Salmond............

[Chester™]

I doubt very much what you say above.

 

However if it is true then it simply points out the entire Scottish Parliament knows as little about this situation as Salmond does.

 

So your point is...........

 

He said "they should go to the fire". And it was a sentiment by all leaders on that particular day:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7624288.stm

 

The point is, why just attack one when it seems all agreed....

 

EDIT: and regardless of the ban of short selling, there was a Financial reporter saying that there was still people "making up rumours" to plunge the share price of RBS today, so as to cash in when the price hit rock bottom. In other words, doing exactly the same but without the direct selling of shares. Therefore, if Mr Salmond responds to your question, this is the type of reply you may get.

[Das Root]

HBOS shares collapsed - 3% of trades were due to shorting.

 

Shorting then banned.

 

HBOS shares collapsed again - 0% of trades were due to shorting.

 

RBS shares collapsed - 0% of trades were due to shorting.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The initial collapse of HBOS shares was not down to 'spivs' and 'speculators'. It was down to a loss of confidence in the banking system. Funnily enough EXACTLY WHAT SALMOND HIMSELF SAID THIS AFTERNOON. Change of tune eh........

 

There is no argument here. Eck was wrong. That is as close to a FACT as you will ever get. In fact he even admitted this himself today, in a roundabout way.

 

 

 

So what was the point of your question if he's already answered it? Or is it just a case of you wanting him to drop to his knees and admit he's not the Coppercrutch of finance he thought he was?

 

Though it surprises me that you just found out that a guy who was head economist at RBS would be buddies with bankers, surely that would be a given?

 

Jammyheart is correct though, Gray said that pretty much straight after Salmond's speech, the Tories and Lib Dems followed right after...didn't know that either though? Finger certainly not on the pulse there

[jammyheart]

He said "they should go to the fire". And it was a sentiment by all leaders on that particular day:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7624288.stm

 

The point is, why just attack one when it seems all agreed....

 

EDIT: and regardless of the ban of short selling, there was a Financial reporter saying that there was still people "making up rumours" to plunge the share price of RBS today, so as to cash in when the price hit rock bottom. In other words, doing exactly the same but without the direct selling of shares. Therefore, if Mr Salmond responds to your question, this is the type of reply you may get.

 

cheers chester that was it just couldn`t remember right.

[Ulysses]

Please behave yourself.

 

So please explain how Salmond would "eat this question up".

 

Oh - and acting like a smug git and refusing to actually answer the question because he doesn't want to admit he was wrong does not count.

 

Thanks.

 

He'd say what happened. People sold off because they were scared by reports that the Government planned to inject capital into a number of banks. What scared them was the fear that the banks urgently needed the money, and this fear factor was particularly focused on RBS. It might have been another bank, and it might be another bank tomorrow.

 

Nothing to do with short selling, but not exactly tales of the unexpected either.

[I.J]

I note that no one dared answer my points earlier.

 

Yep, I know it was because it doesn't fit in with the pretend play fights that politics is all about.

 

Who cares though?

 

FTH.

 

Con te partiro.

 

[coppercrutch]

He said "they should go to the fire". And it was a sentiment by all leaders on that particular day:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7624288.stm

 

The point is, why just attack one when it seems all agreed....

 

Because I don't like Salmond and he is the 'economist' of the bunch so should know better.

 

So what was the point of your question if he's already answered it? Or is it just a case of you wanting him to drop to his knees and admit he's not the Coppercrutch of finance he thought he was?

 

Though it surprises me that you just found out that a guy who was head economist at RBS would be buddies with bankers, surely that would be a given?

 

Jammyheart is correct though, Gray said that pretty much straight after Salmond's speech, the Tories and Lib Dems followed right after...didn't know that either though? Finger certainly not on the pulse there

 

It would just simply be refreshing for a change for a politician to come out and simply admit they were wrong. That goes for all of them. From all parties.

