Simon your party opposed the the bail out of Northern rock.
The bailout of Northern Rock was a complete shambles. Between them, Brown and Darling dithered for weeks, making a manageable problem into a major crisis. Mervyn King thought it wasn't his problem, which was sort-of right given that the half-wit who by then was, alas, Prime Minister, had explicitly removed oversight of the stability of the banking system from the BoE's remit. The Financial Services Authority thought it was nothing much to do with them either.
Osborne, quite correctly, pointed this out. Indeed, Peter Lilley, his predecessor as Shadow Chancellor had famously warned, in 1997, of exactly how Brown's fiddling with bank regulation would turn out.
Peter Lilley's 1997 warning about the tripartite system will become as iconic and momentous as the £350m NHS pledge.
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
"As I said before he was a man with no successful legacy as it was hard to know what he believed."
Cameron believed in what all Tory PMs believe in - cold, hard pragmatism. Getting elected. He embraced Remain because he genuinely thought that would win - as did the rest of us. He does have a legacy - he gave the British public the golden opportunity of leaving the EU. Thanks, David!!
Wild currency fluctuations in March '17...... Government panic..... Leading Brexiteer comes out to recant and say he made a serious mistake...... Gove says it was wrecked by government indecision ....calls for May to resign...£ sinks to parity with the dollar...Scotland calls for second independence referendum IMMEDIATELY.....£ continues to fall...Hammond CALLS emergency budget.....Boris resigns followed by Fox......May calls Red White and Blue election...Her leadership is challenged by Davis....there's a run on Irish passports...... Farage is appointed US ambassador
Corbyn and Farron win the most seats and form the second Lib Lab pact. Corbyn cycles to the palace
You missed out the flying pigs from the beginning of that dream Roge.
"Peter Lilley's 1997 warning about the tripartite system will become as iconic and momentous as the £350m NHS pledge."
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
The tendency may exist in reality even if people do not use the term as much. Since most such terms are really just about suggesting others are focusing on minor or the wrong points (for varying motivations), that definitely does happen, as focusing on the wrong thing contributes to people losing.
BTW, I don't see Democrats collectively blaming the FBI and the Russians for Clinton's loss. What I've seen is Democrats (and some Republicans too) express concern at the Russian hacking scandal. And as for Clinton's ratings, Trump's ratings for an incoming President are pretty awful as well, and the signs are so far are that Trump is doing absolutely nothing to reach out to those outside his base.
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
BTW, I don't see Democrats collectively blaming the FBI and the Russians for Clinton's loss. What I've seen is Democrats (and some Republicans too) express concern at the Russian hacking scandal. And as for Clinton's ratings, Trump's ratings for an incoming President are pretty awful as well, and the signs are so far are that Trump is doing absolutely nothing to reach out to those outside his base.
Someone will now link to a democrat who is blaming the FBI and the Russians, but the is valid - the extreme reactions, on any side, are not reflective of the average member of that group.
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
Go and do some canvassing and you'll find, as I have since 2005, that:
- public attitudes to immigration are far different to those portrayed by the media - public tolerance of political correctness is very, very low - public distaste for the EU is very, very high - many Labour voters despaired of the Miliband leadership, and even more so the Corbyn leadership - distrust of the SNP is a huge factor in marginals - apart from amongst activists, the attitude towards LDs since they went into government has changed dramatically - for the worse
These are the public manifestations of why mainstream and hard leftism are unpopular - virtue signalling, SJW and waycist are the shorthand for these.
Simon your party opposed the the bail out of Northern rock.
The bailout of Northern Rock was a complete shambles. Between them, Brown and Darling dithered for weeks, making a manageable problem into a major crisis. Mervyn King thought it wasn't his problem, which was sort-of right given that the half-wit who by then was, alas, Prime Minister, had explicitly removed oversight of the stability of the banking system from the BoE's remit. The Financial Services Authority thought it was nothing much to do with them either.
Osborne, quite correctly, pointed this out. Indeed, Peter Lilley, his predecessor as Shadow Chancellor had famously warned, in 1997, of exactly how Brown's fiddling with bank regulation would turn out.
Peter Lilley's 1997 warning about the tripartite system will become as iconic and momentous as the £350m NHS pledge.
Obvs for different reasons.
It depends, if the Tories are clever they will fudge the £350m claim and pledge an extra £70m per week for 5 years from 2020. That will probably be enough to call it a win.
"Cameron believed in what all Tory PMs believe in - cold, hard pragmatism. Getting elected. He embraced Remain because he genuinely thought that would win - as did the rest of us. He does have a legacy - he gave the British public the golden opportunity of leaving the EU. Thanks, David!!"
