Read Irwin Steltzer in The Telegraph, here's an extract:
"Enough! It's time to put an end to Gordon Brown's ridiculous blame game. As the Prime Minister tells it, Britain's woes started in America. Like some strain of flu, America's problems found their way across the ocean to London, and from there to the rest of the British economy. Cheers from the Left, eager to rubbish America and to resurrect their leader's reputation.
Unfortunately for Mr Brown, neither his claim – he told Parliament yesterday, "Not only have we saved the world", modestly eschewing the "I" word – nor his Macavity act can survive scrutiny. It is beyond question that Britain's problems stem in part from its fractured regulatory system, with responsibility split between the Bank of England, the Financial Services Authority, and the Treasury. A close study of the relevant documents fails to reveal that this system was forced upon Brown by the US authorities. No, it sprang full blown from the brains of Chancellor Gordon Brown and his sidekick, Ed Balls."
"Which brings us to what perhaps is the more important point: Brown's insistence that Britain is the best situated of all countries to face the economic headwinds, and to recover once they have abated. One reason offered is that before the downturn, the Government created three million jobs.
Unfortunately, masses of those were in the public sector, where productivity is far below the private sector, where unreformed work practices are the norm, and where non-jobs are often mere substitutes for the dole. Then there is the uncomfortable fact that the UK labour market attracted millions of foreigners, but not the millions of British nationals who find themselves too stressed, too back-achy, or too tempted by generous benefits to accept low-paid work. This is not to say that everyone receiving benefits is able to work; but no one, including Secretary of State for Work and Pensions James Purnell, doubts that millions are. This crushing weight on the productive sector will make it very difficult for Britain to return to long-term sustainable economic growth."
and one more:
"Finally, there is Britain's fiscal condition. Instead of using the good years to pile up surpluses to spend in the lean years, Brown decided that he had conquered the business cycle – no more boom and bust. There is no minute of any meeting to suggest that the American economists and businessmen with whom the Prime Minister was so fond of being photographed tried to persuade him that he had indeed discovered the magic formula that could end business cycles. The hubris was home-grown. Which leaves Brown in the position of being forced to make clear that tax increases are in Britain's future – not a prospect that will encourage spending. Franklin Roosevelt promised to attack the Great Depression with a policy of tax and tax, and spend and spend. Brown is promising the reverse: to spend and spend, and then tax and tax. Economists agree that when consumers know measures to induce spending are temporary, that higher taxes are in their future, they do not respond by spending their windfalls."
So one final time;
Question: "Who's to blame?"
Answer: Gordon Brown.