The full tables for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll are now up here.

Economic confidence is very poor – the proportion of people expecting the country to fall back into recession has grown to 73%, up from 59% when YouGov asked in February. Only 8 expect their financial situation to improve in the next 12 months, with 63% expecting it to get worse (a net feel good factor of minus 55, the lowest since January) and only 31% of people think the government is managing the economy well, with 59% thinking they are doing so badly. Despite this, the Conservatives still have a lead over Labour as the party people think would best deal with the country’s economic problems, 30% to 24%.

Ahead of the Labour conference opinions of Ed Miliband are generally negative. His overall approval rating stands at minus 33, with the boost in perceptions that he enjoyed from “hackgate” having almost completely disappeared. Ratings of his leadership so far are miserable – only 18% of people think he has provided an effective opposition, 64% think he has not. Only 19% think he has made it clear what he stands for, 66% do not. Only 19% of people think he would be up to the job of Prime Minister, compared to 62% who think he would not.

His ratings are poor even amongst Labour supporters – 51% of Labour voters do not think Miliband has provided an effective opposition, 52% think he has not made it clear what he stands for. 45% of Labour voters think would be up to the job of Prime Minister, 34% think he would not.

36% of people think that the party would have been better off with David Miliband, including 45% of Labour supporters. Only 6% think the party would have been worse off with David Miliband, 35% think it would be no different. Asked who the best leader of the Labour party would be, 30% of people pick David Miliband to a rather cutting 9% for Ed Miliband.

There was also a BPIX poll in the Mail on Sunday, which had topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 40%, LDEM 10%.


152 Responses to “YouGov on the economy and Miliband”

1 2 3 4
  1. No Comment

    I only comment on Scottish matters.

  2. So
    1. Miliband has very poor ratings at the moment.
    2. Most people don’t think Labour is providing an effective opposition at the moment.
    3. But only 30% would never vote Labour.

    Conclusion: There’s still a significant potential upside on top of the current polling of 42%.

    And after a summer of faffing around, this week is Labour and Miliband’s opportunity to end 2 months of near invisibility in the public eye, and define it/himself rather than leave this to the coalition parties. I’ll be disappointed not to see YouGov showing Labour polling at 44% or 45% on at least one occasion this week.

  3. “I’ll be disappointed not to see YouGov showing Labour polling at 44% or 45% on at least one occasion this week.”
    I’ll be surprised if we see figures that high, to be honest.
    What Ed has come out with so far has been disappointing to his own supporters – let alone the voters he’s trying to grab.

    I think we have to wait for a big shock (maybe the rumoured Greek default?) before we see any major change.

  4. I see YG are dumbing down Politics, though I expect this is to appeal to the media. Both Clegg and Miliband seen as Robin Reliants i.e with a wheel missing. Cameron seen as a Jaguar.

    I wonder whether these questions were explained, before the answers were taken. Personally I see Clegg as a 10 year old Skoda (pre VW), starting to become unreliable, maybe in need of a scrapyard ; Miliband as a Mini, wanting be a bigger than he is, but not much room for expansion ; and Cameron as a Ford Consol that has been into a chop shop trying to make into a Porsche.

    Silly question in my opinion.

  5. Tinged Fringe

    While I know you are committed your posts are (nearly) always interesting, non-partisan and analytical, at lewast IMO.

    I think this is an opportunity for EM, to win over a few more people, including those in a Labour Party, rather than to boost the labour vote. Although I think that YouGov is slightly overstating support for Labour at the moment (and totally understaes the LDs support of course).

    While polioticians popularity does rise and fall, I do wonder whether EM is cut out to be leader of the Labour Party, and whether he will be dumped. This is not meant to a dig at EM, and personally I would like to see him remain as leader.

  6. R Huckle

    Personally I see Clegg as a 10 year old Skoda (pre VW), starting to become unreliable, maybe in need of a scrapyard ; Miliband as a Mini, wanting be a bigger than he is, but not much room for expansion ; and Cameron as a Ford Consol that has been into a chop shop trying to make into a Porsche.

    A non-friend at school said to me that the jag was the spiv’s rolls royce. It did not go down well with me as my dad had an old jag at that time.

    I think robin reliant somehow fits NC,who I sometimes think is a bit like an educated Rodney.