Before 2010 I had genuinely high hopes for Cameron. I seriously thought he could be a great PM. Even in the early days of the coalition I kept the faith. Gradually, I came to realise that the man was a complete pillock, a blue Blair but with even worse judgement than his hero. He was the biggest political disappointment of my lifetime.
Yes I can give thanks that he have us the referendum, though the circumstances of his doing so do not reflect well on him. On the whole I was glad to see the back of him and his mate Osborne.
"Peter Lilley's 1997 warning about the tripartite system will become as iconic and momentous as the £350m NHS pledge."
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
Wild currency fluctuations in March '17...... Government panic..... Leading Brexiteer comes out to recant and say he made a serious mistake...... Gove says it was wrecked by government indecision ....calls for May to resign...£ sinks to parity with the dollar...Scotland calls for second independence referendum IMMEDIATELY.....£ continues to fall...Hammond CALLS emergency budget.....Boris resigns followed by Fox......May calls Red White and Blue election...Her leadership is challenged by Davis....there's a run on Irish passports...... Farage is appointed US ambassador
Corbyn and Farron win the most seats and form the second Lib Lab pact. Corbyn cycles to the palace
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
The tendency may exist in reality even if people do not use the term as much. Since most such terms are really just about suggesting others are focusing on minor or the wrong points (for varying motivations), that definitely does happen, as focusing on the wrong thing contributes to people losing.
I think that the Clinton campaign messed up, but I think it's for different reasons to what many on here think. I think the right's attribution that identity politics is the reason for Clinton's loss is much to do with their own grievances and hatred of it, rather than that being the definitive reason as to why Clinton lost. I would argue that much of Clinton's loss is related to Clinton being seen as an establishment candidate, and thus as someone who would continue the economic policies which have seen many, particularly in the Rust Belt lose out financially. It's been well documented that median wages have been declining now for a number of decades across the Western world. I think Clinton thought that making the election a referendum on Trump would lead her winning, but instead by making it personal it also shone the spotlight on her deficiencies as well. For all the talk of identity politics, Obama won two elections with identity politics as an aspect of his platform in 08', and 12', and even now Clinton won the popular vote. Look at the approval ratings of Obama now - they're not too far behind B.Clinton and Regan, at the end of their presidencies. A lot of Clinton's issues, I think can be accredited to the inefficiency of her campaign - for example not visiting places like Wisconsin. That just reinforces the perception that a Clinton presidency would ignore these groups.
"Peter Lilley's 1997 warning about the tripartite system will become as iconic and momentous as the £350m NHS pledge."
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
Well notwithstanding what happens to us all in the long run, I would say that the history books will ensure that they remain key milestones, for one reason or another, in the accounts of the GFC era.
Jason he hardly embraced remain for years before the vote .From about march to June he was like a drowning man asking the voters to save him from his own hubris. The conservative party is the most pragmatic and has the speed to change direction due to not really having to consult it's members over major policy changes.This is it's great strength and has made it so successful.
Can not see Labour winning this by election in Feb march or April.However if it is in May on same day as council elections they might hold it.Similar to last year when they did better than most forecasts and winning the London and Bristol mayoralities .Which seemed to me that many who were writing Labour obituaries was a bit premature .Many were saying the same in 92 then doing a full reverse and writing off the Conservatives in 97.It is hard to predict next year never mind 2020.
The local elections last year were in the middle of a referendum campaign that split the Tories down the middle, while the PM trashed his own approval ratings with a series of increasingly hysterical projections of what'd happen if Leave won. That scenario is unlikely to be repeated this May.
Ms. Apocalypse, the incompetence of Clinton's campaign is something often overlooked (I've only heard it mentioned here, I think, rather than in broadcast or print media).
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
Which part of this is "out of context"?
It's outside the context of a Leave campaign that was not intended to win.
And if somehow they did win, nobody would hold them to account because we'd all come together since nobody really wanted to stay in the EU and it was only Cameron's traitorous support for Remain that avoided a 70-30 landslide for Leave.
Wild currency fluctuations in March '17...... Government panic..... Leading Brexiteer comes out to recant and say he made a serious mistake...... Gove says it was wrecked by government indecision ....calls for May to resign...£ sinks to parity with the dollar...Scotland calls for second independence referendum IMMEDIATELY.....£ continues to fall...Hammond CALLS emergency budget.....Boris resigns followed by Fox......May calls Red White and Blue election...Her leadership is challenged by Davis....there's a run on Irish passports...... Farage is appointed US ambassador
Corbyn and Farron win the most seats and form the second Lib Lab pact. Corbyn cycles to the palace
You missed out the flying pigs from the beginning of that dream Roge.