 

I just like picking on Salmond. It is his smugness that does it.

[Das Root]

Because I don't like Salmond and he is the 'economist' of the bunch so should know better.

 

 

 

It would just simply be refreshing for a change for a politician to come out and simply admit they were wrong. That goes for all of them. From all parties.

 

I just like picking on Salmond. It is his smugness that does it.

 

 

Do you think if that happens, you'll hi-five a mirror?

[this_is_my_story]

Do you think if that happens, you'll hi-five a mirror?

 

:laugh:

[coppercrutch]

EDIT: and regardless of the ban of short selling, there was a Financial reporter saying that there was still people "making up rumours" to plunge the share price of RBS today, so as to cash in when the price hit rock bottom. In other words, doing exactly the same but without the direct selling of shares. Therefore, if Mr Salmond responds to your question, this is the type of reply you may get.

 

Would these be the same people that make up rumours to send share prices upwards ? Don't remember many complaining about that. Do you ?

 

See what gets me is this 'speculators' nonsense. Anyone who has ever bought even one share is a 'speculator'. Anyone who has a pension based on shares or funds is a 'speculator'.

 

Nobody minds when the 'speculators' drive share prices up.

 

Nobody minds when speculators were driving house prices up.

 

Now everyone is all of a sudden very angry with them all.

 

It was quality at my work today. Many people trying to buy shares as they were a 'bargain'. These same people have been moaning for ages about the price of the shares and how their share savings in the company will be losing value. They didn't quite get the irony...

 

He'd say what happened. People sold off because they were scared by reports that the Government planned to inject capital into a number of banks. What scared them was the fear that the banks urgently needed the money, and this fear factor was particularly focused on RBS. It might have been another bank, and it might be another bank tomorrow.

 

Nothing to do with short selling, but not exactly tales of the unexpected either.

 

That is what happened yesterday. My point being that his previous reasoning for what was behind this was incorrect. Would be great to have a politician with a bit of respect for himself. No man that refuses to admit he is ever wrong deserves respect in my opinion. That rules out a lot of politicians...

 

I note that no one dared answer my points earlier.

 

Yep, I know it was because it doesn't fit in with the pretend play fights that politics is all about.

 

Who cares though?

 

FTH.

 

Con te partiro.

 

 

We all know the Labour party are useless. No debate there.

[coppercrutch]

Do you think if that happens, you'll hi-five a mirror?

 

Twice.

[Chester™]

Would these be the same people that make up rumours to send share prices upwards ? Don't remember many complaining about that. Do you ?

 

See what gets me is this 'speculators' nonsense. Anyone who has ever bought even one share is a 'speculator'. Anyone who has a pension based on shares or funds is a 'speculator'.

 

Nobody minds when the 'speculators' drive share prices up.

 

Nobody minds when speculators were driving house prices up.

 

Now everyone is all of a sudden very angry with them all.

 

It was quality at my work today. Many people trying to buy shares as they were a 'bargain'. These same people have been moaning for ages about the price of the shares and how their share savings in the company will be losing value. They didn't quite get the irony...

 

 

When I first took out my pension my Adviser moaned about share prices being to high for the reasons you give (ie there was going to be a collapse of huge proportions). Many when I worked for HBOS complained because they couldnt invest outwith the bank, for the reasons you give. So while there may not have been the outrage like you see today, there has been discontent. Unlike your good self, they dont have this forum to sound off on.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

So Salmond get something wrong economically. Who cares?

 

Surely the main criteria we should be judging him on with regards to his abilities to lead the country are:

 

Does he fraudulently claim expenses?

Does he go on freebie junkets at the taxpayers expense?

Does he get his press secretary pumped behind his missus' back?

 

Only when he can tick these three boxes will be deemed fit to run Scotland in my eyes.

 

 

Scarily enough, Salmond has always reminded me of Baron Greenback out of Dangermouse. Can't recall him doing much pumping!!

