'Crash Gordon' handing keys to 'Etonian Cameron'

One picture is worth ten thousand words ... but IMHO the one below is priceless!

and will Cameron be the man to successfully turn things around (with the help of all his wealthy and privileged friends) ... ? 

to be continued ...

Brown: The collapse of the UK economy was down to me

Gordon Brown today admitted he made a mistake in not introducing tougher bank regulation when he was chancellor.  The PM, chancellor from 1997 to 2007, said that in the 1990s the banks had all been calling for less regulation.

"And actually the truth is that globally and nationally we should have been regulating them more," he said in an interview on ITV1's Tonight.  The Conservatives said Mr Brown had "failed", while the Liberal Democrats said his admission was "not enough".  The prime minister said he should have put the "whole public interest" before the banks.

Mr Brown said: "In the 1990s, the banks, they all came to us and said, 'Look, we don't want to be regulated, we want to be free of regulation'." ... "All the complaints I was getting from people was, 'Look you're regulating them too much'. And actually the truth is that globally and nationally we should have been regulating them more," he added.

"So I've learnt from that. So you don't listen to the industry when they say, 'This is good for us'. You've got to talk about the whole public interest."

Ed Balls, who worked with Gordon Brown when he was chancellor, said both had previously admitted they should have done more to control the financial sector.  At Labour's morning press conference he said: "In retrospect we should have been tougher with some of the investment banks which did not know the risks they were running."

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson added: "Regulation should have been more intrusive and the regulatory practice of the Financial Services Authority should have kept pace with the fast-changing developments in the financial services sector."

Shadow chancellor George Osborne said: "So finally Gordon Brown admits he failed to regulate the bankers and increased taxes on the poor (removing the 10p tax band). We've had 13 years of his economic mistakes. Britain can't afford five years more."

Lib Dem Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said: "It's not enough just to hold your hands up and say sorry without having a plan for making sure that the same thing doesn't happen again."

Most people (particularly in the blogosphere) know this already, and many (including myself) believe admitting to being partially responsible for the worst economic mistakes for generations is not enough (i.e honesty) - if he had represented us properly (which as Prime Minister is his job!) he would have always acted in our interests (not the banks), if he was a capable leader he would have asked far more questions (rather than simply listening to the banks), and if he was selfless, honest (and honorable) he would have admitted his mistakes at the time (and resigned without question or delay) ... instead of using spin to create a smoke-screen (e.g. a 'global problem') and deflecting blame onto others (e.g. America - which President Obama will never forget) ... both strategies regularly adopted by those who apply Poweromics* (to maintain their grip on Power).  Given we are fining the leaders of Northern Rock for their failings, perhaps we should fine/charge Gordon Brown for his role too**, so he is made bankrupt, never forgiven and never allowed into a position (or to profit from a position) of power again (e.g. relinquishing any right to a position in the Lords)*. 

* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed. 

** NB In China he would have been locked up and probably receive the death penalty (for 'economic sabotage').

Reforming banks - A fight to the death?

Whilst some (e.g. Gordon Brown) focus on spin, others focus on substance (e.g. Barack Obama).  Whilst some try to paper over the cracks (e.g. UK), others try to focus on solving the problem (e.g. USA).  This has become ever clearer over recent days and weeks .... in relation to dealing with banks ...  

Gordon Brown decided to introduce a one-off 'bonus tax' for bankers, which involved far more spin than substance.  Barack Obama on the other hand plans to introduce a bank levy and made it clear 'Wall Street' must pay back all the $117bn (£72bn) that US taxpayers are expected to lose from bailing out the banks during the financial crisis. "My commitment is to recover every single dime the American people are owed ... We want our money back and we're going to get it", the President said.


However over the last two days he has gone much further.  President Barack Obama has proposed significant new curbs on the activities of banks to try to prevent future financial crises.  The plans include limits to the size of banks and restrictions on riskier trading. "Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by banks that are too big to fail," Mr Obama said.   He added he was ready for a "fight" with any banks prepared to lobby against tougher regulations.


"While the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it is still operating under the exact same rules that led to its near collapse," Mr Obama said.  His proposals also include a ban on retail banks from using their own money in investments - known as proprietary trading. Instead, banks would be limited to investing their customers' funds.


I, and many others in the blogosphere, have regularly pointed out the fallacy of allowing retail banking and risky investment banking being joined together and remaining together, but the UK Government has singly failed to address this issue, and the BBC failed in it's duty to press home this issue either.  


Mr Obama's proposals appear to be a return to the principles underlying the Glass-Steagall Act. That law - from the 1930s in the aftermath of the Great Depression - separated commercial and investment banking and was eventually abolished in 1999 under President Bill Clinton.