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
Go and do some canvassing and you'll find, as I have since 2005, that:
- public attitudes to immigration are far different to those portrayed by the media - public tolerance of political correctness is very, very low - public distaste for the EU is very, very high - many Labour voters despaired of the Miliband leadership, and even more so the Corbyn leadership - distrust of the SNP is a huge factor in marginals - apart from amongst activists, the attitude towards LDs since they went into government has changed dramatically - for the worse
These are the public manifestations of why mainstream and hard leftism are unpopular - virtue signalling, SJW and waycist are the shorthand for these.
Can you explain the difference between political correctness, and basic civility - with which it seems often to be confused ?
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
God, imagine being canvassed by Mortimer. A young fogey arrives at your doorstep and asks you for your views on political correctness and the EU. I'd rather entertain a Jehovah's Witness!
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
The tendency may exist in reality even if people do not use the term as much. Since most such terms are really just about suggesting others are focusing on minor or the wrong points (for varying motivations), that definitely does happen, as focusing on the wrong thing contributes to people losing.
I think that the Clinton campaign messed up, but I think it's for different reasons to what many on here think. I think the right's attribution that identity politics is the reason for Clinton's loss is much to do with their own grievances and hatred of it, rather than that being the definitive reason as to why Clinton lost. I would argue that much of Clinton's loss is related to Clinton being seen as an establishment candidate, and thus as someone who would continue the economic policies which have seen many, particularly in the Rust Belt lose out financially. It's been well documented that median wages have been declining now for a number of decades across the Western world. I think Clinton thought that making the election a referendum on Trump would lead her winning, but instead by making it personal it also shone the spotlight on her deficiencies as well. For all the talk of identity politics, Obama won two elections with identity politics as an aspect of his platform in 08', and 12', and even now Clinton won the popular vote. Look at the approval ratings of Obama now - they're not too far behind B.Clinton and Regan, at the end of their presidencies. A lot of Clinton's issues, I think can be accredited to the inefficiency of her campaign - for example not visiting places like Wisconsin. That just reinforces the perception that a Clinton presidency would ignore these groups.
I think, as much as anything, the Trump win was to do with his vastly superior use of TV, as set out in this article which I ought to have read >before< the election - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-donald-trumps-shrewd-822494 - and social media (which Plato's irritatingly persistent posts ought to have clued us into).
Policy is secondary - indeed for Trump himself, it appears to be of relatively small importance.
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
The latter was sold to whoever it was for a dollar, or somesuch, IIRC and all employees and shareholders suffered. Neither, in those heady days (I heard the news on the radio as I was on my way to the Kong Kong Derby early one Sunday morning), did banks have the kind of holdings which created the bonkers systemic risk 20 years later. Apart from the name, which might have been vaguely familiar to a few people, no one was touched or aware of Barings.
If Northern Rock had gone down, it would have engendered panic across all high street banks, mass withdrawal and a drawdown of banks' capital reserves, such as they were at the time. There are plenty of left wing critics of the "money creation" system we have now, and it would all have fallen apart under a bank panic if the government hadn't stepped in as it did. Belatedly.
@Mortimer Miliband's unpopularity was nothing to do with virtue signalling/SJW - particularly since Miliband didn't really do any of these. Miliband's issues were as follows:
- On a superficial level, he didn't look and sound like a leader. - He lacked a coherent political vision. Miliband was so caught between his own centre-left politics, and where the Tories had shifted the centre towards, that by 2015 his views were an incoherent muddle of an attempt square both diametric elements together. With no coherent economic and social policies, that meant that the Conservative could focus in on Miliband's long-standing personal flaws even more. Combined with the credibility the Conservatives had on the economy and welfare - two of the central issues at the time - a Miliband loss was inevitable.
On Corbyn: Imagine conflating a hard-left candidate with the rest of the left. As if Corbyn's bizarre attitudes reflects everyone who votes Labour, or everyone left wing. The left is more than just some 18-24 year olds who go on tumblr and twitter FGS.
On immigration: The media pretty much reflects public attitudes towards immigration. Publications like the Mail and The Sun are probably big reasons why the EU Referendum essentially became a hate-fest towards foreigners, as opposed to a genuine examination of the pros and cons of the EU.
- I'm not a fan of the EU myself. However the public are fairly divided on the issue, as the referendum result shows.
