Talk:Mervyn King, Baron King of Lothbury

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MPC tem--207.245.236.145 (talk) 06:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)plates[edit]

The templates on this page seem a bit over the top. The information included in the templates includes start and end dates for every member of the Monetary Policy Committee, in a very repetitive format. This information is already available the Monetary Policy Committee article. What's the point in repeating it all here? I'm inclined to remove them, but I'd like to hear some other comments first. Thanks -Crosbiesmith 20:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean - there's a bit of a discussion about it on Savidan's talk page. Gabriel R 23:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree - page should be mostly about King, not MPC. An explicit link to MPC should be enough with perhaps a template for Gov of B of E. The same over-the-top template does seem to be on most individual pages however (eg Eddie George's, + another - I haven't checked them all). If there were more about King, a huge template would be less dominant. (The discussion referred to above is now at User_talk:Savidan/Archive_3#Monetary_Policy_Committee, and more at Talk:Monetary_Policy_Committee.) roundhouse 10:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridge[edit]

Geoff Harcourt claims in a filmed interview that Mervyn King was offered a teaching position but never took it up. Although the Bank of England site claims he did. Can anyone clarify which periods are being talked about? Mornington (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some theorems which are almost true[edit]

He also co-wrote an absolutely hilarious paper, I am not sure if it is something worthy of his wikipedia page or not, perhaps a bit too frivolous, but it is certainly well worth a read for the satirical value.

Some Theorems Which Are Almost True M. A. King and A. Sandmo Revue économique, Vol. 28, No. 6 (Nov., 1977), pp. 1009-1012 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3500951 --130.240.15.48 (talk) 07:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two points: (1) The man is obviously an economic and political illiterate with a penchant for self-publicity that is orders of magnitude greater than his grasp of economics. I predicted the bursting of the UK housing bubble as far back as early 2002; King was still praising Gordon Brown's (another economic illiterate) alleged 'succcess' in maintaining 'stability' as late as 2004. As for his declaration that the party winning the 2010 election and implementing the cuts would be 'out of power for a generation', this is too dumb for words. (2) Can someone please subedit this article? It is full of poor grammar and punctuation (e.g. redundant hyphens, number disagreements, and more). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.31.130 (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bias[edit]

This article appears to have been set-up to fire salvo after salvo of bile at Sir Mervyn. I would remind whomever is using this page to have their revenge on Sir Mervyn that this is an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.162.153 (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that the 'Bank of England' section lacks neutrality. It should say things like 'journalist x said that Mervyn King failed to solve the banking crisis' rather than 'Mervyn King failed to solve the banking crisis'. The Parson's Cat (talk) 14:19, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I feel what you are asking is unnecessary and that you have misread what has been written.

If you have to name-check every single journalist every time you cite one of their articles, some articles would consist of a vast array of journalists' names. Where explanatory or particularly vitriolic criticism is directed, e.g. from David Blanchflower, the source is explicitly mentioned. Other than that, one merely needs to have a source to back up something that is said, or rather one needs to accurately reflect what a source says.

You say the article states that "Mervyn King failed to solve the banking crisis"—yet that is not what it says. His monetary policy after the crisis hit was good and it is duly portrayed positively in the article. The article's negativity is clustered on his doing nothing to prevent the financial crisis—not surprising given that he didn't even see it coming (one of the most serious failings in his collection)—as well as his outrageous political machinations in support of Coalition austerity.

Overall, King has had a catastrophic career as head of the Bank, both in terms of his personal relations with others and in terms of his economic stewardship. The article reflects that. If you know of any positives about his governorship, please either let me know about them or add them yourself. One thing I have been meaning to add is his successful pursuit of price stability (for all the good that did), but to be honest there just really isn't that much more that is good to say, either about the man himself or about his tenure.
~ Iloveandrea (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You do need to cite journalists if they're making controversial points. I don't think many people I know would describe Sir Mervyn's tenure at the Bank as disastrous. Let's see what a few other people think. I clearly wasn't the first person to worry about the issue of bias. To be honest, I feel that the section as it stands reads more like an essay or a newspaper article than part of an encyclopaedia. Essays and newspapers are not supposed to be neutral. Reference books, however, are. The Parson's Cat (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest financial disaster of the age has happened. It was entirely avoidable. This gentlemen was one of the three key players in UK finance, along with the chancellor of the exchequer and the chairman of the FSA. Numerous reports have shown that there was a gigantic bubble of debt, asset prices, speculation, financial pay and financial innovation – it was visible from space. Some of you guys seem to be suggesting this "just happened"; that no errors of judgement took place. This is completely untenable. Let the truth be told, and let it be told in an objective way. Wildfowl (talk) 00:19, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hindsight is a wonderful thing - attribution of excessive opinionated blame here would be undue, such opining would sit a lot easier here - 2007–2012 global financial crisis - Youreallycan 09:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not merely hindsight. You have completely ignored that I cite not just quotes illustrating his total failure to see it coming, and thus his failure to do anything about it, but also the correct, predictive analysis from people who did see the gathering storm. King failed to see it, yet it was perfectly foreseeable. That is what the article shows. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 14:04, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Freshman essay at best[edit]

Some clean-up done, but most of the material in this "BLP" reads like an essay done for a freshman poly-sci class at best. Worthy of a C-minus. Collect (talk) 11:44, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have no grasp of even the most basic issues to do with the financial crisis and King's pivotal role. Please stay off the article if you do not know what you are talking about. ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Totally Biased Article[edit]

This article is almost completely negative. Even a convicted child rapist like Polanski has a more balanced Wikipedia article. I think this says something about the editorial stance at Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.245.236.145 (talk) 06:53, 31 December 2012‎

What's biased about it? It's perfectly possible for an article to be "almost completely negative" and at the same time completely unbiased, after all. He himself said that he "should have shouted from the rooftops" but did not – and perhaps if he had, we would not be in this hellish mess. Wildfowl (talk) 21:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Religion[edit]

What religion is Mervyn King? Or his parents/grandparents. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.154.227 (talk) 03:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Brexit[edit]

On 12/26/2016 the BBC reported, "King said before the referendum that warnings of economic doom about leaving the EU were overstated. Since then, he has welcomed the fall in the pound and said he believes Britain can be better off out than in the EU." The Guardian 12/26/2016 This was a startling statement from somebody who presumably has a good working knowledge of economic fundamentals. I immediately turned to Wikipedia as I knew little about Lord King. This article informed me that his judgement is considered suspect. This is Wikipedia at its best. Unn3yonchr (talk) 13:05, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mervyn King, Baron King of Lothbury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Mervyn King, Baron King of Lothbury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:42, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mervyn_King,_Baron_King_of_Lothbury&oldid=1207984415"