The point is that you can't really politicise this.
A decision was taken in each case, no doubt after consultation. Any party in government would have received the same advise and probably taken the same decision.

If they are that bloody good then why, once again, do we find ourselves in the same bloody situation today Sherlock? Because they toe the line, that's why. Fk me mate, it's hardly quantum physics!
As for banks lending money, the correlation between QE funds and the rise in stock-market levels are way too close to be just a coincidence (I'd post a link but as you spend soooooooo much time on HOL it'd be a waste of time), this is where OUR money has gone, NOT to the man on the street (us!)......who will be paying back this money.

I honestly thought you were better than this. You live and learn.

Buy Litecoin.

'experts' like the Bank of England for example we need closure with their independence.

[Link]

#forallhisflaws

This campaign made me laugh.... missed it initially, but HIGNFY highlighted it last night.

Some of the tweets have been hilarious.

We all know what Corbyn is. No surprise at all that he would praise Castro. That's why he will never be Prime Minister.
He and his little band of half wit Marxist supporters and the hangers on like Dianne Abbott are to be thanked. They will keep Labour out of power for decades.

Sometimes you have to make diplomatic noises toward scumbags.
Corbyn had no need to say anything positive about Castro other than to give a nod to his far left support.
You know, the type who keep you as leader at the expense of the party.

You have to remember the Falklands and the wider politics involved.

We could all trot this stuff out. Like the reports that emerged this week of 'statesman' Ken Livingston's aides cheering when 9/11 happened.

However, Legal, it displays a lack of depth when debating matters.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

I believe the term is hindsight.

Can you be sure that we are worse off? The banking system is not something I can claim to be an expert on.

The UK was in an almost unique historical position, and made the right decision. Not bailing the banks out would have created unknowable and unpredictable consequences, that included catastrophic destruction of the UK economy, and a knock on effect to the world economy.

Even in hindsight, the decision to take the predictable outcome, of a financial hit, loss of confidence but with the assurance of stability only the state could provide was the right one.

Had those banks gone to the wall it was entirely plausible that their collapse would have hit the banks that didn't need to be bailed out and ripped through the UK financial interests (which is our primary economic generator). The entire economic status of the UK wasn't worth risking.

Now some of the decisions around that bail out can be questioned - but not the idea of ensuring an entirely unpredictable and possibly totally devastating outcome didn't occur

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]