- Well, obvious point on the LDs. But I don't see how that has anything to do with SJW/virtue signalling etc. The LDs lost voters because they went into coalition with the Tories for a start, and the Tories successfully in Lib/Con marginals used the LDs to position themselves as a socially liberal, fiscally conservative party. Because they positioned themselves in that centre, that led to the LDs becoming irrelevant, and the Tories winning seats.
- On political correctness: I recall you expressing an opinion along the lines that racism and sexism is merely being impolite. My experiences with people from a range of political perspectives suggest that many think otherwise.
- SNP weren't unpopular because they were a social democratic party. The issue there was that voters were concerned Miliband would become a puppet for Scottish interests which isn't a left/right issue.
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
Barings was irrelevant in the scheme of things.
The only people who really lost out were Peter and his family and the City charities who owned large amounts of the Perpetuals.
Peter deserves everything he got.
ING lost a lot of goodwill from their shortsighted approach to the Perps.
Ms. Apocalypse, the incompetence of Clinton's campaign is something often overlooked (I've only heard it mentioned here, I think, rather than in broadcast or print media).
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Or maybe you are a muslim or a non Christian who doesn't celebrate Christmas.
The LDs were only on 3.5% last time. I can't see them getting more than 7-8% at the by-election.
Lib Dems in the next door Tim Farron constituency will be available to campaign, especially to make inroads in centres of population like Keswick and Whitehaven.
We have a weak pound (Brexiteers keep telling us how great that is) and we ARE STILL PART OF THE CUSTOMS UNION.
If we leave, car manufacturing will be devastated. You will notice we haven't left yet...
The EU tariff on car imports from outside the customs union is 10%.
This is far less than the devaluation of sterling since the referendum.
UK car manufacturers will be quids in, even with a 10% tariff.
They most certainly won't. You are making a very naive mistake, of thinking that tariffs on completed cars are the issue. They are not; the issues are tariffs, and non-tariff barriers such as delays in customs, on the supply-chain.
There is absolutely no doubt that potential damage to our car industry is the single most worrying economic risk of the Brexit process.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
My Dad helped Eddie out on it (he was on the committee that acted as an informal sounding board). I'm sure he'd appreciate your kind comments
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Or maybe you are a muslim or a non Christian who doesn't celebrate Christmas.
I thought we'd sorted all those posters out with the PB New Entrance Requirements test, no?
TOPPING: are you fairly new to PB? Because usually there are loads of comments on Christmas Day on the site, including sometimes a special crossword quiz.
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Or maybe you are a muslim or a non Christian who doesn't celebrate Christmas.
I assumed the 1647 ordnance on abolishing festivals was still in effect - nothing more christian than not celebrating christmas after all. It allotted time for recreation in their place, so I assumed that was what bank holidays were for.
Forasmuch as the Feasts of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and other Festivals commonly called Holy-Dayes, have been heretofore superstitiously used and observed Be it Ordained, by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled, That the said Feast of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and all other Festival dayes, commonly called Holy-dayes, be no longer observed as Festivals or Holy-dayes within this Kingdome of England and Dominion of Wales, any Law, Statute, Custome, Constitution, or Cannon to the contrary in any wise notwithstandin
TOPPING: are you fairly new to PB? Because usually there are loads of comments on Christmas Day on the site, including sometimes a special crossword quiz.
My memory is often, um, impaired on Christmas Day.
Wouldn't be surprised if I posted five hundred times in years gone by.
I think, as much as anything, the Trump win was to do with his vastly superior use of TV, as set out in this article which I ought to have read >before< the election - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-donald-trumps-shrewd-822494 - and social media (which Plato's irritatingly persistent posts ought to have clued us into).
Policy is secondary - indeed for Trump himself, it appears to be of relatively small importance.
I agree with you very much on policy. This is where I think some of the Trump/Regan comparisons are so off. For a start Regan was a governor for several years prior to running for President, and actually had a coherent political outlook. Trump doesn't appear to have one - which is why the likes of Bannon seem to see a Trump presidency as an opportunity to exert their own 'alt-right' agenda, and why establishment Republicans seem to think they use a Trump presidency as a platform to implement their own longstanding aims (like Ryan with Medicare).
The Lib Dems owe Labour no favours at the by-election.
They ran a candidate that could have scuppered Olney in Richmond, that that did not happen is irrelevant. It COULD have happened.
If the Greens were in with a serious shout (They aren't) then perhaps it could be considered... I think the Greens will run in this one, expecially if the Lab candidate is pro-nuclear.
