Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The January Ipsos-MORI leader approval ratings
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The January Ipsos-MORI leader approval ratings
The Ipsos-MORI leader satisfaction ratings for Jan
Not much change only Cam down http://t.co/CZI7qSfZtA
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And this is what happened to the banking industry in 2007-9. The malaise brought down the largest to the smallest bank, from a specialist investment bank to a local savings and loan. And it affected all banks which survived the fall out.
The strongest and fittest had to absorb the weakest. Where this was impractical taxpayers had to pick up the tab.
Industry structure had very little impact on who the casualties were. What did Lehmans, AIG, Northern Rock and the Dunfermline Building Society have in common?
Industry structure is a factor in competitiveness but it has a relatively minor impact on the performance of a banking sector. Before the task of optimising industry structure is started, the more significant determinants must be addressed. These are trade imbalances, asset bubbles, monetary policies, government and household indebtedness, housing policies and pricing, regulation of core, derivative and shadow banking activities etc.
Simply tinkering with an individual country's banking structure is not going to deliver safe, honest and competitive banking services. And pretending it would derives either from ignorance of the underlying problems or a cynical attempt to deceive.
The task of restoring the UK's banking system to competitive health is best left to Mark Carney at the Bank of England. At least he understands the problems, knows the business and has been given the tools with which to deliver.
All of them took ill-judged risks and were proven incompetent at managing their source of capital?
http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2014/01/17/brighton-mp-calls-on-conservatives-to-back-labours-bid-to-oust-greens/26797?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Everyone knew that Dickie Fuld was running Lehman on too little equity. It took a while for the chickens to get there, but they were always coming home to roost.
Borrow long, lend short. Page 1, Rule 1, in the "bluffer's guide to banking"
"All of them continue to be net negative"
Indeed, but some are of course more negative than others.
It also certainly doesn't stop them being the very public face of their party when they want to make big announcements or on setpiece occasions. Like for today with little Ed giving his very own banking plan and Cammie refuting it by saying the banks are now fine. Meanwhile Clegg very publicly struggles with Rennard and what to do. The leaders matter and their popularity or lack of it is going to be a huge factor.
It also makes the leaders debate quite the pickle for the broadcasters. None of the ledaers are 'box office' in the sense of being popular but then the public does quite like to see those it has little respect for taken down a peg or two. I suspect the debates will be far more confrontational than last time as a result.
My local MP wants to take on our alex .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2540993/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-George-Galloway-wants-rules-debate-SNP-leader-Alex-Salmond.html
[Sits down].
@Avery
( I assume your strategy is to write posts so long there's no room for a reply ! ) :-)
I'm well aware what systemic risk is complex supply chains such as car manufacturing deal with it all the time. But this is not really to do with industry risk and everything to do with industry concentration. And every study from Porter to PIMS will tell you as an industry consolidates pricing goes up since competitors move from pricing themselves in to business to pricing themselves in to bigger profits. The UK banking sector is a case in point. It is the aim of most companies to dominate a market and when they consolidate that's when cartels kick in. When market conditions get to this level there is a long history of governments in the US and UK taking a look and changing the playing field.
As for your list of things that need done you are putting the cart before the horse none of these things can be achieved without a functioning finance system. And in any case as I have argued with you over the years Osborne doesn't know how to deliver them.
(I didn't read your discussion with Alanbrooke, was just taking issue with your sweeping statement that the failed banks had nothing in common. Banking crisises are ultimately always a result of bad judgment by management. As a business it should be utility like: important, cautiously managed and with great care and a bias towards risk avoidance.)
And Osborne appointed Carney to sitteth on his right hand side. And Carney, Mr. Brooke, does know his onions.
Banks are highly regulated economic distribution systems. They do not operate in the same conditions as car manufacturers: their freedom to price and to lend is circumscribed. Their risks are ultimately our risks.
Osborne and Carney are delivering a functioning finance system. It is taking time, but like the rest of the economy, the UK is moving in the right direction at a rate which is internationally competitive and advantageous.
Before chopping up unsellable banks into unsellable chunks lets first get the existing banks into a condition which might encourage investment and purchase. Otherwise we just return to 2009 type Brownian state intervention.
To be fair to Dickie, although he was well paid he took the bulk of his pay in stock, and kept it in equity. He lost a round billion personally when the firm went bust.
To be honest, I don't have much of an issue with the amounts that the likes of Lloyd Blankenfein or David Vinar get paid because they have proved themselves to be very agile risk managers. The problem is really the adequate-but-no-better banker who are paid too much for basically taking advantage of the platform their employer offers.
I fully endorse the conclusions of my learned friend, m'lud.
