed some families had run big banks for many generations. Banking profits tended to ebb and flow with the state of the economy. That culture began to change in the Thatcher era and as more influence came from across the pond the leadership style became much more aggressive, staff were encouraged to be motivated by greed and they had an ignorant market to plunder. In the old days, it did not matter that the average personal customer knew next to nothing about money issues, because he/she would be guided by their bank manager.Once that manager was motivated to keep his/her job by selling them products they might not want or need then the game changed and we have seen the results. The sooner basic finance is taught in schools from age 7 or 8 the better.

Same applied in the business world. "Socially useless" (I like that term dreampt up I think by Mr Mynors) products were developed to sell to a gullible client base, brought up to trust its bankers. Bank balance sheets began to inflate put of control around the turn of the millenium and the longer it went on the bigger the inevitable crash.

Still undecided who to vote for this time, but it won't be Mr Brown and his crew.

Fred Hung Parliament a certainty.and it will pay for our vacancesthe May election has made a good startIve made money the honest way from Politiceans pity it dont work the other way round?

"A very short while ago on a different thread your were lauding the polls as indicating a massive tory election win."

You're the only one with Alzheimer's around here, Freddy!

If you stopped filing your willie to a point for 5 seconds and had bothered to read the other thread properly, you would understand that I was pointing to the anomolies between the opinion polls and the bookies. Everybody knows that, when it comes to elections, the opinion polls aren't worth a light and the bookies always manage to get it spot on. A Conservative majority is still odds on with the bookies.

.

Only just Hilary4/5 Conservative majority.13/8 No Overall Majority.not exactly a certainty.Cameron is just as much a liability to the Toriesas Brown is to the Labour Partythe one difference is Labour have no options.also Vince Cable convincingly won the Chancellors TV debate Alistair Darling was second by defaultdue to George Osborne thinking he was in a boy band.

A majority is a majority and it doesn't really matter by how much, Tabster. They need 626 seats for a majority.

Betfair today are calling a 56% chance of a Tory majority and are suggesting they'll get 333 seats. That's fluctuated between a 50/50 call on budget day, and a 62% chance of an outright majority around a week or so back.

If you like looking at charts, it's also evident that the Betfair Tory downtrend which has been in place since February has now been broken to the upside.

Thanks mnamreh - A few years ago, post retirement, I was invited by an enterprising teacher to visit local secondary school and offer basic guidance on financial matters to volunteers in their lunch break. Their ignorance was quite frightening. Other side of the coin is that I cringe if I pay in a cheque at my bank and am asked ( by someone who hasn't got a clue, but is told to ask me) if I know what to do with the money.

Hilary,

Your phantasies are interesting and seemingly fascinating to yourelf. Firstly pointed "willies" and especially mine and then Sheep@shagging.

I would suggest rereading all your posts and check some of your statements.

I would consider being careful when trading or driving.

Have a nice day.

=================

UKIP, be careful the tories are coming!

======================

Tabs,

What are the odds to-morrow?

Only asking 8-)

"They need 626 seats for a majority."

326 seats actually, I think, Hils. :-)

I was talking to someone the other day and they said how important was the vote from the armed services and not to forget it. It could swing things in one hell of a direction.

Today the Lib Dems produced their manifesto promising all of our military 'risk takers' a nice pay rise, together with a credible proof on 'how' and 'with what' this and other goodies were going to be paid for.

I think thing are still up for grabs and the Lib Dems are going to take a bigger share of the vote as time goes on and things get nearer to Election Day.

Both Nick Clegg and Vince Cable have done very well today and so have the Lib Dems.

There are a lot of undecided people out there, including myself, and this whole thing is going to go down to the wire. If we get a hung parliament, which is currently the favourite thing to happen, then deals are there to be struck. The Lib Dems have got some sensible entrenched key points to do their deals with.

I was interested to hear Clegg's views on 'jails and sentencing'. He seems quite strong on a solution to solve fact that "92% of offenders only get short sentences and then, having been sent inside for a 12 weeks holiday (or even less!), where they learn a bit more on perfecting their crime skills, they come out, commit another crime and then get sent back to jail. Clegg's strength for me, was on just how to go about doing this without building even more jails. He actually has a well thought out plan on it.

Personally speaking, I'm quite fed up with the red or blue 'voting promises' fiasco, which we've had for the last umpteen years, with its unfair taxation, poor solutions to the crime and education problems, and also a whole lot more and I actually fancy and am up for a bit of a change.

Well spotted, Doc.

:o)