My tweet to Betfair seems to have got the Clinton and Trump % markets suspended
Hopefully a payout soon.
Turnout not suspended, they've f*cked themselves over on that one...
Paid out now, nice to have recovered much of my losses on the election with no risk at all on various late markets. I suppose they will settle the turnout soon as well, although if it had been very near one of the boundaries they might have had to wait until the next population census! Better to have bet on the total number of votes than the turnout.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Surely a textbook example of the Bank of England not having a clue what was happening until after it happened.
The Lib Dems owe Labour no favours at the by-election.
They ran a candidate that could have scuppered Olney in Richmond, that that did not happen is irrelevant. It COULD have happened.
If the Greens were in with a serious shout (They aren't) then perhaps it could be considered... I think the Greens will run in this one, expecially if the Lab candidate is pro-nuclear.
The LDs were only on 3.5% last time. I can't see them getting more than 7-8% at the by-election.
Lib Dems in the next door Tim Farron constituency will be available to campaign, especially to make inroads in centres of population like Keswick and Whitehaven.
I don't think the LDs have the basic potential to get more than about 10% in Copeland. It's simply a very weak area for them over the years. The fact that it's next door to Westmorland & Lonsdale doesn't really make any difference to that IMO.
I think, as much as anything, the Trump win was to do with his vastly superior use of TV, as set out in this article which I ought to have read >before< the election - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-donald-trumps-shrewd-822494 - and social media (which Plato's irritatingly persistent posts ought to have clued us into).
Policy is secondary - indeed for Trump himself, it appears to be of relatively small importance.
I agree with you very much on policy. This is where I think some of the Trump/Regan comparisons are so off. For a start Regan was a governor for several years prior to running for President, and actually had a coherent political outlook. Trump doesn't appear to have one - which is why the likes of Bannon seem to see a Trump presidency as an opportunity to exert their own 'alt-right' agenda, and why establishment Republicans seem to think they use a Trump presidency as a platform to implement their own longstanding aims (like Ryan with Medicare).
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Surely a textbook example of the Bank of England not having a clue what was happening until after it happened.
Some of that, too. But it's hard to know what is happening when the relevant contract notes are hidden in a drawer in Singapore.
I think, as much as anything, the Trump win was to do with his vastly superior use of TV, as set out in this article which I ought to have read >before< the election - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-donald-trumps-shrewd-822494 - and social media (which Plato's irritatingly persistent posts ought to have clued us into).
Policy is secondary - indeed for Trump himself, it appears to be of relatively small importance.
I agree with you very much on policy. This is where I think some of the Trump/Regan comparisons are so off. For a start Regan was a governor for several years prior to running for President, and actually had a coherent political outlook. Trump doesn't appear to have one - which is why the likes of Bannon seem to see a Trump presidency as an opportunity to exert their own 'alt-right' agenda, and why establishment Republicans seem to think they use a Trump presidency as a platform to implement their own longstanding aims (like Ryan with Medicare).
(So Trump's strong aversion to wind power, for example, is not shared by the vast majority of those who voted for him.)
Pew is an absolutely fantastic resource. Recently, I was reading American views on abortion. Really intriguing to how British and American views differ so much on this subject.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Surely a textbook example of the Bank of England not having a clue what was happening until after it happened.
Some of that, too. But it's hard to know what is happening when the relevant contract notes are hidden in a drawer in Singapore.
The drawer belonging to the person who was both supposed to be monitoring malpractices and perpetrating them.
Dear god a lot has changed regulatorily and oversight-wise since then.
How this sorry saga will end..... Wild currency fluctuations in March '17...... Government panic..... Leading Brexiteer comes out to recant and say he made a serious mistake...... Gove says it was wrecked by government indecision ....calls for May to resign...£ sinks to parity with the dollar...Scotland calls for second independence referendum IMMEDIATELY.....£ continues to fall...Hammond CALLS emergency budget.....Boris resigns followed by Fox......May calls Red White and Blue election...Her leadership is challenged by Davis....there's a run on Irish passports...... Farage is appointed US ambassador Corbyn and Farron win the most seats and form the second Lib Lab pact
How this sorry saga will end..... Wild currency fluctuations in March '17...... Government panic..... Leading Brexiteer comes out to recant and say he made a serious mistake...... Gove says it was wrecked by government indecision ....calls for May to resign...£ sinks to parity with the dollar...Scotland calls for second independence referendum IMMEDIATELY.....£ continues to fall...Hammond CALLS emergency budget.....Boris resigns followed by Fox......May calls Red White and Blue election...Her leadership is challenged by Davis....there's a run on Irish passports...... Farage is appointed US ambassador Corbyn and Farron win the most seats and form the second Lib Lab pact
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
The latter was sold to whoever it was for a dollar, or somesuch, IIRC and all employees and shareholders suffered. Neither, in those heady days (I heard the news on the radio as I was on my way to the Kong Kong Derby early one Sunday morning), did banks have the kind of holdings which created the bonkers systemic risk 20 years later. Apart from the name, which might have been vaguely familiar to a few people, no one was touched or aware of Barings.
