Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Another Right Royal Rip Off?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

50% OFF new PortraitPro 12, plus EXTRA 5% OFF code EPHZROS414
brian1208
brian1208 e2 Member 109977 forum postsbrian1208 vcard United Kingdom12 Constructive Critique Points
21 Nov 2012 - 3:40 PM


Quote: The Tulip bubble would have seemed a good idea at the time because plenty of folk were making money from it. People didn't see sense until the music stopped and those holding tulips had their fingers burned.


I've just had an e-mail from the Telegraph offering me "Half-price Tulips" - should I be worried? Wink

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
21 Nov 2012 - 3:40 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

strawman
strawman  1021991 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
21 Nov 2012 - 5:49 PM


Quote: I've just had an e-mail from the Telegraph offering me "Half-price Tulips" - should I be worried?

Only if you are buying with a Nigerian prince who is offering to buy them off you at twice the price after you buy them Wink

jondf
jondf  72473 forum posts
28 Nov 2012 - 3:08 PM


Quote: ....he was a good chancellor because of the stability he brought to the country, but unlucky about the time he became PM

Yes, I agree Tongue

But it is was perhaps a little unfortunate that Gordon Brown didn't realise the full potential he showed early on in his political career. A tragedy for the man if not the country. Yet prime minister Brown (in tandem with Alistair Darling) was quick to realise the implications of Britain's first failing bank in over 150 years. The speed of UK government action over Northern Rock was a decisive move in saving the world's banking system from collapse. Brown subsequently drew together and co-ordinated the G20 industrialised nations towards an outcome that could so easily have been otherwise when copmpared to what we're experiencing now.

The difference between Brown and Cameron is as it's always been between Labour and Conservative. In principal, one tries to look after the many whilst the other only looks after the few.

collywobles
29 Nov 2012 - 8:57 AM


Quote: The difference between Brown and Cameron is as it's always been between Labour and Conservative. In principal, one tries to look after the many whilst the other only looks after the few.

Or - one tries to look after the many at the expense of the few and the other looks after everyone who look after themselves!

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
29 Nov 2012 - 9:10 AM


Quote: ....he was a good chancellor because of the stability he brought to the country, but unlucky about the time he became PM

Yes, I agree Tongue

But it is was perhaps a little unfortunate that Gordon Brown didn't realise the full potential he showed early on in his political career. A tragedy for the man if not the country.

Thank heavens he got booted out when he did. He was the most disastrous ever Prime Minister. Flogged off a good percentage of our gold reserves at rock bottom price, swelled the career structure of the benefit classes bought votes by swelling the Public sector and giving ginormous pay rises with big bonuses for little effort and without proof of any attainment whatsoever. Spent all our money and accused anybody who disaagreed with him of bigotry. I could fill so much more space here about his profligacy, raids on pension funds bloody hell there is so much to tell. As I said, thank heavens he has gone.

Last Modified By Focus_Man at 29 Nov 2012 - 9:22 AM
thewilliam
29 Nov 2012 - 10:54 AM

Do you remember the toy steering wheels that attached to the dashboard with a rubber sucker? The description of GB as a good Prime Minister reminds me of a child that thinks he/she is a good driver because the car doesn't crash.

GB was proud of his hands-off approach to banking regulation which allowed the sector to go so badly astray. He was just following the lead of his master, George W who repealed the laws that Rooseveldt had put into place to regulate the banking sector.

When Bill Clinton left office, the US budget surplus was something like 300 Billion and was doubling year on year. It didn't take long for his successor to change all that.

Just a modern version of the Dutch Tulip Bubble.

collywobles
29 Nov 2012 - 11:51 AM

Gordon Brown didn't have an hapeth of leadership quality in him at all.

Last Modified By collywobles at 29 Nov 2012 - 11:51 AM
thewilliam
29 Nov 2012 - 1:10 PM


Quote: Gordon Brown didn't have an hapeth of leadership quality in him at all.

True though this might be, I suspect that the people wanted an end to the "velvet facism" that seemed to be a core policy of New Labour. Never has any govenment been so intent on taking our civil liberties. Silly laws as diverse as a householder being fined £1200 for putting his dustbin out a day early or the anti-terrorism legislation. We need to remember that it was GB who wanted to give the police the power to hold a suspect for up to 90 days without charge.

Suddenly all sorts of offences come under the "terrorism" banner. It started with Walter Wolfgang arrested for heckling at a Labour Party Conference and then allowed some Councils to put citizens under surveillance in cases of secondary school catchments where a child is claimed to "live" at the grandparents' address.

Cameron didn't win the last election, GB lost it.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139370 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
29 Nov 2012 - 1:12 PM


Quote: Gordon Brown didn't have an hapeth of leadership quality in him at all.

There is a big difference between being No. 1 and No. 2 in the pecking order in almost every organisation.

Sometimes it would seem the No. 2 is the obvious person for the top job but different qualities are needed and those who are perfectly suited to the second-in-command position do not have ultimate leadership quality. Gordon Brown probably fits into that category.

Very recent examples of those in the No. 2 spot being passed over are the forthcoming vacancies for Governor of the Bank of England (Deputy Governor didn't get the job), and........... the Archbishop of Canterbury! (Archbishop of York didn't get the job).

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
29 Nov 2012 - 1:31 PM


Quote: Gordon Brown didn't have an hapeth of leadership quality in him at all.

There is a big difference between being No. 1 and No. 2 in the pecking order in almost every organisation.

Sometimes it would seem the No. 2 is the obvious person for the top job but different qualities are needed and those who are perfectly suited to the second-in-command position do not have ultimate leadership quality. Gordon Brown probably fits into that category.

Very recent examples of those in the No. 2 spot being passed over are the forthcoming vacancies for Governor of the Bank of England (Deputy Governor didn't get the job), and........... the Archbishop of Canterbury! (Archbishop of York didn't get the job).

Gordon Brown shouldn't have got the top job either. Now during the past 12 months Brown has collected his MPs salary plus £thousands of expenses but has appeared only once in the house and has never spoken at all. This just shows his lack of respect for his constituents and for those who pay his salary - us.

jondf
jondf  72473 forum posts
29 Nov 2012 - 1:59 PM


Quote: Gordon Brown shouldn't have got the top job either

I accept that it was all a bit cack-handed and self-congratulatory but still maintain that Brown, on the basis of his performance as chancellor, deserved an easier ride than he got.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.