Tories admit Labour did NOT cause the Great Recession

[Rolluplostinspace]

Low interest rates in the noughties encouraged people to buy a lot more.
Who precided over those low interest rates? Labour government.
Therefore, whatever Osbo says is irrelevant.

BoE was given independence on 6 May 1997.

So the government had no say in interest rates?
That wasn't wise. Of course it worked great during the boom but every bubble has to burst.
You must have sensed it was enevitable, I certainly did.

No, interest rates and monetary policy was up to BoE.

It was a banking racket, all part of the neo liberal (Thatcher's reaganomics then Blair's third way) of gaining growth for countries, increasing banking profits and wealth for the few. The widespread use of computers making it much easier for customers to borrow money, much more regular and easy to use credit cards and automated payments and a dropping of lending requirements by banks. It was a money free for all easily accessed and used widely the world over.

The crash was due to hypothecated and rehypothecated lending and mortgages. US banks gave first time buyers and poor creditors mortgages on fixed term introductory deals. They went mad with them and much money was lent on 199 dollars a month (for example) for 2 years. Then normal rates would apply. They knew it would collapse so the debt for those homes was diced and sliced with other debts and sold on as financial instruments with a (crooked) AAA rating, When the rates normalised, people couldn't afford them and so stopped paying. Then you had the robo signing repossession scam by banks but by that time, major banks around the world held lots of debt that was no worth diddly squat.

Due to the way fractional reserve banking works, the loss of value meant the whole bank were suddenly outside lending limits and couldn't create any more money (debt). Couldn't maintain daily trading all exasperated by the public queueing up to demand cash from the banks. It will happen again. Nothing's changed except it's bigger now.

Well then the government, whoever they were, let us down by not keeping a hold over the interest rates.
It'll happen again but more to the point it happened before, in the 1930's and the 80's. Depression and recession caused by low interest rates. Why don't they flipping learn?

Our governments should surely be in charge of the rates so that this doesn't keep happening.
Wtf are they playing at?!

They learned many years ago.
Banks inflate and deflate at will and the one percent make bazillions.

[Lady Murasaki]

And we let them because?

[Fletch]

Low interest rates in the noughties encouraged people to buy a lot more.
Who precided over those low interest rates? Labour government.
Therefore, whatever Osbo says is irrelevant.

BoE was given independence on 6 May 1997.

So the government had no say in interest rates?
That wasn't wise. Of course it worked great during the boom but every bubble has to burst.
You must have sensed it was enevitable, I certainly did.

No, interest rates and monetary policy was up to BoE.

It was a banking racket, all part of the neo liberal (Thatcher's reaganomics then Blair's third way) of gaining growth for countries, increasing banking profits and wealth for the few. The widespread use of computers making it much easier for customers to borrow money, much more regular and easy to use credit cards and automated payments and a dropping of lending requirements by banks. It was a money free for all easily accessed and used widely the world over.

The crash was due to hypothecated and rehypothecated lending and mortgages. US banks gave first time buyers and poor creditors mortgages on fixed term introductory deals. They went mad with them and much money was lent on 199 dollars a month (for example) for 2 years. Then normal rates would apply. They knew it would collapse so the debt for those homes was diced and sliced with other debts and sold on as financial instruments with a (crooked) AAA rating, When the rates normalised, people couldn't afford them and so stopped paying. Then you had the robo signing repossession scam by banks but by that time, major banks around the world held lots of debt that was no worth diddly squat.

Due to the way fractional reserve banking works, the loss of value meant the whole bank were suddenly outside lending limits and couldn't create any more money (debt). Couldn't maintain daily trading all exasperated by the public queueing up to demand cash from the banks. It will happen again. Nothing's changed except it's bigger now.

Well then the government, whoever they were, let us down by not keeping a hold over the interest rates.
It'll happen again but more to the point it happened before, in the 1930's and the 80's. Depression and recession caused by low interest rates. Why don't they flipping learn?

Our governments should surely be in charge of the rates so that this doesn't keep happening.
Wtf are they playing at?!

Sorry LM, you misunderstood, or I wasn't clear. No meant no, the government didn't have control of interest rates. The Bank of England did and still do. They decide the rate, nobody else. It used to be government before 1997.

It's because of frn banking. Creating money out of thin air then deleting it when repaid but keeping the interest, which is never created. Ponzi scheme.

[Lady Murasaki]

Don't mansplain me Fletch. I understood perfectly what you said.
If it used to be the government controlling them then it still should be so that the rates are not too low.

[Cannydc]

The Bank of England (not 'banks') sets interest rates, via a committee which assesses economic data and sits monthly.

The reason they get the job, and not the government of the day is that previous governments manufactured rate rises and falls to match electoral cycles.

In short, non-election years we got high interest rates, election year we got rate cuts, tax cuts and milk and honey for all.

Some termed this (rightly) as Boom and Bust.

[Fletch]

And we let them because?

They kill you if you try to stop them.