If Northern Rock had gone down, it would have engendered panic across all high street banks, mass withdrawal and a drawdown of banks' capital reserves, such as they were at the time. There are plenty of left wing critics of the "money creation" system we have now, and it would all have fallen apart under a bank panic if the government hadn't stepped in as it did. Belatedly.
£1 which literally came out of the pocket of the partner closing the deal. Barings was, if you look at the actual exposures, tiny and outside a limited audience, unknown. Plus they had a history of regular insolvency...
Please god no. No more effing stupid internet lingo please.
I have yet to hear a single person vocalise the phrase virtue signalling. I doubt I will ever hear 'vice signalling' away from the weirdo world of internet forums either. Ditto SJW, handwaving, and the utterly moronic 'waycist'.
Pretty much this. Literally, no one has even heard of these terms outside of the internet. This is why it's hilarious that people genuinely think that 'virtue signalling' etc is the reason why the Left have lost this year.
The tendency may exist in reality even if people do not use the term as much. Since most such terms are really just about suggesting others are focusing on minor or the wrong points (for varying motivations), that definitely does happen, as focusing on the wrong thing contributes to people losing.
I think that the Clinton campaign messed up, but I think it's for different reasons to what many on here think. I think the right's attribution that identity politics is the reason for Clinton's loss is much to do with their own grievances and hatred of it, rather than that being the definitive reason as to why Clinton lost. I would argue that much of Clinton's loss is related to Clinton being seen as an establishment candidate, and thus as someone who would continue the economic policies which have seen many, particularly in the Rust Belt lose out financially. It's been well documented that median wages have been declining now for a number of decades across the Western world. I think Clinton thought that making the election a referendum on Trump would lead her winning, but instead by making it personal it also shone the spotlight on her deficiencies as well. For all the talk of identity politics, Obama won two elections with identity politics as an aspect of his platform in 08', and 12', and even now Clinton won the popular vote. Look at the approval ratings of Obama now - they're not too far behind B.Clinton and Regan, at the end of their presidencies. A lot of Clinton's issues, I think can be accredited to the inefficiency of her campaign - for example not visiting places like Wisconsin. That just reinforces the perception that a Clinton presidency would ignore these groups.
I'd recommend Sean Trende's article, The God That Failed. Essentially, her staff took the view that they didn't need to appeal to Blue Collar White voters, because they were history, and a new Coalition of the Ascendant would keep the Democrats in power for years to come.
Fair go. Mr. T., a different perspective does give a different point of view. I had Bill Clinton marked down as a wrong'un from the outset. It was with his nomination and then election that I started to worry about the political system in the USA. Subsequent events have not eased my fears.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Surely a textbook example of the Bank of England not having a clue what was happening until after it happened.
Some of that, too. But it's hard to know what is happening when the relevant contract notes are hidden in a drawer in Singapore.
The drawer belonging to the person who was both supposed to be monitoring malpractices and perpetrating them.
Dear god a lot has changed regulatorily and oversight-wise since then.
You'd hope so but wasn't the UBS unauthorised trading loss similar?
Eurobarometer surveys are a mess and border on propaganda. Anyone with the most basic understanding of survey design would not attach much weight to them.
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Or maybe you are a muslim or a non Christian who doesn't celebrate Christmas.
I assumed the 1647 ordnance on abolishing festivals was still in effect - nothing more christian than not celebrating christmas after all. It allotted time for recreation in their place, so I assumed that was what bank holidays were for.
Forasmuch as the Feasts of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and other Festivals commonly called Holy-Dayes, have been heretofore superstitiously used and observed Be it Ordained, by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled, That the said Feast of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and all other Festival dayes, commonly called Holy-dayes, be no longer observed as Festivals or Holy-dayes within this Kingdome of England and Dominion of Wales, any Law, Statute, Custome, Constitution, or Cannon to the contrary in any wise notwithstandin
There are still devout Scots and Ulstermen who denounce the sin of celebrating Christmas.
