????

1 packet of Milk Buttons (bribe - son) One milk chocolate bar (bribe eldest daughter) One packet of Rolos (reward - me) One Independent

Well. I think by 2007 sentiment was largely in with there being a potential crash (no-one got the severity) certainly CDOs were being questioned by then and the US property market was going down - which is why an economy based on asset prices rising for ever was so stooopid, so strikes me that the more astute on the EDF were looking at what was starting to bubble rather than huge premeditated foresight, sorry chaps.

No conspiracy agreed just went out of control and no-one (or very few) saw it happening so can we hardly solely blame the bankers for saying "This time it's different"...similar things were "No more boom and bust" and "?250,000" for a one bedder in SE22 is a great investment" Human greed and optimism (and it's in most of us) over rode the reality.

Eventually chinese labour will want more than a $1 an hour...that's when it will start to turn...fair time off

I think DJKQ has a point about self-certification et al. It's a bit of a cliche to say it but when I first got a mortgage in the 80s (deregulation had happened but early days) and whilst you didn't have to wear a suit and tie there was an element of a job interview to get a mortgage. I got out of ownership in 1999 and back in again in 2004 (yup. what a great 5 yaers to be out of the market :() and when I went back in it was like filling up your car with petrol in terms of ease and also checks...

RE China - what I think most people don't get is that this recession/slump is a paradigm shift in power to the developing countries. The West hasn't had its day but it's had its day with the share of wealth and resources it's had and globlly that's fair enough but it means painful change for most of us...pople still say "oh well i remember the recession in 1990s/80s" as if they're the same thing. Relaity Check on the way.

...get our economy better callibrated so we can afford to decide if we want to go down that path....the city looks on the up again to me and for now we should reluctantly be either be grateful through our gritted teeth and as Londoners frankly we have no choice or start gain which means reinventing our economic and social models based on far less wealth/income for us all....you ready?

I wouldn't argue against you Lousiana - if it is true then it does maen that we all need to pull together and the 'dismantling' of the welfare state as we know is inevitable. I think on the upside technology may rescue us yet...maybe

...but now is not the time to call their possible/probable bluff

Those banking practices have caused a global boom, cheap money, massive assett inflation, and huge government taxation takes for 10-20 years and that huge pyramid sale which has underpinned western economic growth has benefitted everyone DJKQ - it may have been a fallacy, it may have been shortsighted, annd it may need fixing, I tend to agree with some if your previous analysis on that, but its a nasty and inconvenient fact that everyone has benefitted from a boom to varying degrees (yes even the very poorest, though them the least) and the blame is split between Bankers, governemnts...AND you and me (as a generalisation as I don't know bugger all about your personal position). Convenient and unpopular as they are all they remain is a dump and easily targeted scapegoat for most of our culpability. It's Daily Mail like.

Hugenot I thought you'd be able to do a decent cost benefit analysis. If kids are a poor future investment for the UK let's scrap them and import all our future labour and tax payers...mmmmm

Nice one IV. I've thought long about this issue and have swung about on it and argued with the missus BUT, to David Carnell's and IV's shock I'm going to agree with them. 1) Kids are an assett for the future of our country, and if we don't have that as a starting point we'll we might as well give up 2) Benefits should be universal or they aren't 'benefits' but some form of graded income support and that is a very different kettle of fish in terms of measurement/status etc. The univerality of benefits should be mainatined, if child benefit shouldn't be a benefit then it shoiuld be removed in total and have to be a claimed benefit for those that need it. As others have pointed out, if benefits are means tetsed then shouldn't this apply to any state provision at a theoretical level? Health? Education? Higher income families will over contribute taxation in absolute terms over the next few years with higher NI, they already pay a higher tax rate on their income above the threshold and for those at the next level up this will be at 50%, so despite the lowest common denominator rhetoric they are doing their bit. If we remove universal from this type of benefit we start becoming more divided and tax payers question the value of their contributions even further. So Scrap it totally or keep it universal.

So, horrid as it is we should welcome ?7bn of city bonuses (taxed at 50%) the huge corporation tax receipts the banks will give us and a reasonably soon sell off of our shares in banks at a profit....and then think about how to rebalance our economy and put a break on excesses in the future, for now it's any port in a storm IMO

To be honest, the best I think we (us, companies the govt) can hope for is limping along for a 'fair few' more years with low inflation rates chipping away at our debts and a continued reduction in state spending and anemic growth in most private sector areas....it's going to be grim.

Yup - that's the huge potential downside. It's madness and hugely risky but it's potentially coming...didn't say I supported it. The Weimar republic would be a more apt and far scarier example actually Brendan.

Globally (but especially in the west) - countries, companies, individuals have a lot of debt, much of this is underpinned on overpriced assetts (largely commercial and domestic property); without incomes going up (govts, corporate or personal) and in a scenario of poor growth, job cuts, tax increases the only way of dealing with this debt is to hope inflation erodes it...piss poor for stability, economics, those on fixed incomes with savings, but if we don't get much economic growth the only alternative is even more cuts and the spiral gets worse (see Ireland) so, I believe governments will take the 'easy' way out - inflation or eventually we'll see economic catasrophe and potentially major social and political disorder in western countries. Everyone in the west owes far too much underpinned by false and propped up asset values and there's no sighn of this getting better (the debts - the asset prices are being propped up by QE etc). We, the west, badly need some significant economic growth. Or simpler if you owe ?100 quid and inflation is at 10% after 5 years you owe (some one do the maths please) about ?35 in real terms; if you owe ?100 and inflation is at 2% after 5 years you owe about ?85 in real terms.

Not 100% but I think it was replaced by the current bridge at East D station (which was once called Lordship Lane)....could well be rubbish though :-$

That's exactly the point Hugenot - if you add in the Business Services legal/accountancy etc that the expertise the City of London brings in it contributes nearly half of our current balance of payments defeceit on the plus side of the ledger....the UK would be an absolute basket case withot this business and yet people would potentially risk it all for actually minimum benefit 'cos it's all their fault'. God hopes 50% of the population don't "get what they wish for"... This doesn't mean we shouldn't try and re-balance our economy and/or get GLOBAL co-ordinated action to stop excess but peole swallow the hard truth, we need the City to be up and firing on all cylinders for now and the forseeable future to get us out of this hole...

300....wher's ladyM?

and my argument was that seriously wealthy people WHO HAVE DONE it themselves aren't on the whole just lucky - that's all. No - ohh they're great, they're my heros; they should be what we all aspire to. Fairly predictably - this has been ment with 1) "Lots of people inherit their wealth" - er, no sh1t sherlock 2) "God what a narrow aspiration...who'd drive the busses. you shallow person"Was never put forward as an aspiration for all just a fact. 3) "bankers are all w*nkers", may or not be true and gawd knows we've raked over it a million times, but not what I was talking about I'd reiterate - self-made millionairres may not all or always be pleasant, moral or anything to aspire to bUT they've by and large had the balls, drive, willingness to take risks and yes a bit of luck to get there. Most peole don't even try- and that's not a problem, they don't have to, many don't want to BUT they can't just dismiss those that do and make it as 'being lucky'.

or it's off

Not since I left a t of heir

Last post at DJ Sean, I'm not sticking up for them just pointing out DJKQs mad rant was just that.....

Do we? The evidence on this thread is that most middle-class lefties detest wealth.....

...still your rants keep me amused if i'm in my Jesus mood....ask Narnia/Declan