Council houses. The answer?

[peakman]

Instead of bailing out the building societies, why not bail out the dispossessed? The government buys the house about to be repossessed for the amount outstanding of the original loan, (forget any interest on the amount outstanding) then transfer the property to the local council, who then would collect a rent from the ex owners.

No one is made homeless, no one needs to be rehoused and after the usual period, the occupier can, or at least would have the option to, re-buy the property. This would ensure a family about to have their home repossessed, was not made homeless and if and when the recession is over, the family would at least have the chance to get back to where they left off.

To me this beats bailing out the greedy fat cats of the banking world, who brought all this upon us. Not only would this be the right thing to do, it would initially cost less and then to a greater or lesser degree be self financing.

Forget the banks, look after the people.

[waldo]

Too late Mr. P, they are already doing that, including a partial purchase scheme

[peakman]

Yes I did know that this was being considered. I just wanted to make the point that this would be, in my opinion, the preferred option, rather than throw billions into the black hole created by the banks and with no guarantee that it will do the trick.

What we need, in my opinion, is a leader who can think "out of the box", for the situation we are in will not be resolved using yesterdays and thus outdated, methods, the world has changed.

The world has, as Barrack Obama stated in his inaugural speech, entered a "New age" and the old way of thinking is, as he also said, "On the wrong side of history". Sadly we here in the U.K. seem to be stuck with a government is well and truly "on the wrong side of history". Or to put it in the vernacular, "They don't know what day it is".

[yord]

you can skirt around these issues all you want and until theres work available that will support and finance the population of a country your fecked if you operate within the system being used. There is not the work because others will do it more cost effective than you are willing to. Until this is addressed you cant proceed. End of story.

[peakman]

As usual Yord, I find you saying it as it is. Now I am drawn to this group because I enjoy debate and in the light of this, plus the fact that I take special notice of your posts on account that while they at times seem a tad enigmatic, I feel they are the product of a mind worth listening to. Therefore yord, have you yourself any thoughts as to how the world will, need must, change, if we are not to descend into the old international anarchies of the past?
P.S. And don't just say "No"

[yord]

the golden rule is that you never take it all. Well not only are they going to take it all, but theyre going to leave you in debt and your kids in debt. I havnt a clue what the percentages are and I really dont care either but I do know that a very high percentage of the worlds population fecking struggle just to get to eat on a daily basis, and can see no reason whatsoever why that isnt going to apply to the UK, and can give you hundreds of reasons why it is.Then again wtf do I know. I know that from yesterday I can no longer operate a forgien curency account , where money is transfered in euro into that account without the bank wanting 6gbp on every 100 euro entering and 3gbp for every hundred leaving. This may not seem so rediculous until you realise that the payments coming in electronically are already in euro , and being a rich capatilist pig , rarely leave once deposited. So in effect the bank wants me to pay them 9% ( 1gbp = 1 euro ) for sweet feck all. My other business accounts with the same bank are far more complex and are free of all charges.
I know today that I was refused service at a royal mail post office because the lad that runs this PO ( a good friend ) and staff of 3, says he couldnt cope as I had 25 recorded letters to post and would hold up the queue of benifit claiments wanting my tax money.
Oh yes Ive got the answers all right

[peakman]

Which are?

[peakman]

It's the banks, isn't it? Let em go, thats my take anyhow. Then maybe just maybe we can start over, only next time make some laws that protect people thus discouraging banks to rip off the vulnerable. This may take a while.

[yord]

survival of the fitest. Decide which youd rather be , poor or rich coz nothing else is going to work

[peakman]

Survival of the fittest. Yes, unless we change what drives our society. Unfortunately all I see coming from Gordon Brown and Alister Darling is a desperate attempt to re-establish the status quo, a consumer driver society financed on credit, in other words one wherein the banks are in control. Or possibly, one where nationalized banks (them, the government) are in control.

I don't think it's going to work. "This mother is going down" (George W Bush) It is what emerges from the ashes so to speak and from reading Barrack Obama's inauguration speech, I am optimistic that a new era is about to dawn, one built upon the original values and aspirations of those who escaped the old world order, crossed the sea to begin the task of creating a New World Order. as stated upon every Dollar note.

All of this may have started in America, indeed no "may have" about it, however it can only be America that leads the world out of it.

The U.K.? Under this lot, you are right, survival of the fittest. My advice? Buy lottery tickets, or better still get yourself elected to Parliament.