Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Thistle do nicely for Starmer – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 32,938
    pm215 said:

    pigeon said:


    Yes, the nominal limit is meaningless. It's not just the risk of bank runs - allowing large depositors to be cleared out would randomly destroy large numbers of businesses, as well as people who happen to be in the middle of buying/selling their homes when the game of musical chairs stops.

    Temporary high deposits due to a house purchase/sale are explicitly covered by the UK scheme already.
    That's news to me, thanks.

    We're contemplating selling our house soon (probably 2024 tbf) and renting while we look for somewhere to renovate or build. Last time we did that I had the proceeds of our house sale spread across 8 or 10 different accounts to keep within the FSCS limits. What a (first world) pain that was. Much simpler now it seems.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 45,517
    Cyclefree said:

    Here we go.

    It shouldn't be LloydsTSB/HBOS all over again.

    Troubled bank Credit Suisse has been rescued by its Swiss rival UBS in a government-backed deal.

    Sunday evening's announcement came after a weekend of emergency talks in Switzerland between the two banks and the country's financial regulators.

    The Swiss National Bank said the deal was the best way to restore the confidence of financial markets and to manage risks to the economy.

    Both banks will be given a liquidity assistance loan of up to $110bn.

    The federal government said in order to reduce any risks for UBS it would grant a guarantee against potential losses worth $9.6bn (£7.9bn).


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65007871

    What in Christ's name is in CS's books that the Swiss government is so desperate to dump on UBS?

    To put that $9.6 billion into context - the total losses (losses, fines & remediation costs) from the Adoboli, FX and LIBOR scandals was $5 billion. And that does not include the fines for the tax evasion the Private Bank did for US clients nor the French tax evasion fine & costs, let alone the many other smaller cock-ups over the same period.

    So UBS have to hope that CS's cock ups won't amount to more than $9.6 billion.

    That decision strikes me as an optimistic assumption.

    Anyway I've just been sent the papers for the April AGM. It might actually be worth going this year.
    That was pretty much the market cap of CS before the comedy started….
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,128

    Andy_JS said:

    This is.a bit ridiculous.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/19/dont-want-pride-sex-flags-post-leads-suspension-tory-councillor/

    "An 81-year-old Tory councillor has been suspended after she said she doesn’t want “Pride sex flags along my high street”.

    Angela Kilmartin, a councillor on Braintree District Council in Essex, wrote on Facebook that she did not want any “sex flags” on the high street in Witham.

    She said: “I don’t want Pride sex flags along my high street. I don’t even want heterosexual flags along my high street.

    “Sex is for the bedroom and private life, not for displaying preferences in public.”"

    This is the most heterosexual flag I know, is it what she means?


    I've never thought of the Union Jack as having a sexual connotations. I suppose there was Austin Powers with his Union Jack underpants but that's about it. Or maybe you're just stirring **** as usual.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    On reservoirs - each person uses something like 160m3 of water a year.

    Sounds a lot?

    That's a piece of reservoir 4m by 4m if it's 10m deep.

    You don't need to store a fraction of an entire years water. Maybe 25% of that.


    And what happens when everyone wants to withdraw all their water at the same time?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    Taz said:

    UBS/Credit Suisse deal done.

    Who is the next domino to fall?
    Deutsch Bank ?
    Good grief, you and TSE?

    DB = doomed bank.
    Douche Bank.

    Please get it right. Here is The List

    DB = Douche Bank
    JPM = J P Moron
    Morgan Stanley = Moron Stanley
    CITI Group = Shitty Group
    BarCap* = BarCrap
    Credit Suisse = Debit Suisse
    UBS = United Bank of Shit
    RBS = Royal Bank of Shit
    TSB = Totally Shit Bank
    NatWest = ShatWest
    HSBC = Honkers Shitty Bank of Crap (I know, needs work)
    Goldmans Sachs = Gold-digging Suckers

    * Yes, I know
    Citi is still known as Shitty Bank in a homage to the past

  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    What do you mean by “failing”?

    CS shareholders have largely been wiped out (they are getting peanuts in UBS shares). They are the risk capital

    The issue with banks failing is the consequences for depositors and borrowers who are otherwise innocent parties caught in the cross fire
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    Taz said:

    UBS/Credit Suisse deal done.

