³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

AND WHAT SHALL SHAMINDER DO NOW - POOR THING?

I find the rocking and weeping works for me Shaminder - give it a go.

some reasons why the markets are not impressed with 'the plan'.

1. the new plan requires the government to get ownership in any companies that participate. That will only serve as a disincentive on the part of the more sound financial firms to take part in the plan and anything that reduces participation reduces the market (or liquidity) for these assets and that serves to defeat its purpose.

2. the plan guarantees that taxpayers will get repaid in full if the government loses money on the deal. Paid by whom? The firms that participated in bailout? All financial firms? The whole idea of repayment in full is beyond absurd anyway because if the plan fails, there won't be any financial firms left to pay for any losses.

3.the plan "puts taxpayers first in line to recover assets if participating company fails." That means the cost for financial firms to issue debt is going to skyrocket, because any bondholder of a firm that participates is subordinate to the government. Who in their right mind is going to purchase the debt of a participating financial firm in that case unless they are getting an astronomical rate of interest as compensation?


in other words is the focus of the plan restoring liquidity or some political feel gooding?

given the financial crisis was begun by fannie and freddie who paid millions to politicians for 'light regulation' and whose books had not been signed off for 5 years it remains significant this relationship between financials and political funding has not been broken. So a few mosquitoes may have been swatted but the swamp from where they came is still there?

Conservative party conference -eh? What an irrelevance faced with the current situation.
Brown must think that there is a God after all. Which party set up the "Free market forces" and supported the City of London whiz kids? Thatcher! No wonder the E.U. calls the City "The Casino".

As I blogged weeks ago we now know what the Tories have in store for us when they get elected. Tax increases and excuses that they are clearing up the mess Labour has left them.

I still have yet to hear of a definite workable policy they propose but it is early days yet. Getting rid of Local Education Authorities is one I have heard with 5000 new schools. The ending of national pay awards is still their aim. Teachers beware. I become a very powerful figure as I am Chair of Finance in 2 schools, one which is in deficit- But Turkeys will still vote for Christmas.

The Tories don't seem to be baying for an election in case Labour dump Gordon (its been a few days since the conference and perhaps is a "decent" interval) and felt obliged to have one - or not.

You would assume there could never be a better time for them.

Sadly with the voting system the Lib Dems will probably barely progress.

How did we get to this stage?

Leadership is a "fiefdom" passed from one "strong" leader to another. Ordinary people lose out. So soon we'll say goodbye to the Scots, probably the Welsh later, and there will be turmoil in England.

Perhaps I wasn't the sunny kid in class on reflection.

@4 Cheer up! Once the Scots really get the media-hyped feel for independence, the English will finally wake up and say 'Oi - not fair. We've been doing....' Debates will occupy blogs galore and both sides will complain about monies spent and monies earned. Sensible GreatBritain will continue. Enjoy local difference. Appreciate family strength.

Shaminder Nahal may know the answer to this already.
It is the subject that is never mentioned so may be conspiracy by omission.
A sound or honest money system would sort this out.
This is an old idea but never gets discussed.
The people through their government must take control of the creation and control of credit as we do with cash.
This would save huge amounts of interest.
Then distribute the benefits as an annual dividend to all adults in the country.
Taxes could go down.
97% of money in society has to be borrowed into existence, with interest.
Therefore there is never enough money to pay the interest. Madness!
This is no accident but by the design of an interest group.
Who benefits? Follow the money, but it is obious to all now.
Wealth like energy is not destroyed but simply transferred.
Islamic banking still regards interest or usury as immoral, as Christianity used to.

At last the Tories are coming out of the wood-work.
Latest policy-no-ploy to bribe electors.- Keep Councill taxes at current level for two years, when they get in power.

How are they to pay for it? "Cut the waste in Councils" as the Tory spokelady said this lunchtime.. So all you who have Tory Councils or with large Tory Cllrs. ask them why are they currently wasting your money and what services, sorry waste, do they propose to cut? I will ask my current Tory/Lib dem coalition the same question.

I bet you never get an answer.

Warwickshire County Council are cutting many rural speed limits on the strength of a DfT Circular 1/2006.

IF the government allow local authorities to cut speed limits to 40Mph, transport in rural areas will be put back to 1930s standards. Pre 1974 local councils spent an absolute fortune improving and widening many miles of road between rural communities to make them safe for the then national limit of 70 Mph. If cuts in speed limits go through, the investment of our far sighted forefathers will be completely wasted. Cutting speed limits will also increase fuel consumption for rural drivers. It would appear that today's politicians have had their brains washed by well organized anti speed campaigners and greens, who's main aim appears to be to bring back the Red Flag Act and turn the UK into a third world country when it comes to transport. If road safety campaigners were serious about actually reducing accidents they would all propose annual eyesight tests. However, as they get most of their funding from the transport industry it would appear that they would prefer more accidents at lower speeds.

I expect that most rural accidents are caused by tourists going relatively slow watching the scenery not the road ahead. Reducing rural speed limits to 40 Mph will not cut accidents as most rural accidents occur in locations where the safe speed may be as low as 30 or even less than 20 Mph. Cutting the current allowed maximum of 60 Mph will actually encourage some drivers to go faster where road conditions do not allow higher speed.

Many rural road accidents are caused by drivers foolishly swerving to avoid small animals like rabbits and pheasants. Killing something like a sheep is surely preferable to risking you life, running over things like rabbits and pheasants wont even damage your vehicle. Similarly parking in potentially dangerous locations like in blind bends and over the brow of a hill can be easily avoided. Pedestrians should not always follow the highway code to the letter, crossing over to the side of the bend where you can easily be seen from a reasonable distance is advisable

Keeping rural speed limits at the current 60Mph is more important now the prospect of spy in the sky satellite tracking and road pricing looms on the horizon. It would appear that there are plans to put lower limits on every road except the more expensive trunk roads. This will restrict choice to avoid the routes with the highest rates and still get to your destination in a reasonable time. It could be said that rural speed limits are almost impractical or impossible to police, but with spy in the sky tracking, they can get you anywhere between two fixed points. Any average driver is faced with the prospect of becoming a criminal he is skilful enough to complete his rural journey at an average over 40Mph. I seem to remember of something in New Labour's "clause 4 " about allowing people to attain their full potential, not much sign of it in policy when it comes to driving.

It is pretty obvious that those leading the call for lower rural speed limits are almost exclusively townies who are probably not good drivers themselves. This country is being wrecked by narrow minded people who because they can't do something safely themselves think that nobody else is capable of doing it either. Like the Foxhunting Ban, policy is all about trying to destroy the rural economy so that ten bob fat cat city dwellers can " Escape to the Country " and take the homes currently occupied by indigenous rural people. Like the road fuel tax escalator, its all part of a general trend for ethnic cleansing by stealth. Rural Post Office closures are also likely to be considered if the legal time taken for collections / delivery significantly increases.

With Banks being nationalised here and in the states and far right politics gaining strength in Austria- perhaps an overall view on the way global politics appears to be moving away from the center and what this may mean for the Conservative party conference and their future direction?

The ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ is a great institution but its left of centre jounalists are given a bankrupt party in government too much leeway.

The damage inflicted on this and future generations by Blair, Brown and Darling will cripple us for 20 years.

I don't necessarily feel the Tories have the right answers but in the real world a long dead slug would know more on what to do.

Treat Labour as they now deserve with manure and toss them out with the bi-weekly refuse never to return with any luck

Did you notice these somewhat indiscrete comments by Sir Victor Blank about how
he lobbied Brown on a plane to get rules
on competition and bank takeover relaxed?