    I can’t think what EM is, which maybe is a problem with the voters, maybe he will develop some vehicle characteristics during the Conference. EB would be a red fast sports car, with two fingers sticking out of the window.

    GO would have to be a RR, with a sign ‘We are all in this together on the back window’, VC would be an old rover, the one with character, classy but old fashioned.

  7. I’m not surprised by Miliband’s low ratings. I saw both him and Darling interviewed on Sky News this morning. Darling was measured and sensible and quite persuasive on some matters (I had to turn off when he said Gordon Brown deserved great credit). In contrast Miliband came across to me as waffly and evasive.

    This next bit is not meant to be partisan, but Miliband is severely hampered by his odd appearance and twisted mouth and his strangulated voice. Perhaps that shouldn’t matter, but unfortunately in the Television age, it does.

  8. What I take away from this is still that Personal Popularity of the Party Leader does not translate into a huge Voter Intent difference in British politics. If personal popularity mattered, then the Conservatives should be doing much better than they are, and Labour doing much worse than they are. Barring complete melt down or big scandal, the popularity of the party leader doesn’t seem to have much effect. Even ‘Duffygate’ only moved polling by a slim amount, and only mattered at all because it was such a close result.

  9. Pete B

    This next bit is not meant to be partisan, but Miliband is severely hampered by his odd appearance and twisted mouth and his strangulated voice

    But so have the Rwan Atknson characters and people love them; I certainly do. Would I vote for Mr. Bean; I would be tempted.

    Alternatively the chap who played Baldrick is a staunch Labour supporter, if EM wanted to portray a black adder type persona, he could make the Baldrick actor a lord and promote him to chancellor. I would really be tempted to go red then; I’d certainly watch them on TV.

  10. Jayblanc
    What I take away from this is still that Personal Popularity of the Party Leader does not translate into a huge Voter Intent difference in British politics.

    I am not sure if the Scottish Nationalists would agree.

  11. Henry

    Neither would Lab, Con or LD in Scotland.

    However, having a strong leadership team won’t make any difference if they are pursuing policies that the voters don’t like, and other parties are presenting a more “attractive package”.

  12. Old Nat
    …having a strong leadership team won’t make any difference if they are pursuing policies that the voters don’t like, and other parties are presenting a more “attractive package”.

    Thanks; as usual wise words

  13. Pete B

    From previous votes on looks, etc.

    Harold Wilson was not good looking, had a strange voice and weird laugh. Yet he turned potential weaknesses into strengths and won four GEs.

  14. Does anyone know how long a polling company has to publish its detailed polling tables, before it is in breach of British Polling Council rules?

    ICM still haven’t published their September poll data on their site, though the Guardian released the headline predictions (based on ICM’s interpretation of the data) on Friday night.

  15. @PeteB
    “but Miliband is severely hampered by his odd appearance and twisted mouth”

    In the eye of the beholder as they say. I like EM’s youthful and intelligent appearance whereas Cameron’s smooth, red overindulged face I find really off putting.

  16. During the recess we didn’t see ofr hear much from Labour or its leader. Now we are going to hear for a while and then from the Tories.

    Will any of it have much effect on voters’ intention at all? I think twitches only.

    Perhaps it’s when things get worse or better for individuals (the economy!) that movements in the polls will happen.

  17. The one thing that will console Ed Miliband is that his
    Party has never got rid of a leader, forced him out against his will.

    Except for the man who won three elections for them.

    (The Lansbury replacement by Clem is a bit vague, i admit)

    Tony Blair.
    ‘Its up to you, now’ were his last words to the party conference.

    And Nick Poole: yes, there was a boy called Bell in my class at Crown Point- computers he was interested in, in 1966.

    Or as Healey said when they elected Foot instead of him…
    ….them

  18. Chrislane 1945.

    “Tony Blair.
    ‘Its up to you, now’ were his last words to the party conference.”

    And to Parliament they were :-

    “That is that. The end.”

  19. @PeteB
    “but Miliband is severely hampered by his odd appearance and twisted mouth”

    Nobody could ever have said Major Atllee was good looking and though only a handful of people had television then, many would see newsreels at the cinema twice or even three times a week.

    As for Donald Dewar, it was said of him “what can you do with a man who has egg on his tie and mud on his shoes” They managed to persuade him to get a new suit.

    Will any of the pretty boys now leading parties leave any enduring achievement to compare with the Scottish Parliament, the NHS or even the OU?