    Who is the next domino to fall?
    Deutsch Bank ?
    Good grief, you and TSE?

    DB = doomed bank.
    Douche Bank.

    Please get it right. Here is The List

    DB = Douche Bank
    JPM = J P Moron
    Morgan Stanley = Moron Stanley
    CITI Group = Shitty Group
    BarCap* = BarCrap
    Credit Suisse = Debit Suisse
    UBS = United Bank of Shit
    RBS = Royal Bank of Shit
    TSB = Totally Shit Bank
    NatWest = ShatWest
    HSBC = Honkers Shitty Bank of Crap (I know, needs work)
    Goldmans Sachs = Gold-digging Suckers

    * Yes, I know
    Citi is still known as Shitty Bank in a homage to the past

    And Goldman Sachs will forever be the Vampire Squid.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,972
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT: I doubt that I have persuaded many of you, but I will repeat my belief that Trump is not certain to win the Republican nomination, and that his status, if anything, has been eroding within the party.

    You can see that by, among other things, the low attendance at CPAC, and the loss of supporters like the Club for Growth and Murdoch. And almost all the profesionals know, by now, that Trump is a loser, who has damaged the party.

    (I have no idea what the odds on him winning the nomination should be now, because it is an n-person game, and we don't even know how large the "n" will be, much less who they will all be.

    Nor do I know whether his opponents will be as inept as many were in 2016. I was genuinely astonished then by their failures to attack his many weaknesses. (And I did not expect our media to give them as much help as they did.)

    Moreover, it is entirely possible that DeSantis running would hurt Trump, since he is seen by so many as appealing to the same voters.)

    The Republican Primary is an extremely difficult election to call.

    I tend to think that Trump has a hold over about a third of the US Republican Party - as in, they see him as their man and he can do no wrong, etc. There's another 20-30% that are Trump-ist in leanings, and who are strong supporters of the President, but who would be quite open to voting for another candidate, if they were to find one with a similar mindset and a better chance of winning.

    That's about 55-60% of the Republican Party.

    There's another 10-15% who will are mostly anti-Democrat, who supported Trump (as he was anti-Democrat), but who would definitely prefer someone else next time around.

    And then there is 25-30% who are committed Republicans, but who are disgusted by the corruption and venality of Trump.

    The issue for the Republicans is that they have (mostly) a winner takes all Primary system. This means that if there 4-5 candidates, then Trump can win in Iowa, New Hampshire, etc., with 30-35% of the vote. And if Trump wins the first few contests, then he will be mighty hard to stop from winning the contest.

    FWIW, I think a DeSantis v Trump head-to-head would be won by DeSantis, who would in turn beat Biden or Harris. I'm not a great DeSantis fan, but I think the latest Florida Gubernatorial election shows there's a lot of appetite for Trumpism delivered by someone who is not Trump. Of course, there is an important caveat here. If Trump is still arguing he won the Republican nomination and is not supporting DeSantis, then I think it could all look very different.

    I don't really see a path for a non-Trump, no-DeSantis candidate. I mean, it's possible someone with charisma and the Evangelical vote could do it, but the former requirement knocks out Pence. And I don't see many other hats in the ring.
    If Pence wins evangelical heavy Iowa he will certainly be a contender as a former Vice President. Remember he is now the main anti Putin candidate in the GOP top tier too
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    ohnotnow said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    To privatise the profits and nationalise the losses.
    One of the things the last twenty years has told us is that Glass-Steagall was absolutely right: deposit taking entities and trading entities should be separate.

    The former group should be highly regulated and well capitalized, and in return for this, the State and the Central Bank offer support for depositors in the event of problems. (Not shareholders, note, just depositors.) And this is necessary, because it is perfectly possible during a panic for a well capitalized, fundamentally profitable retail bank to go bust. Simply, you lend long (mortgages and the like) and borrow short (current accounts). If everyone heads to the door at the same time, no bank on earth can survive that.

