we're all in this together

[hibsdaft]

http://markgorman.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/osborne-bullingdon.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/29/article-0-024784E6000005DC-390_468x321_popup.jpg

http://markgorman.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/cameron-bullingdon-dining-club2_468x420.jpg

aye, of course we are.

[Bishop Hibee]

I regularly drink in Robbies wearing my Old Etonian gear before going to ER :wink:

A sad inditement on our democracy. Even Thatcher wasn't keen on the Tory Grandees who dominated the party before she became leader. Sickening really.

[Hainan Hibs]

I thought this thread was going to be about High School Musical:greengrin.

I can't really think when I look at those photos, the word "erseholes" continually flashes in my head.

[lapsedhibee]

http://markgorman.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/osborne-bullingdon.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/29/article-0-024784E6000005DC-390_468x321_popup.jpg

http://markgorman.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/cameron-bullingdon-dining-club2_468x420.jpg

aye, of course we are.Motion picture version:

Motion picture version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqObJtGrKaA)

[LiverpoolHibs]

Ha, he just got it tight from an audience member on Question Time. Excellent.

Why Should We Pay For Their Crisis...

[hibsdaft]

sorry, when i started this thread i didn't realise that Dave Cameron was into the Killers.

now i realise that we really are all in this together afterall.

so sorry.

[LiverpoolHibs]

sorry, when i started this thread i didn't realise that Dave Cameron was into the Killers.

now i realise that we really are all in this together afterall.

so sorry.

So even his pretend music taste is ****? Crikey!

[wpj]

Ha, he just got it tight from an audience member on Question Time. Excellent.

Why Should We Pay For Their Crisis...

Got off lightly by the panel though I think

[LiverpoolHibs]

Got off lightly by the panel though I think

Yup, because they all buy into the paradigm that the guy was challenging.

[wpj]

nick griffen next week? Did I hear right?

[Green Mikey]

nick griffen next week? Did I hear right?

In two weeks. Booing and hissing from the crowd when his name was mentioned!

[steakbake]

Yup, because they all buy into the paradigm that the guy was challenging.

I don't agree. That guy's comment didn't make sense at all.

The fact of the matter is that people (including me) voted Labour into power, who then deregulated the financial system to make it what it became and essentially sowed the seeds of our economic collapse.

We had the illusion of being better off, because banks, thanks to this deregulation enacted by the Labour government we voted in three times, were allowing people who simply couldn't afford it to buy their own houses with 100%+ loans as well as credit loans, cards etc for all those life's essentials such as a new car every couple of years, flat screen telly's and tarting up our over-priced palaces with useless trinkets and expensive decor. This was the illusion the Labour government wanted to create and it lulled us into thinking Brown had performed an economic miracle.

It was built on sand for all of us, whether wealthy or poor, bankers, public sector workers, private sector workers etc so yes, we are indeed all in it together.

[Beefster]

The inverted snobbery on parts of this thread is remarkable. I'm sure it's not down to jealousy though.

Perhaps Osborne's inherited wealth means that we won't have F1 supremos formulating government policy or Indian businessmen getting fast-tracked passports in 'suspicious' circumstances.

I'd also bet that George Galloway is richer than the majority of MPs.

[Steve-O]

Where these people have come from (through no choice of their own) is really quite irrelevant IMO.

[hibsdaft]

Where these people have come from (through no choice of their own) is really quite irrelevant IMO.

it shouldn't stop them wanting to become the government, but it should stop them from using idiotic patronising soundbites like "we all in this together".

[Betty Boop]

The inverted snobbery on parts of this thread is remarkable. I'm sure it's not down to jealousy though.

Perhaps Osborne's inherited wealth means that we won't have F1 supremos formulating government policy or Indian businessmen getting fast-tracked passports in 'suspicious' circumstances.

I'd also bet that George Galloway is richer than the majority of MPs.

What makes you think that? At least George Galloway doesn't claim MPs expenses.

[BravestHibs]

Where these people have come from (through no choice of their own) is really quite irrelevant IMO.