Eurobarometer surveys are a mess and border on propaganda. Anyone with the most basic understanding of survey design would not attach much weight to them.
@Verulamius Pretty sure that's a fallacy of relative privation - we can walk and chew gum. We can tackle large and small waste. As far as I'm concerned, any wasteful use of taxpayes money should simultaenously be dealt with - and it will be.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
Surely a textbook example of the Bank of England not having a clue what was happening until after it happened.
Some of that, too. But it's hard to know what is happening when the relevant contract notes are hidden in a drawer in Singapore.
The drawer belonging to the person who was both supposed to be monitoring malpractices and perpetrating them.
Dear god a lot has changed regulatorily and oversight-wise since then.
You'd hope so but wasn't the UBS unauthorised trading loss similar?
Slightly different.
Kweku ran his losing positions and hid them by pretending that he was hedged so the mark to market didn't look too bad. When the market went his way, his bogus hedging trades expired worthless, when it went against him, he put more bogus hedging trades on.
Now, he maintains that "everyone knew" this was happening and he had the agreement of his bosses. But if the compliance/risk dept knew well of course it was fraud so that would have been that.
With Nick Leeson, he was both the compliance/risk officer and the trader so the only person who might have been worried was himself.
The LDs were only on 3.5% last time. I can't see them getting more than 7-8% at the by-election.
Lib Dems in the next door Tim Farron constituency will be available to campaign, especially to make inroads in centres of population like Keswick and Whitehaven.
I don't think the LDs have the basic potential to get more than about 10% in Copeland. It's simply a very weak area for them over the years. The fact that it's next door to Westmorland & Lonsdale doesn't really make any difference to that IMO.
Keswick is a relatively strong Lib Dem town much more akin to Windermere and Kendal . I am sure they will concentrate efforts here to gain the CC division . They lost it narrowly in 2013 but held it previously ( different boundaries ) . The other 3 Allerdale wards have potential though they are more rural and Conservative inclined . Any vote increase the Lib Dems achieve here will be at the Conservatives expense .
The trouble with that page, Mr Verulaminus, is that as the text makes plain it represents one view of government spending, and perhaps not a complete one. I suspect that a lot of people who follow and report on government spending will struggle to reconcile the figures.
Focusing on NC, FL, and OH, was fair enough, given that they're very marginal, and have 62 ECV's between them. Putting resources into States like Arizona, Texas, and Georgia was absurd and evidence of the hubris I mentioned. Ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan was plain stupid. Ignoring blue collar whites was beyond stupid.
"Five men have been convicted of sexually abusing and trafficking six teenage girls in Coventry. Waqaar Khan, Kadeem Bourne, Kenan Kelly, Marcus Woolcock and Zahid Chaudhary were accused of almost 40 offences, Warwick Crown Court heard. Ringleader Khan befriended the girls, aged 15 to 17, on social media before picking them up and forcing them to have sex, sometimes filming it. West Midlands Police described them as "brazen, calculating and evil". The court heard the men took the girls, some of whom were in care, to secluded areas of the city and sometimes gave them alcohol or drugs before abusing and trafficking them for sex."
Mr. Glenn, you picked one of the PIIGS that's now 'flying', which did paint a somewhat misleading picture. Ireland's done very well to turn things around. The other PIIGS are in varying states.
Spain is doing very well too, and will notch up its second year in a row of 3%+ GDP growth. Employment has grown by more than two million from the bottom of the crisis, and is up almost five million from the level at the beginning of 1999 when it joined the Eurozone. (That being said, there are clearly two Spains: the export oriented North of the country and Madrid are flying. The South, whose economy is almost entirely reliant on tourism and construction, is still a disaster area.)
Portugal is recovering, albeit growth has really stalled since the Socialist-Communist coalition took power. Demographics are a major issue there, and it's hard to see a major recovery.
Greece is a disaster. Syriza plus the Eurozone is like taking arsenic and strychnine.
Eurobarometer surveys are a mess and border on propaganda. Anyone with the most basic understanding of survey design would not attach much weight to them.
The surveys are carried out by reputable firms, and on some questions like 'The Euro has been good or bad for my country', the answers tally well with figures from other firms.
The big two issues I have with them are: (1) the questions are unbelievably leading, and (2) it's not clear how they achieve a representative sample. If you asked 'Do you think that economic migrants from other EU countries should be allowed to come here and claim benefits?' you'd get very different answers.
Why does everyone think the by-election will be delayed until May? Surely both Lab and Con will want it quicker than that, in order to try and keep everyone else out of the game?
