Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Cool answer... so what about the Free Market and CIS/СНГ (would it work within our Commonwealth)?
    I believe that the free market is good in principle, but it is open to far too many exploitations. From evidence of recessions caused by human greed, I believe that the free market needs regulated to keep it stable. I don't know what CIS is.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In the interest of openness, our MPs for the 15th Parliament will be:

    big-bang-theory, davidmarsh01, DebatingGreg, gmseahorse, Indievertigo, LPK, Maddog Jones, mevidek, Mr Dangermouse, rockrunride, RoryS, TopHat, WhatTheFunk, xXedixXx
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TopHat)
    In the interest of openness, our MPs for the 15th Parliament will be:

    big-bang-theory, davidmarsh01, DebatingGreg, gmseahorse, Indievertigo, LPK, Maddog Jones, mevidek, Mr Dangermouse, rockrunride, RoryS, TopHat, WhatTheFunk, xXedixXx
    Some good choices there.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    I believe that the free market is good in principle, but it is open to far too many exploitations. From evidence of recessions caused by human greed, I believe that the free market needs regulated to keep it stable. I don't know what CIS is.
    The recession caused by human greed? :rofl: no it was caused by mismanagement of funds what exploitations? the free market is exactly that free, without stupid socialist regulations.

    CIS is Commonwealth of Independent States/Содружество Независимых Государств, it is a trading block... do you think that the UK should have something similar with the British Commonwealth?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    The recession caused by human greed? :rofl: no it was caused by mismanagement of funds what exploitations? the free market is exactly that free, without stupid socialist regulations.

    CIS is Commonwealth of Independent States/Содружество Независимых Государств, it is a trading block... do you think that the UK should have something similar with the British Commonwealth?
    Mismanagement of funds caused fundamentally by human greed. Bankers wanted to sell more and more loans to gain a larger bonus so they started giving loans to people who clearly couldn't afford to pay them back. They then didn't get a lot of this money back and they got in ****, in simple terms. There's plenty of exploitations in the free market, the rich can exploit poorer people, such as offering unacceptably low wages, or forcing people who need the job to work in unacceptably poor conditions. I think you're just intent of rabidly supporting your notion of the "free market" that you're blinkered to any possible shortcomings there could be in it at all.

    I'm in favour of any trade agreements for the UK, so I would be in favour of any agreement which favours trade in the UK as long as it did not impinge on any current trading and economic partnerships.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    Some of your Minister's did nothing last term. This would introduce the doctrine of Ministerial Accountability to this House

    I don't want to drag up old arguments. Minister's should be held to account and my Amendment does that
    Why is ministerial accountability so important on an internet forum intended for fun? I feel that departments in some ways aren't the best idea on here, but I'm willing to go along with them. I certainly don't think that people should be forced to release some unnecessary statements when the party could be writing bills. This is one of the rare occasions where I agree with CyclopsRock :lol: If I was in government I certainly wouldn't produce any statements or anything, and no amendment you make could change that.

    How the hell is it dragging up old arguments? You literally just proposed this amendment, and when I say I'm disagreeing with it you say I'm dragging up old arguments? How is that even possible? Just because you say something doesn't make it true.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Mismanagement of funds caused fundamentally by human greed. Bankers wanted to sell more and more loans to gain a larger bonus so they started giving loans to people who clearly couldn't afford to pay them back. They then didn't get a lot of this money back and they got in ****, in simple terms. There's plenty of exploitations in the free market, the rich can exploit poorer people, such as offering unacceptably low wages, or forcing people who need the job to work in unacceptably poor conditions. I think you're just intent of rabidly supporting your notion of the "free market" that you're blinkered to any possible shortcomings there could be in it at all.
    Oh blame the bankers :facepalm:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Oh blame the bankers :facepalm:
    Yup. Who's fault would you say it was? Farm workers?
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Yup. Who's fault would you say it was? Farm workers?
    Socialist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Socialist.
    Social democrat, actually. You're looking for these guys.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Mismanagement of funds caused fundamentally by human greed. Bankers wanted to sell more and more loans to gain a larger bonus so they started giving loans to people who clearly couldn't afford to pay them back. They then didn't get a lot of this money back and they got in ****, in simple terms. There's plenty of exploitations in the free market, the rich can exploit poorer people, such as offering unacceptably low wages, or forcing people who need the job to work in unacceptably poor conditions. I think you're just intent of rabidly supporting your notion of the "free market" that you're blinkered to any possible shortcomings there could be in it at all.