I would disagree with that to be honest. The fact, in itself, that they were born into wealth isn't the issue but it's what goes along with being born into wealth that undoubtedly is. They will potentially be running the lives of 60 million people where the average wage is roughly £20,000 a year. They have absolutely no idea what it's like to have to live on that kind of money and so cannot possibly be trusted to do what is right by the majority. It's the sense of entitlement that makes them feel like they are the people who should be running the country that grates with me. These are people who are succesful in this field becauseof where they came from not because they are the best for the job. You can afford to go to Eton so you are able to run the country. That doesn't hold water for me.

I can only assume as I don't have the figures but David Cameron has got a personal wealth of £30 million which has got to put him in the top 3% in this country, how he can have any idea about what is best for the remaining 97% and in particular those at the opposing end of the scale who need the most help, I would love to know.

[Killiehibbie]

I don't agree. That guy's comment didn't make sense at all.

The fact of the matter is that people (including me) voted Labour into power, who then deregulated the financial system to make it what it became and essentially sowed the seeds of our economic collapse.

We had the illusion of being better off, because banks, thanks to this deregulation enacted by the Labour government we voted in three times, were allowing people who simply couldn't afford it to buy their own houses with 100%+ loans as well as credit loans, cards etc for all those life's essentials such as a new car every couple of years, flat screen telly's and tarting up our over-priced palaces with useless trinkets and expensive decor. This was the illusion the Labour government wanted to create and it lulled us into thinking Brown had performed an economic miracle.

It was built on sand for all of us, whether wealthy or poor, bankers, public sector workers, private sector workers etc so yes, we are indeed all in it together.

So is it Labour and the banks to blame for all these people who borrowed too much money? I was told not to buy anything unless I had the money to pay for it and apart from a mortgage have always done that.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I don't agree. That guy's comment didn't make sense at all.

The fact of the matter is that people (including me) voted Labour into power, who then deregulated the financial system to make it what it became and essentially sowed the seeds of our economic collapse.

We had the illusion of being better off, because banks, thanks to this deregulation enacted by the Labour government we voted in three times, were allowing people who simply couldn't afford it to buy their own houses with 100%+ loans as well as credit loans, cards etc for all those life's essentials such as a new car every couple of years, flat screen telly's and tarting up our over-priced palaces with useless trinkets and expensive decor. This was the illusion the Labour government wanted to create and it lulled us into thinking Brown had performed an economic miracle.

It was built on sand for all of us, whether wealthy or poor, bankers, public sector workers, private sector workers etc so yes, we are indeed all in it together.

I don't think that logically follows. When every major political party wholeheartedly supports the neo-liberal political consensus I don't think voting in one of those parties then makes the electorate complicit in their economic crimes/failures - even moreso considering the inherently undemocratic nature of our 'democracy'.

It's simply not true to say that the average person - through actions such as taking unsustainable loans etc. etc. - is as much culpable for the crisis as the banks and the financial system generally. Arguably all that meant is that the crisis hit later than it would have done anyway - ie. consumer borrowing was necessary to sustain growth for as long as it did.

I think the most interesting aspect of this recession is the complete lack of context or precedent given to it in the media and other areas. Like it's come completely out of the blue, unfathered and unmothered; rather than what it is - a rather extreme example of something that is completely integral to the way that capitalism (or more properly neo-liberalism) operates. This isn't different or new - it's pretty much following the course of every single recession and depression in the history of capitalism.

Osbourne is (like most of the Cameron-ites) attempting to ally extreme monetarism with an old fasioned One Nation Toryism suggesting that we (The Nation) all created this mess, we all need to get out of it and that all our interests are aligned. Well, they are not - quite the opposite.

[steakbake]

So is it Labour and the banks to blame for all these people who borrowed too much money? I was told not to buy anything unless I had the money to pay for it and apart from a mortgage have always done that.

Doesn't change the fact that there are many people who are simply not living in the real world about the mess we are in. At one stage, the UK was a bawhair away from asking the IMF for a bail out. Like Iceland, Hungary, Ukraine and Pakistan.