    For trading entities, well this group can largely do what they like, but the flip side is that if they go bust - as many investment banks over the years have, like Drexel Burnham Lambert, Barings and Lehman Brothers - then they go bust, and the government and the Bank of England let them go to the wall.
    I remember around the time of the GFC listening to a fairly right-wing/semi-libertarian podcast who were outraged that the investment banks (or arms) were being bailed out.

    They were firmly behind the idea of protecting "your average joe" and their deposit account - but the freewheeling 'buy! sell! buy! sell!' people should be left to their fate.

    Quite struck me at the time and has stayed with me.
    Tricky to pull off though if the bank's been subsidising their trading arm from their deposit arm.
    Which is why ringfencing makes that illegal
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,488
    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,108
    France is becoming the new Britain
    Brexit and the French ruling class’s superior survival skills are helping it trounce its rival on the world stage
    https://www.ft.com/content/f3ef3af0-83e1-414d-83ee-c860bf19053d
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,217
    Very surprised to learn that Credit Suisse and UBS have 10K employees between them in London.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,217

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
  • Options
    WillGWillG Posts: 2,223
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT: I doubt that I have persuaded many of you, but I will repeat my belief that Trump is not certain to win the Republican nomination, and that his status, if anything, has been eroding within the party.

    You can see that by, among other things, the low attendance at CPAC, and the loss of supporters like the Club for Growth and Murdoch. And almost all the profesionals know, by now, that Trump is a loser, who has damaged the party.

    (I have no idea what the odds on him winning the nomination should be now, because it is an n-person game, and we don't even know how large the "n" will be, much less who they will all be.

    Nor do I know whether his opponents will be as inept as many were in 2016. I was genuinely astonished then by their failures to attack his many weaknesses. (And I did not expect our media to give them as much help as they did.)

    Moreover, it is entirely possible that DeSantis running would hurt Trump, since he is seen by so many as appealing to the same voters.)

    The Republican Primary is an extremely difficult election to call.

    I tend to think that Trump has a hold over about a third of the US Republican Party - as in, they see him as their man and he can do no wrong, etc. There's another 20-30% that are Trump-ist in leanings, and who are strong supporters of the President, but who would be quite open to voting for another candidate, if they were to find one with a similar mindset and a better chance of winning.

    That's about 55-60% of the Republican Party.

    There's another 10-15% who will are mostly anti-Democrat, who supported Trump (as he was anti-Democrat), but who would definitely prefer someone else next time around.

    And then there is 25-30% who are committed Republicans, but who are disgusted by the corruption and venality of Trump.

    The issue for the Republicans is that they have (mostly) a winner takes all Primary system. This means that if there 4-5 candidates, then Trump can win in Iowa, New Hampshire, etc., with 30-35% of the vote. And if Trump wins the first few contests, then he will be mighty hard to stop from winning the contest.

    FWIW, I think a DeSantis v Trump head-to-head would be won by DeSantis, who would in turn beat Biden or Harris. I'm not a great DeSantis fan, but I think the latest Florida Gubernatorial election shows there's a lot of appetite for Trumpism delivered by someone who is not Trump. Of course, there is an important caveat here. If Trump is still arguing he won the Republican nomination and is not supporting DeSantis, then I think it could all look very different.

    I don't really see a path for a non-Trump, no-DeSantis candidate. I mean, it's possible someone with charisma and the Evangelical vote could do it, but the former requirement knocks out Pence. And I don't see many other hats in the ring.
    I thought the vote from Florida was remarkable. A swing State which has shifted firmly into Red status.
    It was the people driven mad by COVID moving from across the US to Florida during lockdown. I think that explains both the Florida result and Republicans doing slightly worse everywhere else. The most notable thing is that, if true, that can't be repeated on a national level.

    I also dispute rcs's view that the "next" 20-30% as liking Trumpism but would rather vote for Trumpism but more electable. I think it's more that they don't see Trump as an individual as part of their identity but like everything he stands for. They would still vote for him over RDS if Trump came across as a stronger fighter than RDS, even if RDS was more electable. That is why Trump will win, because Meatball Ron will come off worse in a gutter fight and also look weak if he doesn't stand up for himself.