  20. How about this for a quote

    The ECB board member accepted that banks bear much responsibility for the economic crisis in Spain and elsewhere with cheap mortgages and other lending but said that punishing them could lead to huge unemployment, lower living standards, and a lending squeeze.

    “If one just follows the principle that the ones who did wrong should pay (for their mistakes) then the results can be unacceptable,” he said.

    Read that last sentence again, and again, morality has gone right out the window.

  21. Cars?

    Clegg is the old car in the garage. Underpowered. Out of date. Starting to fall apart. And yet you just can’t bring yourself to scrap it.

    Cameron is one of those ghastly Chelsea tractors with chrome bull-bars. Very showy. But bad for the environment. And dangerous to OAP’s and children.

    Miliband is that car which is under covers at the car show. What is going to look like? Rumour has it that it is a ghastly mish-mash. But until the cover is removed we can’t be sure…

  22. Henry
    “…if EM wanted to portray a black adder type persona, he could make the Baldrick actor a lord and promote him to chancellor. I would really be tempted to go red then; I’d certainly watch them on TV.”

    I would too, but only if the actor stayed in character.

    “Harold Wilson was not good looking, had a strange voice and weird laugh. Yet he turned potential weaknesses into strengths and won four GEs.”

    Yes, but initially he was up against Douglas-Hume who looked like a skull, and commentators at the time said that it was the first election decided by television. Then he was up against Heath, who had the weirdest laugh I have ever seen and an even stranger voice. Wilson was acknowledged at the time as the master of the new medium.

    John B Dick

    “Will any of the pretty boys now leading parties leave any enduring achievement to compare with the Scottish Parliament, the NHS or even the OU?”

    Scottish Parliament was done by a pretty boy (Blair), but apart from that, I agree. I just think that the personality and appearance of party leaders on TV does have a significant effect on the result of elections. Not necessarily decisive, but significant. After all, in the last GE weren’t the LDs supposed to have been boosted by Clegg’s apparent winning of the televised debates?

  23. Richard in Norway,

    Of course, there are no lenders without borrowers. So, from the moral viewpoint you are putting forward, it is right that both the banks and many ordinary people in Spain would suffer from a Spanish financial crisis.

    I would come at things from a slightly different perspective: capitalism is a profit AND loss system. Take out the losses and it simply doesn’t work, because the costs of mistakes and risks don’t perform any regulatory role. Every attempt of the Soviets to introduce profits without losses into their economic system was a disaster. We have seen, time after time in recent years, the reductio ad absurdum of this approach.

    Oddly enough, I remember that three years ago someone said to me that the Spanish wouldn’t have the kind of problems of the UK and US, because they had better regulation. This was, of course, rubbish: government regulation is an inadequate substitute for sound money and fear of bankrupcy, not least because the bankers will always outwit the politicians (they have the vastly bigger incentive and, as far as venal people go, the smart ones end up in business and the dunces end up in politics).

    Of all people, Diane Abbott had one of the best lines about the financial crisis when she said that bankers had “privatised the profits and socialised the losses”. I may disagree with her about the solutions, but she diagnosed the problem perfectly.

  24. Richard In Norway.

    The Spanish “Banks” in trouble needs definition.

    A noteable feature of Spain’s main commercial Banks-like Santander & BBVA is how well they have fared under stringent state regulation compared to other countries.

    But the Cajas, Spains regional savings banks are another story entirely.

    It is here that the problem lies :-

    “These banks—similar to savings and loan associations in the U.S.—eagerly served up credit as the housing bubble inflated over the past decade. Last September they had some $330 billion in loans to developers on their books, up from $50 billion in 2000, the central bank estimates. Today, nearly half of the cajas’ $1.8 trillion in assets are mortgages or other real estate loans.

    With home prices plunging, the 45 cajas are suffering. More than 7% of their loans could go bad this year, vs. 5.1% in 2009, according to the Spanish Confederation of Savings Banks, an industry group. Growing defaults “are a real concern,” says Santiago Carbó, a finance professor at the University of Granada. Credit Suisse (CS) says the cajas might lose $3.4 billion this year. ”

    Bloomberg.

    Cajas are being forced to merge , cutting branches & foreclosing on collateral mortgages as Spain’s real estate values plummet.

    The reason for the merger solution is that as quasi-public institutions, they can’t be purchased.