[I.J]

 

Scarily enough, Salmond has always reminded me of Baron Greenback out of Dangermouse. Can't recall him doing much pumping!!

 

Nicola Sturgeon:

 

[coppercrutch]

When I first took out my pension my Adviser moaned about share prices being to high for the reasons you give (ie there was going to be a collapse of huge proportions). Many when I worked for HBOS complained because they couldnt invest outwith the bank, for the reasons you give. So while there may not have been the outrage like you see today, there has been discontent. Unlike your good self, they dont have this forum to sound off on.

 

Well hopefully there are more out there with common sense than I imagine. That can only be a good thing.

 

Interested to see how this new plan works.

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

Uly, did CC bang your sister?

 

As usual ur all over him:)

 

Give him a break man, he is ginger after all!

[coppercrutch]

Uly, did CC bang your sister?

 

As usual ur all over him:)

 

Give him a break man, he is ginger after all!

 

Ginger AND balding. Don't forget that.

 

AND I still stay at home with my mum !!

 

Woohoo !!

[Ulysses]

No man that refuses to admit he is ever wrong deserves respect in my opinion.

 

That probably explains your self-esteem issues.

[Ulysses]

Uly, did CC bang your sister?

 

Have you not got homework to do? Away and let the grown-ups get on with talking about the grown-up world.

 

[coppercrutch]

That probably explains your self-esteem issues.

 

You are getting me mixed up. I am one of the VERY FEW people on this site who actually has no problem admitting when I am wrong.

 

I have even done it in this very thread - just yesterday.

[Ulysses]

You are getting me mixed up. I am one of the VERY FEW people on this site who actually has no problem admitting when I am wrong.

 

I have even done it in this very thread - just yesterday.

 

Remind me again why Salmond got it wrong.

[coppercrutch]

Remind me again why Salmond got it wrong.

 

Because he is Salmond ? That is enough for me.

[Ulysses]

Because he is Salmond ? That is enough for me.

 

Thanks for that. Others might want some evidence, but that's a matter for them.

 

What would you do?

[coppercrutch]

Thanks for that. Others might want some evidence, but that's a matter for them.

 

What would you do?

 

I already have. In this thread. And in numerous others before.

 

Blaming short sellers for bringing down a bank. When only 3% of the share deals had anything to do with short selling. When short selling was then banned. When then other banks shares collapsed in the very same way with short sellers nowhere to be seen.

 

I actually find this incredible this debate is even occurring. Salmond was wrong. On this count I am 100% correct.

 

If anyone can't see that they need help.

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

Have you not got homework to do? Away and let the grown-ups get on with talking about the grown-up world.

 

 

I'll take that as a yes he did then.

[david mcgee]

I already have. In this thread. And in numerous others before.

 

Blaming short sellers for bringing down a bank. When only 3% of the share deals had anything to do with short selling. When short selling was then banned. When then other banks shares collapsed in the very same way with short sellers nowhere to be seen.

 

I actually find this incredible this debate is even occurring. Salmond was wrong. On this count I am 100% correct.

 

If anyone can't see that they need help.

 

A short seller was on the TV yesterday.

 

He said, " We were the canarys in the coalmine, showing everyone that something was wrong, but they chose to ignore us".

[Toggie88]

CC, you've no idea how well a grasp Salmond has on the current economic situation. It's mind boggling.

 

He knows his stuff, he wouldn't be where he was today if he didn't.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

CC, you've no idea how well a grasp Salmond has on the current economic situation. It's mind boggling.

 

He knows his stuff, he wouldn't be where he was today if he didn't.

 

Oh well I am convinced

[davemclaren]

Oh well I am convinced

 

The same applies to yourself.

[Ulysses]

I already have. In this thread. And in numerous others before.

 

Blaming short sellers for bringing down a bank. When only 3% of the share deals had anything to do with short selling. When short selling was then banned. When then other banks shares collapsed in the very same way with short sellers nowhere to be seen.