"I am proposing simple, common sense reforms" Mr Obama said, and vowed "If these folks want a fight, it's a fight I'm ready to have".

Adding Value or Poverty - No-one owes the UK a living

Another interesting post from a fellow blogger to ponder ...

... this time referring to the 'fairy tale' we have lived in and the 'harsh reality' the UK now faces:

"I think some people are missing a big point ... the big point being that we're not just anybody, we're British.

Consequently, normal laws of economics don't apply to us. Hadn't you heard? For example, we're not subject to the economic cycle like lesser mortals - 'boom and bust' has been abolished by that Nobel economist of the future, his Holiness Gordon. The abolition of boom and bust was a great weight off my mind when I heard about it, I must say. Sorted. Well done, Gordon.

Being British exempts us from manufacturing - for goodness' sake, don't you realise that working in a factory can make your clothes grubby, and you could even get dirt under your fingernails? Certainly beneath our dignity as Brits.

We don't mind doing a little work, mind, but we feel much more comfortable in 'service' jobs - as far as manual labour is concerned, well, that's what foreigners are for, isn't it?

We're proud to be "a nation of shopkeepers"... and hairdressers, consultants, estate agents, civil servants, care professionals, and, er ... consultants. Obese, us? Never - we get plenty of exercise, walking down to the benefits office.

OTT, I know, but the British mentality has been painfully close to this caricature, unfortunately. Most people seemed perfectly happy living on North Sea oil revenues, financial services, and borrowing against artificial rises in housing equity.

Well, those gravy trains have hit the buffers. We can learn how to work, or we can get used to a new concept - poverty. As we're about to find out very soon, no-one owes the UK a living".

Are such insights misguided, or getting too close to the truth ? ... you decide!

Why the Prime Minister hasn't learnt a thing

Gordon Brown said today he is "appalled" that some financial firms are continuing, and even extending, their bonus culture ... so why did he present an open-cheque book to them, bail them out with £100's billions of taxpayers money, and put nothing in place to stop this from happening again? ... for instance why has he not pushed for the introduction of a new Glass-Steagall type act to separate commercial banking (supporting wealth creation) from investment banking (supporting wealth manipulation) again, given the removal of this was a key factor in the financial crisis in the first place?

Mr Brown also refused to blame Britons for their level of rising personal debt during his time as chancellor and prime minister, saying the vast majority of debt had been the result of the "legitimate aim" of people trying to buy a home ... a "legitimate aim" to have a roof over ones head - yes ... but to have to take on huge personal debts to do this - no! ... and this would not have happened if the Government had ensured a steady & sufficient supply of housing (ideally driven by a Land Value Tax too), rather than 'promoting' self interest/greed and house price inflation/speculation.

The problem is the Government do not know how to create real wealth ... they only know how to manipulate wealth, and letting landowners profit from land whilst bankers profit from loans ... and what's even more worrying is that the Prime Minister's comments today show he hasn't learnt anything from this crisis! ... so how could we ever believe he is the right man to fix it?

When 'deflecting blame' gets 'exposed' ...

Arguably one of the best political questions* in recent times managed to flummox the great Orator (President Obama), and saw Prime Minister Gordon Brown rapidly lose his smile & schrivel in his shoes ... 

Take a look at the video footage and the Guardian's summary here ... it was a classic question, with a classic outcome ... well done Nick ... though I bet your special seat next to Gordon on official visits is harder to come by now!

* Nick Robinson asks Obama if he agrees with Brown about the US causing the crisis - something Brown has said repeatedly over here, but something he fails to mention in his trips to Washington (NB deflecting blame is a common strategy used by people who apply Poweromics ... and creating 'fear' amongst people is too ... watch out for this one as we get closer to the election ...).

–––––––––––––––––––

Take a look at my posting on Stephanomics blog "Spending rows" below, as well as my own posts "honesty - honestly" and "economic fools" on these subjects too ...

Post 4 (leanomist) wrote:

Let the battle unfold: Honesty v Spin

Go for it Alistair, tell us the truth, and please remember to include the fact that the UK's economic woes are mostly 'home grown' and were 'systematically manufactured' by Gordon Brown during his 10 years as Chancellor - and not by America, or anyone else in the world for that matter, which he would like to make us believe * and is relying on Mandy to help him with ...

David Clift, a Future 500 Leader

* remember Nick Robinson recent question to Obama & Brown, brilliantly exposing Gordon Brown's use of the blame game ... (ie it was the USA, and nothing to do with me!) ... for example take a look at http://poweromics.blogspot.com/2009/07/when-deflecting-blame-gets-exposed.html and other examples / information provided there too.

–––––––––––––––––––