    Cajas typically have close ties to provincial governments, so they often face political pressure to back projects that may not be profitable.

    So perhaps the ECB board member you quote understands that punishing the hubris & feckless lending of the cajas, would involve exposing the politically motivated direction of local politicians to lend , which was behind the huge expansion of Spain’s local Savings Banks into the dodgy world of property exploitation.

    Reminds me of Bill Clinton & Fannie Mae.

  25. Henry & Jayblanc

    “What I take away from this is still that Personal Popularity of the Party Leader does not translate into a huge Voter Intent difference in British politics.”

    “I am not sure if the Scottish Nationalists would agree.”

    Ms Goldie was more popular than her party but could not stall a decline of three generations duration.

    Alex Salmond is neither pretty nor much liked. Some think him too cocky.

    Both of these leaders present themselves as competent and serious politicians.

    The SNP are where the right wing of the Labour party were during the Butskillite consensus and with a handful of competent ministers determined to impresss, a reputation for competence is a winning attribute.

    The SNO have vision too – Independence – which leaves most people unenthused. Policies are beginning to coalesce and become integrated around fresh, local, premium quality and often organic food which impacts on tourism and rural development, and local renewables generation.

    A rural focused party such as the LibDems and the SNP both are, cannot expect to attract the urban majority, but the SNP can rely on the irrelevance of London-led NewLabour focused as it is on Middle England and seen as Tory-lite.

    In 2010, Labour was chosen as the best anti-Con choice except where there were incumbent LibDems.

    In 2011 the LibDems got their just deserts, their anti-Con supporters choosing Labour or SNP.

    What we don’t know is whether in the next Westminster election those who voted Labour in 2010 and SNP in 2011 will adhere to the previous split pattern, or whether there is a continuing flow to SNP.

    The SNP could have 10 MP’s or above 30, and the difference could be critical both to the determination of the next UK government and to assessing the probability of independence.

    It would be good to have some polling.

    It could go one way or the other, and I haven’t the slightest hunch which is the more likely.

  26. Re EM’s “policy” announcement on tuition fees I love this :-

    From the Observer,:-

    “Miliband’s aides said that, if there were an election now and Labour won, it would implement the policy as soon as possible. But they stopped short of promising that the details would feature in three and a half years’ time in a party election manifesto.”

    :-) :-) :-)

  27. @Colin

    “But they stopped short of promising that the details would feature in three and a half years’ time in a party election manifesto”

    Exactly as it should be. I would have thought that every single statement on current policy should have a similar rider attached.

  28. ROBIN

    But its a new policy-just announced.

    What is the point of altering “current policy” , if the “new policy” is temporary…………………..I mean other than the obvious that is :-)

  29. Pete B

    ‘Wilson was acknowledged at the time as the master of the new medium’.

    I agree with your comments.

    Mike Yarwood used to imitate Harold Wilson brilliantly. In fact if anything he enhanced his character. I read somewhere that some of HW key phrases and actions originated with MY, and HW used to study the programme and adopted any characteristics he thought were good and built them into his own performance.

    I also saw a newsreel of when Wilson was a Minister for Atlee; he refused to look straight into the camera but looked down when he spoke, which made him seem very shifty. By the time he was leader, he had perfected looking straight at the camera and appearing to be addressing you in person.

    I did not support HW’s policies, but as a performer he was first class.

  30. @Colin;

    Surely that’s a good thing? As I can see it, Miliband is trying to stop all the accusations of having no policy, but that’s very difficult to do when your policy review doesn’t produce results until February 2011. So, he’s announcing some “temporary” policies that would be enacted if Labour suddenly arrived in power as a shock result of an immediate coalition split.

    I’d have been deeply annoyed if it was a permanent policy, because it would show he was talking the same old route of ignoring the party.

  31. John b Dick

    The SNP could have 10 MP’s or above 30, and the difference could be critical both to the determination of the next UK government and to assessing the probability of independence.

    It would be interesting to know whether if Labour was short of an overall majority, it would be possible to gain the support of a larger SNP to form a Government.

    Then when it came to voting on UK matters, the Govt would win with SNP support, but if it was English only legislation and the SNP abstained, the Govt could lose.