Reselections that may have been missed:
David Ruffley:
http://www.burystedmundsconservatives.org.uk/news/david-ruffley-mp-2015-general-election
Barry Sheerman:
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/huddersfield-mp-barry-sheerman-fight-4928640
Selections —LDs, Chichester, Andrew Smith:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/candidates.aspx?letter=S
No longer standing — Sam Phripp, LDs, NE Somerset:
http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/General-election-candidate-takes-decision-step/story-20435727-detail/story.html
Given he is now the MP for Bradford West and his party seems to be crumbling I doubt even gorgeous George is kidding himself that he is somehow central to the independence referendum and all the serious negotiations and process around it. As for his boasting about being a 'bruiser', that was also the claim made by the amusing buffoon Carmichael too, before Sturgeon completely annihilated him. So Nicola could easily take George down in a debate if it came to that. Or indeed Dennis Canavan or Patrick Harvie if they wanted, though I doubt they will.
@Avery
I'm afraid you continue with the usual complacency and knee-jerk defence of banking.
I read your post yesterday re 3D printing but only late as I had been out at a small manufacturer all afternoon. A well run company, well invested , apprenticeships and doing the kind of thing UK plc needs to do to restore its finance, But as usual he sub optimises his potential because he refuses to put any trust in UK banks. He uses two banks Barclays and the Bank of Mordor but only to park his considerable cash balance since has has no trust in the institutions that they will hold to terms, not rip him off or bugger off when times are tough. He should be investing and expanding, creating more jobs and re-shoring work, but he's not because he's hoarding cash as an insurance against a banking system he does not trust.
I am currently negotiating on two other businesses where once again it is exactly the same the banks are seen as a hindrance not a help. Our banks have no faith from customers that they do banking. So for all George's trips to see flashy technology, it's a waste of petrol if the perennial UK weakness of no finance to invest in ideas is still the norm.
I cannot agree more with yourself and Messrs. Lebo and Norporth.
But isn't it now time to convince the voters?
It looks as if he should be talking to a corporate financier and looking at debt or equity capital solutions.
But I've also been on the other side - not banks, but working with venture capitalists evaluating companies - and it looks very different from that side of the table. Company directors and shareholders often want the bank or venture capitalist to take all the risk for only a small part of the prospective profit.
The problem, if there is a problem, cannot possibly be anything to do with banking cartels or lack of competition - what is there to stop any of the many hundreds of foreign banks with banking licences in the UK from entering the market and lending to small businesses, if there are profitable opportunities to do so? Indeed, occasionally you do get some foreign banks doing a bit of this, but it's clearly not easy money since they rarely find enough opportunities to make it worthwhile.
*Do your own research. It is not a bet I will be taking.
And your suggestion does make sense.
Kick the b*stard who is imposing austerity on you until you are forced to choose between the b*stard and the alternatives.
Is it Mr Pole that despite the man from the ministry edicts to lend more a £4m business wouldn't get a loan because the banks are more worried about their balance sheets ?
bank's market share however banks still are the major source of funding for commercial finance. And since they remain the major source and have had considerable taxpayer support I don't consider it unreasonable for HMG to look at the sector and ask why it appears incapable of serving businesses.
And the Nabavi of All Sussex has added a further useful and very true perspective on the problem downthread.
It is difficult to add to the words of wisdom already expressed.
I do think there are times, Mr. Brooke, that you wished you were German.
However, I'm sceptical about the answer. Basically I don't think the answer is failings on the supply side - as I said, if it were, why aren't foreign banks jumping in to take up the slack? We have almost certainly the world's most open and non-protectionist banking system; even the banking sector of the City, the jewel in the crown, has been mainly foreign-owned since Big Bang. Any bank in the world could start lending to small businesses in the UK. One has to ask why they don't.
As for Sir Richard Nabob Grand Earl of the South Downs, I'm afraid his misplaced faith in Osborne is simply another reflection of how SE Tories fail to grasp that elsewhere voters care more about their own industries than UK banks. It is an unfortunate fact for you SE chappies that a factory worker's vote and a banker's vote are both equal. Indeed if anything the factory worker's vote is worth more since he's more likely to sit in a Midlands marginal and can swing a seat whereas bankers just pile up votes in constituencies that have always voted blue.
I can only assume you folk like big tax bills and Labour governments since you can't find an affinity with enough voters to win an election outside the South.
There is no such thing as a global retail bank: the best that can be achieved is to be multi-domestic.
HSBC is a rare global success but even its structure is essentially multi-domestic.
A German culture of municipal provision of industry finance and an American culture of business angels providing venture capital might help. But foreign cultures are difficult to import.
Conversely, if there are good potential returns available by lending more to the SME sector, the UK-focused banks would be irresponsible or incompetent not to do so. And, if they didn't bother to do so, there would be a gap which some other bank could fill.
