HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Who is this British auste...

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:26 AM

Who is this British austerity asshole on the Charlie Rose show? George Osbourne.

Thinks that the US going over the Cliff would be a disaster. Used a mix of 80% spending cuts, 20% tax changes in the UK. Loved Simpson/Bowles ("a balanced approach". Advocates raising pension/retirement age. Sitting there, smug as shit, clearly flush with cash, happily throwing those who are struggling off the island. Dismissed Krugman as just plain wrong. Claims austerity works great because you "increase confidence".

Wow....just wow. Like listening to a Brit Mitt.

2 replies, 1207 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 2 replies Author Time Post
Reply Who is this British austerity asshole on the Charlie Rose show? George Osbourne. (Original post)
NRaleighLiberal Dec 2012 OP
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #1
NRaleighLiberal Dec 2012 #2

Response to NRaleighLiberal (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:14 AM

1. Our esteemed Chancellor of the Exchequer - Treasury Secretary equivalent

His family own a wallpaper business, though he seems remarkably incompetent when it comes to knowing his own stake in it:

Chancellor George Osborne failed to declare a personal investment in a £32m multinational company, it has emerged.

In an embarrassing mistake for the Conservative minister, Osborne accidentally listed the wrong company on the MPs’ register of interests.
But documents from Companies House revealed his shareholding is actually with the firm’s much larger parent company – Osborne & Little Group Ltd – which has a turnover £10m greater.
Neither company managed to make a profit last year, and Osborne has not personally profited from his hidden investment for at least five years. But the parent company saw a turnover of more than £32.7m, according to the 2011 annual accounts.


From before the Tories won:

A little boy lost in the City
Few wanted to go on the record with their criticisms of Osborne, but the views of David Buik, senior analyst at the City brokers BGC Partners, are typical of what I was told. "I find it quite extraordinary, however delightful he may be, that his only experience, in terms of business, industry or commerce, has been as a speechwriter at Tory Central Office and that he should be the chosen person to be the next chancellor of the exchequer. I know he's a quick learner, but it's frightening. And I say this as an obsessed Conservative . . . I haven't got a bad word to say about him (as a person). But you have got to have some experience of life."

Stephen Greenhalgh, the Tory leader of Hammersmith and Fulham Council, in west London, and an influential figure in the property world, said as much on 26 November. He let slip that most of the shadow cabinet "haven't run a piss-up in a brewery", and singled out the man who is due to be "running the finances of the nation".

The absurd holiday encounter with Peter Mandelson in Corfu last year still resonates for similar reasons. The episode showed the shadow chancellor is well connected, with an admirable international contacts book. He is a regular at the World Economic Forum in Davos and a member of the secretive Bilderberg Group. But the events in Corfu and their aftermath also demonstrated a worrying naivety: would-be chancellors should not be seen to leak malicious gossip to the media, or to spend too much time on yachts with mysterious foreign billionaires.

Osborne's private wealth worries some in the City, too. It is hardly the fault of the future Sir George Osborne that he is the heir to a baronet­cy that dates back to 1629, nor that he has a 15 per cent stake in his family's wallpaper and fabrics firm, Osborne & Little, which is worth in the region of £15m. Indeed, he says the family firm gives him an understanding of the challenges faced by any business. But he also knows that such inherited wealth could be used against him, particularly when the Commons has been investigating his mortgage expenses. Intriguingly, in his entry to Who's Who, he no longer mentions his club memberships at the privileged Beefsteak and Cheshire Pitt, which he included when he was first made an MP.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:49 AM

2. He came across as an arrogant prick - even Rose seemed befuddled by what he had to say.

Good (or bad?) to know that there are assholes on both sides of the Atlantic, I suppose!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread