What with Ed Balls talking about the Tories destroying the country by leading the fast growing economy, creating jobs that we currently have, as opposed to his spend, spend, spend policies and Ed Miliband saying that Labour are the party of fiscal responsibility, is a tacit admission that people might not think they are, based somewhat judgementally, on past performance.
Now the US enters the same territory. Hilary Clinton wants to be the first female President (might work, Obama was elected solely because he was black). And what she hopes most of all is that you won't remember her recent poor performances and chicanery. She certainly hopes you won't mention her involvement, via that titan of manhood, her husband, in bringing forward the banking crisis.
Now, we are aware that many processes were at work, mainly the ability to be rewarded despite failure and led to an inevitable collapse of a house made of hubris cards. But it was given an almighty shove when the Clinton administration brought in new rules, basically insisting that banks give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them.
To meet the targets, banks got creative; low start repayments made people think they could afford the mortgage, the salesmen got rich on the commissions and banks sold on the worthless paper to other investors, bundled with some that might work out OK. When so many didn't, kerboom! Full scale banking crisis.
New Labour, who were very cosy with the money in the banks, caught a cold. Their reckless borrowing was because Brown had convinced himself (but probably no-one else, oh, maybe Robert Peston) that there would never be a downturn again. Brown had cured boom and bust. He sold our gold and bought Euros (interestingly showing his complete lack of financial nous - he announced to the markets he was going to be selling a lot of gold so the price rocketed downwards).
So when the banking crisis hit here, we were already deeply in the do-do hence it taking so long to climb back out. All the 'austerity' the Left squeal about without identifying is resetting required due to Labour having no idea how to govern whatsoever. Every Labour administration has left the country in a mess. Now Hilary Clinton thinks the US is ready for more.
Politics, current affairs and ideas as they drift through my head. UK based personal opinion designed to feed or seed debate.
Slideshow
Showing posts with label US. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US. Show all posts
Wednesday, 15 April 2015
Saturday, 1 March 2014
Ukraine
There is much debate as we approach the 100th anniversary of the start of WW1 about whether Britain should have stayed out, exactly why it was fought, is the Blackadder version actually what the Left believe to be a documentary?
But one thing is clear, a small incident in a backwater kicked off puffed up indignation from powerful countries looking for an excuse to take offence. Countries took 'positions' not to protect anything tangible, but to validate action they wanted to take anyway.
And then there is the excuse for WW2; that Germans in a foreign country needed protecting.
Which brings us to where we are today in the Ukraine. The EU has been in the region (and was heavily involved in the trouble at the inception, trying to scoop Ukraine into its empire), but have you any idea what they have been saying, what they propose? No, didn't think so.
The US? Here the weak and habitual work-dodging President, Obama, seems to have had a recollection that the Russians are the enemy. So he is quoting in that weird, homely, insincere way platitudes of American resilience and standing firm. And Russia should take care. Who knows, he might even try to find out what the hell is going on out there and maybe even, where 'there' is.
Russia under Putin, it has to be said is doing a half decent job of catching the West out and getting his own way. Yet the feeling always is that he is a thick, thug and spends all his time concentrating on corruption and how to get away with it. But the thug bit is definitely there, so he will push the military side. And he won't want to lose influence in a region such as Ukraine. Not sure, apart from the 'democracy' shout, what the reason is for the US (or the squeaking Cameron) to get involved.
Unless it is to posture against 'the enemy' Russia. in which case there will be war.
But one thing is clear, a small incident in a backwater kicked off puffed up indignation from powerful countries looking for an excuse to take offence. Countries took 'positions' not to protect anything tangible, but to validate action they wanted to take anyway.
And then there is the excuse for WW2; that Germans in a foreign country needed protecting.
Which brings us to where we are today in the Ukraine. The EU has been in the region (and was heavily involved in the trouble at the inception, trying to scoop Ukraine into its empire), but have you any idea what they have been saying, what they propose? No, didn't think so.
The US? Here the weak and habitual work-dodging President, Obama, seems to have had a recollection that the Russians are the enemy. So he is quoting in that weird, homely, insincere way platitudes of American resilience and standing firm. And Russia should take care. Who knows, he might even try to find out what the hell is going on out there and maybe even, where 'there' is.
Russia under Putin, it has to be said is doing a half decent job of catching the West out and getting his own way. Yet the feeling always is that he is a thick, thug and spends all his time concentrating on corruption and how to get away with it. But the thug bit is definitely there, so he will push the military side. And he won't want to lose influence in a region such as Ukraine. Not sure, apart from the 'democracy' shout, what the reason is for the US (or the squeaking Cameron) to get involved.
Unless it is to posture against 'the enemy' Russia. in which case there will be war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)