Lincoln greenback and JFK to name but two. Saddam Hussain, Gadaffi, attempts on Assad, those countries didn't have Rothschild style central banks. Nor does Iran or North Korea. Who are the public directed to hate at the moment?

[Lady Murasaki]

The Bank of England (not 'banks') sets interest rates, via a committee which assesses economic data and sits monthly.

The reason they get the job, and not the government of the day is that previous governments manufactured rate rises and falls to match electoral cycles.

In short, non-election years we got high interest rates, election year we got rate cuts, tax cuts and milk and honey for all.

Some termed this (rightly) as Boom and Bust.

Fine, but it's not rocket science to make sure the rates are not too low. Causing over borrowing. Don't they learn from history, or don't they care?

[Fletch]

Don't mansplain me Fletch. I understood perfectly what you said.
If it used to be the government controlling them then it still should be so that the rates are not too low.

Sorry, thought by 'Well then the government, whoever they were, let us down by not keeping a hold over the interest rates'. you thought government could still control rates.

[Lady Murasaki]

And we let them because?

They kill you if you try to stop them.

Lincoln greenback and JFK to name but two. Saddam Hussain, Gadaffi, attempts on Assad, those countries didn't have Rothschild style central banks. Nor does Iran or North Korea. Who are the public directed to hate at the moment?

Interesting.
I'm not convinced of that because I don't want to believe it's that sordid.

[Fletch]

The Bank of England (not 'banks') sets interest rates, via a committee which assesses economic data and sits monthly.

The reason they get the job, and not the government of the day is that previous governments manufactured rate rises and falls to match electoral cycles.

In short, non-election years we got high interest rates, election year we got rate cuts, tax cuts and milk and honey for all.

Some termed this (rightly) as Boom and Bust.

Fine, but it's not rocket science to make sure the rates are not too low. Causing over borrowing. Don't they learn from history, or don't they care?

Low rates mean growth and profit. The rates have been so low for so long now that even a tiny rise will cause chaos. World war or complete collapse is the only way out. It will collapse anyway so having a war to blame it on, global reset, will take the public's eye off the real criminals. See US for attempts to start war over last 18 months. No coincidence.

[Rolluplostinspace]

The Bank of England (not 'banks') sets interest rates, via a committee which assesses economic data and sits monthly.

The reason they get the job, and not the government of the day is that previous governments manufactured rate rises and falls to match electoral cycles.

In short, non-election years we got high interest rates, election year we got rate cuts, tax cuts and milk and honey for all.

Some termed this (rightly) as Boom and Bust.

Fine, but it's not rocket science to make sure the rates are not too low. Causing over borrowing. Don't they learn from history, or don't they care?

They don't care.
Keep wages low and increase borrowing.
How its been since the 70's.
A world of credit makes some people very wealthy for doing nothing.

[Lady Murasaki]

Don't mansplain me Fletch. I understood perfectly what you said.
If it used to be the government controlling them then it still should be so that the rates are not too low.

Sorry, thought by 'Well then the government, whoever they were, let us down by not keeping a hold over the interest rates'. you thought government could still control rates.

No problem, try not to talk down to women in future.
It's irritating.

[Fletch]

And we let them because?

They kill you if you try to stop them.

Lincoln greenback and JFK to name but two. Saddam Hussain, Gadaffi, attempts on Assad, those countries didn't have Rothschild style central banks. Nor does Iran or North Korea. Who are the public directed to hate at the moment?

Interesting.
I'm not convinced of that because I don't want to believe it's that sordid.

It's all very sordid and totally without guilt on their part. It's just business. Wars mean more money creation (payable debt) for the military industrial complex as well and banks fund all sides in war.

Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy
https://www.michaeljournal.org/articles ... -f-kennedy

[Lady Murasaki]

The Bank of England (not 'banks') sets interest rates, via a committee which assesses economic data and sits monthly.

The reason they get the job, and not the government of the day is that previous governments manufactured rate rises and falls to match electoral cycles.

In short, non-election years we got high interest rates, election year we got rate cuts, tax cuts and milk and honey for all.

Some termed this (rightly) as Boom and Bust.

Fine, but it's not rocket science to make sure the rates are not too low. Causing over borrowing. Don't they learn from history, or don't they care?

They don't care.
Keep wages low and increase borrowing.
How its been since the 70's.
A world of credit makes some people very wealthy for doing nothing.

Why the hell didn't you ever go into politics?

[Rolluplostinspace]

And we let them because?

They kill you if you try to stop them.

Lincoln greenback and JFK to name but two. Saddam Hussain, Gadaffi, attempts on Assad, those countries didn't have Rothschild style central banks. Nor does Iran or North Korea. Who are the public directed to hate at the moment?

Interesting.
I'm not convinced of that because I don't want to believe it's that sordid.

It is that sordid.
The axis of evil as named by GWB were the last countries creating their own money interest free.
No debt owed to the bankers.