    I'm in favour of any trade agreements for the UK, so I would be in favour of any agreement which favours trade in the UK as long as it did not impinge on any current trading and economic partnerships.
    eeer what. The only reason banks could do that is because it was the government lending them the money. The BOE kept rates as low as possible precisely SO banks would lend to people. They aren't being "greedy", they're "making money". When you give a loan to someone, you have to cross-reference the chances of them defaulting with the potential profit - that's what sets the interest rate given. If there's a low chance of them defaulting, they get a much lower interest rate. But of course, for a bank, there's an additional variable - how cheaply THEY can get the money. If they have to pay 10% on all their borrowings from the central bank, then suddenly there's no way they could lend to higher-risk clients, as everytime the banks costs go up, that's a multiplier in the calculation. Conversely, the lower the rate they have, the more they can lend to those more likely to default because the greater savings for them (and thus greater profits) mean they can afford to write off more losses.

    Would the crisis have happened without "greed"? No, of course not, but without "greed" absolutely nothing would happen so that's a moot point. Banks ONLY lend so as they can make a profit, and the economy only moves at all because they lend, so let's not sit here and proletyse about being "greedy" as if there's some objective metric for what is and isn't greed within the context of earning money simply for lending out other bits of money.

    We all know why this happened - this happened because the government was rigging the BoE interest rate ("It's independent!!" Of course it is, Gordon.) so as to bolster House Prices and thus sew up several million Middle-England voters who's net worth increased 5% a year because of some fiddling that the BoE was doing to it's balance sheet. The key thing is this: A failure of regulation would be when a bank was doing something that either the government hadn't accounted for, or simply didn't notice. That's not what this was. This wasn't a case of the government not "catching" the banks, this was a case of the government actively supplying the banks with the means to do what they did. Without the government supplying them with cheap money via the Bank of England (in exactly the same way the banks then went on to supply borrowers), the banks would have had to have relied upon current accounts and investors in order to raise money to then lend, which would have pushed up costs and made it impossible to "greedily" lend to poor people.

    And that's the thing. The key thing up there is not the free market, or liberalised markets, or a problem of deregulation. You wouldn't find a Libertarian supporting such policies - but then, we never do support the government intervening into the economy; that's you guys. Anyone who doesn't understand that it was the government intervening in the first place that caused the problem simply doesn't understand what happened and probably needs to watch a bit less Will Self on Question Time wracking up applause from people who don't understand the issue by saying things that demonstrates he doesn't understand the issue.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by TopHat)
    Social democrat, actually. You're looking for these guys.
    Did I say I was on about Labour specifically? no, and anyway the left are all the same to me.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Why is ministerial accountability so important on an internet forum intended for fun? I feel that departments in some ways aren't the best idea on here, but I'm willing to go along with them. I certainly don't think that people should be forced to release some unnecessary statements when the party could be writing bills. This is one of the rare occasions where I agree with CyclopsRock :lol: If I was in government I certainly wouldn't produce any statements or anything, and no amendment you make could change that.

    How the hell is it dragging up old arguments? You literally just proposed this amendment, and when I say I'm disagreeing with it you say I'm dragging up old arguments? How is that even possible? Just because you say something doesn't make it true.
    You have shown complete disregard to the Guidance Document and have told everyone how a Labour led Government is run.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    You have shown complete disregard to the Guidance Document and have told everyone how a Labour led Government is run.
    how ****ing outrageous
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    You have shown complete disregard to the Guidance Document and have told everyone how a Labour led Government is run.
    Shame that. I run a government how I think is best, not how some bloody document tells me to.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidmarsh01)
    Shame that. I run a government how I think is best, not how some bloody document tells me to.
    I think that was Stalin's stance towards the constitution of the USSR too.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    I think that was Stalin's stance towards the constitution of the USSR too.
    That was a constitution, not a bloody guidance document, and this in an online forum for God's sake.

    You must be the biggest wind up merchant I've ever come across :lol:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Anyway the left are all the same to me.
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Socialist.

    I was going to reply to your previous point, but your childish outbursts are ridiculous. There's no point in continuing the debate if you're going to be nonconstructive and immature.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    You have shown complete disregard to the Guidance Document and have told everyone how a Labour led Government is run.
    NOT THE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

    We shall have an election right this moment. The voters will surely want to punish Labour at the polls for this!
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Will Labour be fielding a shadow cabinet/frontbench team this term?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.