  32. Colin

    It’s not just the Spanish banks it all the banks. The remark might have been made while talking about the Spanish banks, but the attitude is the same everywhere among the unelected economic elite “banks have made mistakes but its dangerous for them to pay for them” now we see that the EFSF is being beefed up and maybe leveraged as much as 7 times to produce a fund of 5 trillion euros!! But when it goes bad who is going to be on the hook, well not the banks because they get to sell their bad bets at cost, meanwhile country after country slip into crisis, if we just take Europe then we have, Latvia Estonia Lithuania(I won’t include belrussia because it problems are different) Romania Bulgaria Hungery Greece Ireland Portugal Spain and today I saw a post saying that its bad in Poland, pretty soon Italy and France will be joining that crowd. I don’t know too much about the other small nations in Europe because all attention has been focused in Greece. It’s spreading bringing with a 50% cut in living standards. And we are feeling safe, things won’t get that bad here. I wouldn’t bet on it. And all the while those at the top must not suffer losses because it would be bad for the economy, they can’t be prosecuted for fraud because it will be bad for the economy, and to rescue the world economy we have to bail out the banks again. It’s a joke, we being led down the garden path, and the message that if we do what’s right it will be worse for us is misleading at best.

  33. We’ve seen quite a lot of political leaders talking a lot but not saying very much in the last few years, it seems most common when there is no election coming up. Saying that Blair was very good at making the “nothing much” sound like something.

    crikey, I really doubt Labour would want to be depending on the SNP for a majority. That would go down very badly down south.

    Interesting to see how Labour does better in the unpopularity scores, it indicates that if we had gone for AV, they would have done quite well out of a preference ranking system. Or if there were a sort of “unelection” with people voting against the party they least like, it would be their sort of system.

  34. Colin

    I think you need educating on what really went on in the so called sub prime crisis.

    See this link

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3JTPzW3xmg

    The speaker is bill black the leading investigated of the S&L scandal. I’ll get you more links later.

  35. TOP HAT

    Fair enough-his shout obviously.

    We will see what it does for his Polling

  36. @RIN

    Agree about the sub prime crisis that caused this mess. There are going to be many legal cases in the US over the next few years. There could be some in the UK. I am surprised that in the UK some of those involved in making dodgy Investment banking decisions have not been put behind bars. Surely fraud must have been commited by some. It seems odd that only the occasional rogue trader ever appears to be prosecuted.

    The consequences are not that funny. There was a documentary on the BBC news channel yesterday about the US housing/employment crisis. There are millions of people living in sport centres, community halls, refuges and similar, with them only being able to live in cheap B&B’s when their unemployment benefit of $300 a month comes through. Some of the people have young children. Another problem which I don’t think was highlighted are the numbers (500,000+) of ex US forces that are living on the streets or in these community refuges. Some of these have fought in the Gulf war, Iraq and Afganistan. So policitians and bankers have a lot to answer for, as the mistakes that they have made, have made millions of people lives in the US a misery.

  37. This is what Benedict Brogan had to say about EM on his Telegraph Blog: “What Team Dave will have noticed is that Mr Miliband looked lean, sounded confident, held himself well, and didn’t waffle.”

  38. Richard

    I just don’t share your view that all this Sovereign & Personal Debt is the “fault” of the lenders.

    You seem to discount the role & responsibility of borrowers-sovereign & personal.

    I think its completely one-eyed.

    So far as EFSF & other vehicles for taking stakes in strategic banks-what would you have countries do-let Greece default at will, leave the Euro & let the indebted Banks go bust?

    It has all been left for too long-I accept-its a sodding mess-I agree-and pending Basel111 & other intitiatives like separating retail / investment banking politicians are making a hash of it & taking too long.

    But at least they now know Greece entered EZ by fiddling its deficit definition, that its economy is a basket case of statist privilege & inertia, that it’s debts are not collectable-and as the German Finance Minister said yesterday-it will take them a decade to bgecome competitive.

    We have all been living beyond our means Richard. The music has stopped. The scramble for chairs is going to be very painful for lots of people-including me…….and I didn’t borrow anythhing from anyone.

    Thanks for the video clip.

    I am quite content with the state of my”education ” on the Sub Prime Crisis-its all there on the Internet………….including the role of politicians in pushing cheap loans to poor people-and chopping up the mortgages to sell on , so the whole rotten business could be sustained.

    Try this :-

    The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that “the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: Widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; An explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels.“

    They are all involved Richard-Greenspan, the politicians who ditched Glass -Steagall & manipulated Fannie Mae..