And, even if other banks didn't step in, commercial companies should be able to come in and use their own capital (or credit rating) to grab these opportunities.
I think the question to be asked is more about why there aren't more profitable opportunities in the SME sector to attract such investment.
Basically the graphic is misleading shyte. A'but time a [ex-] journalist (and IPSO-Mori) learn't t'summinck from t'Economist (c.f. graphs and graphics)...!
This group of banks have higher capital requirements than smaller banks not in the systemically important group. HSBC is included in this group but will not account for anything near the full figure.
Also the additional capital is not immediately required and needs to be verified by means of a stress test to be carried out by the BBA during the course of this year. Given that all banks have reduced capital adequacy requirements by retaining profits as reserves to the tune of 83 billion Euros in the second half of last year, the problem is not as alarming as the headline figures suggest.
It may well turn out that HSBC is over capitalised. In which case the regulators are threatening to get them to "help global economic recovery" by allocated the surplus to undercapitalised banks (through acquisition?).
Well now you can.....
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jan/17/barcelona-mausoleum-fans-remains-stored-ashes
Mr Clegg’s list of visitors contains numerous journalists, while Mr Cameron’s does not.
Maybe he is coy about having a tete a tete with Simon Heffer, or maybe not.
Unlike the banks that survived they didn't get 100s of billions of dollars in soft loans from the Federal Reserve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroo_Onoda
in Fife.
One person detained.
"Detained" rather than "arrested/charged" may mean another or others may have been involved in the boy's death.
"References to human extremities or facsimiles thereof should be removed from all software implementations on the grounds that they are potentially offensive to the differently abled. Likewise all references to senses or any other bodily function or organ which may be deficient in the potential viewing space shall be similarly stricken"
I have usually always followed your comments on the economy with interest, and this despite not often agreeing with your constant 'plague on their houses' cynicism where you get to throw stones from the pavement at others who have to get elected where as you do not. But having followed and read your comments for years now PB, you dislike of particular personalities rather than policies is now glaringly obvious.
And memo to @SeanFear&Co, its your lot in the Conservative party that made us totally unattractive and unelectable for 13 years. And yet, so many of those former Conservative members now in UKIP are desperately hoping for a Labour Government next time around so they can try yet again to impose a like minded soul into the Conservative Leadership while none of them are actual members of the party. They want Scots Independence in the Indy Referendum, yet don't want a clear cut In or Out EU Referendum under Cameron in case they lose.
Good luck with that one, it really does make renewing the membership so much more attractive an option for the rest of us in party who have been about for a similar period, but just in other parts of the country far more difficult . If the Conservatives come out on top as the biggest party in a Hung Parliament or even gain an majority next time, where does that leave your brand of highly selective right wing Conservationism in the English heartlands?
This is not particularly therefore a politcal comment in the conventional sense but I felt that I had to comment in general on your statement. That comment is that the statement itself is what is completely wrong with the political structure of this country.
Parties should not be saying "lets set a manifesto that will get us elected" what parties should be doing is saying "What brings the greatest good for the greatest number of our country" and then trying to persuade the electorate that their view is right.
Power for the sake of power shows a group of people that should be subject to retrospective abortion regardless of whether they are red,blue,yellow,purple,green or any other affiliation. That is what unfortunately our political pygmies stand for mostly. They do not give a shit about you and me. They give a shit about their bank balance and their cronies and how they look to trendy metrosexuals
Wikipedia says:
"As of 22 July 2013, the first person under the age of 18 in line of succession to the throne is Prince George of Cambridge. The child, who is the grandson of the Prince of Wales, is third in line to the throne after his grandfather and father. If the prince were to succeed to the throne before his 18th birthday on 22 July 2031, his uncle, Prince Harry (the Prince of Wales' younger son), would serve as regent. In the event that Prince Harry would be unable to serve as regent, the next in line would be his uncle (Prince George's great uncle) the Duke of York followed by the Duke of York's elder daughter Princess Beatrice of York."
(1) Journalist on the 6 O'clock News said that Mikaeel Kular (R.I.P., by the way) was "2 feet tall". Anyone with more than one braincell knows that the average height of a 3-year-old boy is 3'4".
(2) The birth of Zara Tindall's baby girl was NOT EVEN MENTIONED on the 6 O'clock news!!!
Still, if Sochi had been the location of the Summer Olympics of 2016, I have a fantasy vision of Tom Daley (gold, bisexual, Great Britain) and Matthew Mitcham (silver, gay, Australian) standing on the podium doing a gay/rainbow flag version of the 1968 Mexico black-power salute. Bronze can go to Ivan Garcia (bronze, straight-but-cute, Mexican).