    I would also swap the percentage size of the next two groups.
  • Options
    WillGWillG Posts: 2,223
    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    Joe Biden is letting the US banks fail.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 45,517
    WillG said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    Joe Biden is letting the US banks fail.
    The government here didn't support SVB or Credit Suisse. It arranged an orderly purchase of the SVB UK - that's it.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 45,517
    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    UBS/Credit Suisse deal done.

    Who is the next domino to fall?
    Deutsch Bank ?
    Good grief, you and TSE?

    DB = doomed bank.
    Douche Bank.

    Please get it right. Here is The List

    DB = Douche Bank
    JPM = J P Moron
    Morgan Stanley = Moron Stanley
    CITI Group = Shitty Group
    BarCap* = BarCrap
    Credit Suisse = Debit Suisse
    UBS = United Bank of Shit
    RBS = Royal Bank of Shit
    TSB = Totally Shit Bank
    NatWest = ShatWest
    HSBC = Honkers Shitty Bank of Crap (I know, needs work)
    Goldmans Sachs = Gold-digging Suckers

    * Yes, I know
    Citi is still known as Shitty Bank in a homage to the past

    And Goldman Sachs will forever be the Vampire Squid.
    That gives them too much credit - they like to think they are the top predator....
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,128
    Nigelb said:

    France is becoming the new Britain
    Brexit and the French ruling class’s superior survival skills are helping it trounce its rival on the world stage
    https://www.ft.com/content/f3ef3af0-83e1-414d-83ee-c860bf19053d

    'France is becoming the new Britain.'

    I seem to remember reading that a few weeks ago. Was it meant to be a good or bad thing for France?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    edited March 2023

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    On reservoirs - each person uses something like 160m3 of water a year.

    Sounds a lot?

    That's a piece of reservoir 4m by 4m if it's 10m deep.

    You don't need to store a fraction of an entire years water. Maybe 25% of that.


    And what happens when everyone wants to withdraw all their water at the same time?
    You have a run on the taps
    As you can imagine, turbulent reservoirs are a matter of deep concern for me personally

  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228
    MaxPB said:

    Taz said:

    UBS/Credit Suisse deal done.

    Who is the next domino to fall?
    Deutsch Bank ?
    Good grief, you and TSE?

    DB = doomed bank.
    Douche Bank.

    Please get it right. Here is The List

    DB = Douche Bank
    JPM = J P Moron
    Morgan Stanley = Moron Stanley
    CITI Group = Shitty Group
    BarCap* = BarCrap
    Credit Suisse = Debit Suisse
    UBS = United Bank of Shit
    RBS = Royal Bank of Shit
    TSB = Totally Shit Bank
    NatWest = ShatWest
    HSBC = Honkers Shitty Bank of Crap (I know, needs work)
    Goldmans Sachs = Gold-digging Suckers

    * Yes, I know
    Citi is still known as Shitty Bank in a homage to the past

    And Goldman Sachs will forever be the Vampire Squid.
    Even though they are doing God’s work?
  • Options
    WillGWillG Posts: 2,223
    Nigelb said:

    France is becoming the new Britain
    Brexit and the French ruling class’s superior survival skills are helping it trounce its rival on the world stage
    https://www.ft.com/content/f3ef3af0-83e1-414d-83ee-c860bf19053d

    The evidence base seems weak. Britain was much closer to the US over Ukraine and has been obviously preferred as a partner in the Pacific with AUKUS.

    More houses and more transport infrastructure definitely helps them over the UK, but I don't think it overcomes France's other weaknesses.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,670
    edited March 2023

    Andy_JS said:

    This is.a bit ridiculous.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/19/dont-want-pride-sex-flags-post-leads-suspension-tory-councillor/

    "An 81-year-old Tory councillor has been suspended after she said she doesn’t want “Pride sex flags along my high street”.

    Angela Kilmartin, a councillor on Braintree District Council in Essex, wrote on Facebook that she did not want any “sex flags” on the high street in Witham.

    She said: “I don’t want Pride sex flags along my high street. I don’t even want heterosexual flags along my high street.

    “Sex is for the bedroom and private life, not for displaying preferences in public.”"

    This is the most heterosexual flag I know, is it what she means?


