David Cameron's economic policy.
Ha ha ha.
( Matoosh would rather like a biscuit, Thu 18 Mar 2010, 23:57, 5 replies)

I raise you the current economic climate under Labour

( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Thu 18 Mar 2010, 23:58, closed)

Bugger all to do with anyone's policy
and more to do with bankers not understanding the complexity of what they're buying and selling.
( Fronds are waving gently on, Fri 19 Mar 2010, 1:29, closed)

and
chancellors not understanding the complexity of announcing in advance that you are about to flood the market with gold.
(dchurch bah, Fri 19 Mar 2010, 7:48, closed)

Oh, christ. Not that again.
It was ten frigging years ago. Probably more. Any effects will have washed out of the system a LONG time ago.

But was it such a bad decision as the Daily Fail would have us believe? Not all economists think so. Granted that it might not have been the best possible decision in hindsight, at the time it was reasonable; and the fact that it's not the best possible decision doesn't mean it was a poor one.

Witness this and, more importantly, this.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 19 Mar 2010, 15:59, closed)

I'm not sure it matters how long ago it was: the question was about ignorance, not about the length of time that has passed since the ignorance was witnessed.

It doesn't matter how you dress it up - announcing to a market two weeks in advance that you are about to flood it, is ignorance (or generously, studpidity), pure and simple.

You'll note that when he continued to sell (lesser) amounts of gold, that he learned his lesson and didn't announce that he was going to do it well in advance.

That's almost akin to an admission of ignorance wouldn't you say?
(dchurch bah, Mon 22 Mar 2010, 20:22, closed)