gorski
customised free radical
Finally: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090317/tuk-brown-admits-responsibility-for-cris-dba1618.html
And: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090317/twl-obama-s-blistering-attack-on-greedy-41f21e0.html
Edit: Ha, interesting, removed from Yahoo...
Or:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/16/business/econwatch/entry4869850.shtml
Whatever next? Social Democracy Scandinavian style, in the US and UK?!?
The Prime Minister has admitted he should have taken tougher action ten years ago to prevent the current financial crisis. Skip related content
Related photos / videos
Brown says sorry, nearly Play video
* Brown says sorry, nearly Play video
* Brown admits responsibility for crisis
Related content
* US wholesale inflation brakes to near-zero
* US wholesale inflation slows sharply in February
* US housing starts, permits post unexpected jump
* Related Hot Topic: Financial Crisis
Have your say: Financial Crisis
Gordon Brown, who at the time was Chancellor of the Exchequer, says he wishes he had pushed for international reform in the aftermath of the Asian markets crisis in the late 1990s.
In an interview, the PM said: "I take full responsibility for all my actions, but I think we're dealing with a bigger problem that is global in nature, as well as national.
"Perhaps ten years ago after the Asian crisis when other countries thought these problems would go away, we should have been tougher ... keeping and forcing these issues on to the agenda like we did on debt relief and other issues of international policy."
His comments stop far short of the full apology that his critics have been demanding but are the closest he has come to accepting a measure of responsibility for the current economic woes.
Last week, Conservative party leader David Cameron said "sorry" for his party's failure to foresee the looming banking crisis. The move was seen as an attempt to increase the pressure on Mr Brown to offer a similar apology.
Mr Brown also reportedly refused to rule out a further "fiscal stimulus" for the UK economy when Chancellor Alistair Darling delivers his Budget on April 22.
A planned spending review is also unlikely to go ahead, in part because the economic outlook is so unstable it is difficult for ministers to make meaningful three-year departmental spending forecasts.
Mr Brown said the "40-year-old prevalent orthodoxy" known as the "Washington consensus" in favour of free markets has come to an end.
He continued: "Laissez-faire has had its day. People on the centre-left and the progressive agenda should be confident enough to say that the old idea that the markets were efficient and could work things out by themselves are gone.
"That doesn't mean to say that what government does is always right. What it means is that both government and markets have got to be underpinned by values."
Mr Brown insisted the current situation should favour Labour - despite the Tories' continuing double-digit lead in the opinion polls - as "only progressive, centre-left governments can address the problems of the global change".
And: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090317/twl-obama-s-blistering-attack-on-greedy-41f21e0.html
Edit: Ha, interesting, removed from Yahoo...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - President Barack Obama vowed to block multi-million-dollar bonus payouts by bailed-out insurer AIG as he confronted intensifying public anger against Wall Street excess.
The controversy escalated as New York state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo started to slap subpoenas on American International Group (NYSE: AIG - news) , after the crippled firm ignored a Monday afternoon deadline to divulge details of the bonuses.
Photo
Click to enlarge photo
Conscious (CCCX.PK - news) of the potential backlash as his administration readies new support for the financial industry, Obama said the planned bonuses for AIG executives and traders revealed over the weekend were an "outrage."
"This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed," he said, in a rare flash of public anger, at a White House event with owners of small businesses.
Photo
Click to enlarge photo
"Under these circumstances, it's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less 165 million dollars in extra pay," Obama said.
"How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?" he said, adding half in jest that "I'm choked up with anger here" as his voice caught at one point.
On Sunday, administration officials said there was little that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner could do legally to stop the bonuses, because they were promised under AIG employment contracts before the insurer was bailed out.
But Obama, noting the substantial government support extended to AIG, said: "I've asked Secretary Geithner to use that leverage and pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole."
Massive losses at a London trading division have already forced the US government to pump some 150 billion dollars into AIG, leaving the company 80 percent owned by the taxpayer.
On March 2, the administration unveiled another emergency injection of 30 billion dollars.
According to widespread reports, the bonuses are largely going to traders at the very London-based financial products unit that is blamed for AIG's spectacular fall from grace.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the administration was looking to attach stricter conditions to the latest infusion of 30 billion dollars.
"Certainly, any person that is subject to these bonuses ... should think long and hard about whether, given the performance of the company, this is either warranted or appropriate," he told reporters.
Acknowledging the public's anger at how 700 billion dollars in government bailout money for Wall Street has been used, Gibbs said the AIG case "offends our common sense, offends our sense of value, and seems completely misplaced."
"AIG is a bonus too far," said Thomas Ferguson, a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, after several rows over executive bonuses and corporate junkets at other rescued companies.
"My suspicion is that public patience with all this is pretty much over," he said, blaming Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and chief White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers for badly misjudging the public mood.
"The political people in the White House are now going to take this out of the hands of Summers and Geithner, because it's become just too costly politically."
The administration is at risk of deeper public anger after AIG revealed on Sunday that it had passed on 22.4 billion dollars of government money to many foreign-owned banks that signed up for its exotic insurance against risky bets.
France's Societe Generale (Paris: FR0000130809 - news) and Germany's Deutsche Bank (Xetra: 514000 - news) were among the top three recipients after AIG used the bailout funds to cover so-called credit default swaps offered by the London office.
AIG was deemed by the US government to be too big to fail, given the intricate web of ties it built with other financial institutions through the credit default swaps linked to the tanking property market.
Obama said he wanted Congress to pass tougher financial regulation "so we don't find ourselves in this position again."
In a letter to Geithner Saturday, government-appointed AIG boss Edward Liddy said the bonuses could not be canceled due to the threat of lawsuits for breach of employment contracts.
He also argued that AIG risked an exodus of senior employees unless it awarded incentives to retain "the best and the brightest talent."
That argument is being ridiculed in Congress as the Obama administration girds for the tough sell of asking for more bailout money to help US banks clear out their toxic assets.
John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House of Representatives, said the "outrageous" AIG bonuses proved his party's case that Obama must spell out an "exit plan" to wind down his administration's hefty market interventions.
Or:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/16/business/econwatch/entry4869850.shtml
Whatever next? Social Democracy Scandinavian style, in the US and UK?!?