    I've never thought of the Union Jack as having a sexual connotations. I suppose there was Austin Powers with his Union Jack underpants but that's about it. Or maybe you're just stirring **** as usual.
    Since you jumped in on my reply perhaps you could elucidate on what is a heterosexual flag in the original post, unless all you wanted was a little greet.

    Ps I think we’re allowed to write ‘shit’ even before the watershed.
  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623

    On reservoirs - each person uses something like 160m3 of water a year.

    Sounds a lot?

    That's a piece of reservoir 4m by 4m if it's 10m deep.

    You don't need to store a fraction of an entire years water. Maybe 25% of that.


    And what happens when everyone wants to withdraw all their water at the same time?
    You have a run on the taps
    Well, at least liquidity will still be important.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228
    Nigelb said:

    France is becoming the new Britain
    Brexit and the French ruling class’s superior survival skills are helping it trounce its rival on the world stage
    https://www.ft.com/content/f3ef3af0-83e1-414d-83ee-c860bf19053d

    His logic seems to be that now Macron has abandoned his attempt to be a solo striker on Ukraine and come into line with the UK/US view he’s more influential than the UK?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,488
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

    I thought I was thanking you for having done so with that thread header!
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

    I don’t mean to be rude @Cyclefree because you’ve phrased it nicely.

    But it’s a statement of the bleeding obvious!

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,488
    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    So why didn't Labour let Northern Rock fail?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,972
    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    This would be the same Starmer who leads a party which bailed out every bank that asked in 2008 while Bush let Lehmans go bust in the US?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    This would be the same Starmer who leads a party which bailed out every bank that asked in 2008 while Bush let Lehmans go bust in the US?
    You do realise that an uncontrolled bankruptcy by Lehman almost gave the global economy a cardiac arrest?
  • Options
    WillGWillG Posts: 2,223

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    This would be the same Starmer who leads a party which bailed out every bank that asked in 2008 while Bush let Lehmans go bust in the US?
    You do realise that an uncontrolled bankruptcy by Lehman almost gave the global economy a cardiac arrest?
    And they promptly bailed out every other bank in the most incredibly cronyist, haphazard manner. The fact that GS was given protected status.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,972
    edited March 2023

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    What is the point of capitalism if these banks are not allowed to fail?

    Agree 100%. Capitalism only seems to apply to ordinary people. This would be the best thing for Starmer to campaign on at the next election.
    This would be the same Starmer who leads a party which bailed out every bank that asked in 2008 while Bush let Lehmans go bust in the US?
    You do realise that an uncontrolled bankruptcy by Lehman almost gave the global economy a cardiac arrest?
    It did though mean that Bush ensured that the US state did not only allow capitalism to let small businesses go bust, even big banks could go bankrupt too. Remember too the US House of Representatives initially voted down the entire bailout package for the rest of the banking sector.

    Gordon Brown here however was not willing to do that
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,787
    edited March 2023
    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,128
    ping said:

    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….

    Anyone able to translate?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,228

    ping said:

    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….

    Anyone able to translate?
    Printing more money
  • Options
    YokesYokes Posts: 1,225
    Whatever anyone says about the GOP primary, Trump will not win a general election and the GOP know it. This guy came up against one of the most divisive candidate you could imagine in Clinton and still couldnt win the popular vote.

    People can say what they want about the talk of a criminal trial boosting Trump's position. After 4 years of that circus performance in the White House he isnt going to get any boost when it comes to the race that matters.

    On those proposed charges. Trump is aware of some kind of oncoming charge but its guesswork on his part of the rest such as next weeks timing of supposed arrest. He is just trying to pre empt it. The reality is that the supposed charges may be tough to make stick but Trump is facing a raft of other legal issues and is likely to get brought down.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

    I don’t mean to be rude @Cyclefree because you’ve phrased it nicely.

    But it’s a statement of the bleeding obvious!

    I know.