 

I actually find this incredible this debate is even occurring. Salmond was wrong. On this count I am 100% correct.

 

If anyone can't see that they need help.

 

It's fine, you don't like Salmond. It was an honest answer, and I won't knock it. But the rest is just padding. I'm not a fan of his myself (though his policies don't affect me directly), but I'd settle for saying that rather than make up reasons for it.

[coppercrutch]

It's fine, you don't like Salmond. It was an honest answer, and I won't knock it. But the rest is just padding. I'm not a fan of his myself (though his policies don't affect me directly), but I'd settle for saying that rather than make up reasons for it.

 

You are right I don't like Salmond. However my points about him having a poor grasp on the current situation are completely valid. Him along with numerous along 'expert' individuals.

 

I just decided to pick on Salmond this time.

 

I also don't like Brown. I have actually probably gone at Brown on this forum way more than Salmond. However very few seem to bother about that.

 

Strange. Salmond seems to have a little protection crew wherever he goes.

[coppercrutch]

CC, you've no idea how well a grasp Salmond has on the current economic situation. It's mind boggling.

 

He knows his stuff, he wouldn't be where he was today if he didn't.

 

One thing that is mind boggling is how little he has a grasp of the situation.

 

People that know what is going on here will listen to what he has to say and quickly realise it is all talk.

 

Those that don't know what is going on here will listen to what he has to say and quickly realise he is an economic genius.

 

 

As for 'He wouldn't be where he was today if he didn't'.........

 

I don't think I have ever heard a poorer argument in my entire life !!!

 

Gordon Brown. Palin. George W Bush, Applegarth.

 

A lot of people get into positions that their intellect does not truly deserve.

 

 

Need I go on..............

[coppercrutch]

A short seller was on the TV yesterday.

 

He said, " We were the canarys in the coalmine, showing everyone that something was wrong, but they chose to ignore us".

 

Very well put.

 

But what are you talking about !! Our banks are doing just great !! They are all just being taken down 1 at a time by spivs and speculators !!

 

It has nothing to do with their horrific investment strategies, massive greed and involvement in a financial system that is inherently unstable.

 

No - nothing at all to do with that. At all. Ever. Noooooooo Siree.

 

Nada. Never.

 

[Das Root]

Christ on a bike Coppercrutch, yer a fricking ego maniac. You're 'well on your way' to making that ?300k. Most of the folk you have mentioned will have done that, and then some. I think you should write a book, or try to become the Scottish 'money saving expert' guy. You say you have the financial world on speed dial, maybe it's time to give everyone else a taste of yer genius, we're overwhelmed that's for sure

[coppercrutch]

Christ on a bike Coppercrutch, yer a fricking ego maniac. You're 'well on your way' to making that ?300k. Most of the folk you have mentioned will have done that, and then some. I think you should write a book, or try to become the Scottish 'money saving expert' guy. You say you have the financial world on speed dial, maybe it's time to give everyone else a taste of yer genius, we're overwhelmed that's for sure

 

But my motivation is not money. I like the stuff but my life doesn't revolve around it.

 

I simply like having no debt and the freedom to do what I want when I want. I wouldn?t swap that for a 'high powered' job in the city or politics any day.

 

I am simply trying to show people the truth. That is that many of the so called 'experts' and 'leaders' in this World are actually no smarter than the average man on the street. In fact many of them are just 100% plain stupid. So many people trust these people's every word and it is just so wrong.

 

This is not about my ego. If it was I wouldn?t spend my time insulting myself and admitting when I am wrong. In case you haven't noticed egomaniacs don't do that.

 

I am simply giving my opinion and advice on this subject. As it is one of the few things I actually know about. If people want to listen fine. If they don't then fine.

 

My advice has been pretty good so far. Or can I not say that coz it makes me an egomaniac.