    The bankers sure took advantage-but they should never have been allowed the opportunity.

  39. @COLIN

    “It has all been left for too long-I accept-its a sodding mess-I agree-and pending Basel111 & other intitiatives like separating retail / investment banking politicians are making a hash of it & taking too long.”

    Bear in mind that the BASEL accords are due to a lack of banks’ self-regulation. The banks knew the risks and ignored them. they and they alone are responsible for the banking crisis. Governments and politicians which over-borrowed knowing of the banks’ irresponsible practices (and many did know) are responsible for any government debts on their watch(s).

  40. @ANTHONY WELLS
    Jay Blanc says that a very poor rating for a party leader has no great effect on the party’s election performance.
    Mike Smithson often questions the Labour position, in the light of Milibands appalling lack of appeal. What is your opinion on this matter ? My own guess is that Mike is about right. Jay, is IMPO adopting a partisan position based on hope rather than fact. However, I am quite prepared to listen to a greater knowledge than my own.

  41. I don’t think it’ll do anything, really.

  42. @John B Dick

    Around these parts, if you say the sky is Blue over Britain, an SNP supporter will be sure to say the skies are Orange over Scotland.

  43. RiN
    “And all the while those at the top must not suffer losses because it would be bad for the economy, they can’t be prosecuted for fraud because it will be bad for the economy, and to rescue the world economy we have to bail out the banks again. It’s a joke, we being led down the garden path, and the message that if we do what’s right it will be worse for us is misleading at best.”

    Absolutely. Politicians must take part of the blame for lack of regulation, but there does seem to have been a lot of sharp practice (to put it mildly) by the bankers themselves.

    However there is also some merit in Colin’s view that borrowers are partly to blame. No-one, including governments, should take on more debt than they can afford to pay back if circumstances turn slightly against them.

  44. Jayblanc

    So you’ve seen some of our glorious sunsets, then?

  45. @ Colin

    “Reminds me of Bill Clinton & Fannie Mae.”

    Oh please. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were pushed to make responsible loans available to underserved minority communities. They were not pushed to create predatory loans. In fact they were prohibited from doing so. It was not until Dubya came into office and paid back all his friends in the savings and loan industry like Roland Arnell and the lot and allowed lenders to go out and make subprime and predatory loans. It was also his SEC who allowed those loans to be securitized that caused the global financial crisis. Not Clinton’s.

    As for “political pressure” to loan, I suppose that it is political to want to increase housing loans so that racial minorities can acheive the dream of individual homeownership. These communities have long been underserved. When done through responsible means, increasing home ownership among racial minorities not only benefits racial minorities but benefits society as a whole. So if that’s “political pressure,” then I’m fine with political pressure.

  46. I don’t think these personal ratings impact the voting intention polls right now. I mean, they do but probably to a limited extent. However, I think that when an election actually occurs, the personal opinions of the leaders will matter and will impact the elections.

  47. so cal

    i’m surprised that the myth of the sub prime crisis being the fault of the poor borrower deceiving the lenders and bill Clinton forcing lenders to lend to folk that were unqualified to receive them still has legs considering the evidence of extreme fraudulent behavior, but its pushed as a way of getting the powerful off the hook

  48. @ Old Nat

    “So you’ve seen some of our glorious sunsets, then?”

    I have. They were absolutely gorgeous.

  49. SOCAL

    The history of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae is fascinating.

    I have read countless versions-including the wiki one.

    They were certainly front & centre in what became the global credit crunch.

  50. @COLIN

    I just don’t share your view that all this Sovereign & Personal Debt is the “fault” of the lenders.

    As one might expect, Richard in Father Christmas Land and the boards left wingers, share the BBC’s love of a sob story which is based on total feckless irresponsibility.
    This may involve knocking out kids willy nilly, or financial cretinism. It is NEVER the individuals fault and ALWAYS the lenders were loans/mortgages are concerned. In the 1960’s, an old Music Hall comedian, Jimmy Wheeler, used to say to his stooge, ” I’m worried ” STOOGE ” why Jim” JW ” because I’ve got a new JAG, a new house in Golders Green, and a new boat down at Poole”. STOOGE ” well what yer worried about” JW ” I only earn £25 quid a week”.

    From a not very funny music hall joke, this has now become a “life choice” which garners sympathy from the usual bleeding heart community.

1 2 3 4