    But it hasn't been obvious enough to enough people. Otherwise the sector wouldn't have got into the mess it's been in for most of my working life.
  • Options
    Just been listening to some old NPR Tiny Desk concerts and came back across this one I shared a few months ago, Nathaniel Rateliff & The Night Sweats

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KUV2TFTpGo

    When I searched PB for it just now to see if I'd posted it before, I saw that @Richard_Tyndall went to to see them live in Jan 2019
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,408
    Nigelb said:

    France is becoming the new Britain
    Brexit and the French ruling class’s superior survival skills are helping it trounce its rival on the world stage
    https://www.ft.com/content/f3ef3af0-83e1-414d-83ee-c860bf19053d

    Arf. Even the usually sycophantic below-the-line FT commenters aren't falling for that one.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    edited March 2023

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

    I thought I was thanking you for having done so with that thread header!
    I know you were. But I am in a tooting-my-own-trumpet mood tonight.

    I shall disappear again soon enough when the usual suspects come on to snipe. So enjoy it while you can.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,128

    ping said:

    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….

    Anyone able to translate?
    Printing more money
    We can't print dollars can we? Does this mean we print pounds in order to buy dollars. That sounds appalling.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    In a weekend when even conspiracy theorists have been behind the curve:

    It does appear to be true that Police Scotland have paused their investigation into SNP finances until after the leadership election. Interviews are resuming on 27 March.
    This is a mistake - it makes it seem the investigation may be conditional on who is the next First Minister.


    https://twitter.com/craigmurrayorg/status/1637532874210516993
  • Options
    YokesYokes Posts: 1,225

    ping said:

    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….

    Anyone able to translate?
    I think it means they are concerned that the flow of money is going to freeze up because banks will tighten up on issung lines of credit (preserving cash) so this, in some shape or form, greases the wheels by making access to dollars (and vice versa I assume) a bit easier.

    In reality it is a very notable move if these central banks fear the credit markets freezing up. .
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,488
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Well, the longer version of my article from my work blog has gained a lot of traction amongst my peers on LinkedIn. Quite chuffed by that. It's nice when something you say resonates.

    It's nice when you share it with us here.
    I have done. Here it is again. https://medium.com/@cyclefree2/cuckoo-be1c97265e6b

    This is the bit that was picked out - which I first said in a talk I gave at the London School of Business to an audience of quite illustrious people some 9 years ago. You'd have thought I was announcing the 10 Commandments judging by the reaction. Sometimes stating the bleeding obvious comes as a surprise.

    I thought I was thanking you for having done so with that thread header!
    I know you were. But I am in a tooting-my-own-trumpet mood tonight.

    I shall disappear again soon enough when the usual suspects come on to snipe. So enjoy it while you can.
    Toot away before you tootle away!
  • Options

    Just been listening to some old NPR Tiny Desk concerts and came back across this one I shared a few months ago, Nathaniel Rateliff & The Night Sweats

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KUV2TFTpGo

    When I searched PB for it just now to see if I'd posted it before, I saw that @Richard_Tyndall went to to see them live in Jan 2019

    One of the links from that was

    Nickel Creek

    I'm halfway through my first listen and I like them very much
  • Options
    BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,403
    edited March 2023

    Just been listening to some old NPR Tiny Desk concerts and came back across this one I shared a few months ago, Nathaniel Rateliff & The Night Sweats

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KUV2TFTpGo

    When I searched PB for it just now to see if I'd posted it before, I saw that @Richard_Tyndall went to to see them live in Jan 2019

    One of the links from that was

    Nickel Creek

    I'm halfway through my first listen and I like them very much
    And if anyone else likes that, check out Punch Brothers
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    Yokes said:

    ping said:

    “Central banks announce dollar liquidity measures to ease banking crisis

    Turmoil prompts authorities to launch daily operations to access dollar funding via standing swap lines“

    https://www.ft.com/content/12cde8bc-ddac-48ef-8563-ff4007fa7e9f

    Brrrr!

    QE-nfinty….

    Anyone able to translate?
    I think it means they are concerned that the flow of money is going to freeze up because banks will tighten up on issung lines of credit (preserving cash) so this, in some shape or form, greases the wheels by making access to dollars (and vice versa I assume) a bit easier.

    In reality it is a very notable move if these central banks fear the credit markets freezing up. .
    Yes - we're back into 2008 territory.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,653
    New thread
This discussion has been closed.