Now we have to pay down the debts and it will affect us all. Therefore we are all in this together.

It's not Labour to blame for us taking on the credit, but they created the circumstances in which it was possible by deregulating the banks. What I don't accept is that people should be creditting them with some kind of economic prowess when it was really all built on nothing at all.

[JimBHibees]

Doesn't change the fact that there are many people who are simply not living in the real world about the mess we are in. At one stage, the UK was a bawhair away from asking the IMF for a bail out. Like Iceland, Hungary, Ukraine and Pakistan.

Now we have to pay down the debts and it will affect us all. Therefore we are all in this together.

It's not Labour to blame for us taking on the credit, but they created the circumstances in which it was possible by deregulating the banks. What I don't accept is that people should be creditting them with some kind of economic prowess when it was really all built on nothing at all.

Totally agree with that. End to boom and bust and Mr Prudent, my erchie.

[Beefster]

I can only assume as I don't have the figures but David Cameron has got a personal wealth of £30 million which has got to put him in the top 3% in this country, how he can have any idea about what is best for the remaining 97% and in particular those at the opposing end of the scale who need the most help, I would love to know.

Cameron's has claimed that figure is nonsense.

Again though, it's inverted snobbery. It's just a reverse of a wealthy or upper class person saying "what qualifies a man earning £20k a year to govern us?".

There will be (and are now) cabinet ministers who know what poverty is like. That's a consequence of parliament being open to anyone, irrespective of background.

[Bishop Hibee]

Cameron's has claimed that figure is nonsense.

Again though, it's inverted snobbery. It's just a reverse of a wealthy or upper class person saying "what qualifies a man earning £20k a year to govern us?".

There will be (and are now) cabinet ministers who know what poverty is like. That's a consequence of parliament being open to anyone, irrespective of background.

No inverted snobbery or jealousy with me. I've got at least 2 "self-made" millionaires I count as mates and they are quite happy to mix in my company as I am in there's.

I just think it's wrong that a privileged elite will be more than likely running the country come May 2010. I'm not in it together with them, although all donations are welcome if they fancy a bit of wealth redistribution, next years Champions League tickets to pay for etc. :wink:

[Steve-O]

it shouldn't stop them wanting to become the government, but it should stop them from using idiotic patronising soundbites like "we all in this together".

What would you say if they said "we're not in this together but we'll try our best to help out the peasants"?

[(((Fergus)))]

No inverted snobbery or jealousy with me. I've got at least 2 "self-made" millionaires I count as mates and they are quite happy to mix in my company as I am in there's.

I just think it's wrong that a privileged elite will be more than likely running the country come May 2010. I'm not in it together with them, although all donations are welcome if they fancy a bit of wealth redistribution, next years Champions League tickets to pay for etc. :wink:

What if, coincidentally, they happen to be the best available candidates for the job?

[hibsbollah]

What if, coincidentally, they happen to be the best available candidates for the job?

Then they should demonstrate what and how they would do better, instead of giving us fatuous nonsense about 'the common good' and the Tories caring about the poor.

[hibsdaft]

What would you say if they said "we're not in this together but we'll try our best to help out the peasants"?

i'd be bemused firstly. then i'd enjoy watching them die a death at the polls.

[Beefster]

On the topic of politicians and how worthy they are of leading us....

Can a politician stoop much lower than using an opponent's dead son to score political points?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6283938/Ben-Bradshaws-callous-twitter-attack-on-David-Cameron-condemned.html

Bradshaw's point is irrelevant anyway as both parties have pledged to protect health spending.

[hibsdaft]

Can a politician stoop much lower than using an opponent's dead son to score political points?

i don't think so no, ben bradshaw is and always has been pure sc*m but thats a new low even for him.

its an issue which should go anywhere near politics and Cameron was wrong imo to mention it in his speech.

[ancient hibee]

Can't remember the last PM who wasn't pretty well off coming nto office.As for toffs-Blair went to Fettes-Darling to Loretto-who cares.