As for the Lib Dems and UKIP, pretty sure Lib Dems will do better than at the General Election and UKIP worse.
Mortimer is out of date on public attitudes to the Lib Dems. He needs to start paying attention to those "parish council" elections.
Anyone interested in the Barings collapse - ask me at the next PB Drinks! Suffice it to say that, from the government and BoE point of view, it was a textbook example of how to handle a bank crash, and of how these things were successfully handled for 150 years before Gordon Brown.
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
NR shareholders got it in the neck, but didn't the bond holders escape more or less unharmed ? Nice work if you can get it I would have thought.
Why does everyone think the by-election will be delayed until May? Surely both Lab and Con will want it quicker than that, in order to try and keep everyone else out of the game?
As for the Lib Dems and UKIP, pretty sure Lib Dems will do better than at the General Election and UKIP worse.
Mortimer is out of date on public attitudes to the Lib Dems. He needs to start paying attention to those "parish council" elections.
We'll see in May when the next local elections happen...
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
The latter was sold to whoever it was for a dollar, or somesuch, IIRC and all employees and shareholders suffered. Neither, in those heady days (I heard the news on the radio as I was on my way to the Kong Kong Derby early one Sunday morning), did banks have the kind of holdings which created the bonkers systemic risk 20 years later. Apart from the name, which might have been vaguely familiar to a few people, no one was touched or aware of Barings.
If Northern Rock had gone down, it would have engendered panic across all high street banks, mass withdrawal and a drawdown of banks' capital reserves, such as they were at the time. There are plenty of left wing critics of the "money creation" system we have now, and it would all have fallen apart under a bank panic if the government hadn't stepped in as it did. Belatedly.
£1 which literally came out of the pocket of the partner closing the deal. Barings was, if you look at the actual exposures, tiny and outside a limited audience, unknown. Plus they had a history of regular insolvency...
**** I think Barings and the Co-op were small enough to fail ... they did so for different reasons, and the Co-op was bailed out by US hedge funds, which took a share in it.
Northern Rock, RBS or HBOS were too big to fail. Zero has been done to split banks up so that the new post-2008 banks can be left to fail, yet that's how capitalism is supposed to work.
Comments
Good news = We haven't left yet
Rinse and repeat
Obvs for different reasons.
Cameron believed in what all Tory PMs believe in - cold, hard pragmatism. Getting elected. He embraced Remain because he genuinely thought that would win - as did the rest of us. He does have a legacy - he gave the British public the golden opportunity of leaving the EU. Thanks, David!!
We're leaving, despite all the whining.
You mean both will be largely forgotten except for political obsessives and on the odd occasion someone brings them up on a forum like this, they will be quoted incorrectly and out of context?
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/747000584226607104/photo/1
- public attitudes to immigration are far different to those portrayed by the media
- public tolerance of political correctness is very, very low
- public distaste for the EU is very, very high
- many Labour voters despaired of the Miliband leadership, and even more so the Corbyn leadership
- distrust of the SNP is a huge factor in marginals
- apart from amongst activists, the attitude towards LDs since they went into government has changed dramatically - for the worse
These are the public manifestations of why mainstream and hard leftism are unpopular - virtue signalling, SJW and waycist are the shorthand for these.
Before 2010 I had genuinely high hopes for Cameron. I seriously thought he could be a great PM. Even in the early days of the coalition I kept the faith. Gradually, I came to realise that the man was a complete pillock, a blue Blair but with even worse judgement than his hero. He was the biggest political disappointment of my lifetime.
Yes I can give thanks that he have us the referendum, though the circumstances of his doing so do not reflect well on him. On the whole I was glad to see the back of him and his mate Osborne.
And if somehow they did win, nobody would hold them to account because we'd all come together since nobody really wanted to stay in the EU and it was only Cameron's traitorous support for Remain that avoided a 70-30 landslide for Leave.
Hopefully a payout soon.
Turnout not suspended, they've f*cked themselves over on that one...
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-wolff-donald-trumps-shrewd-822494
- and social media (which Plato's irritatingly persistent posts ought to have clued us into).
Policy is secondary - indeed for Trump himself, it appears to be of relatively small importance.
If Northern Rock had gone down, it would have engendered panic across all high street banks, mass withdrawal and a drawdown of banks' capital reserves, such as they were at the time. There are plenty of left wing critics of the "money creation" system we have now, and it would all have fallen apart under a bank panic if the government hadn't stepped in as it did. Belatedly.
Miliband's unpopularity was nothing to do with virtue signalling/SJW - particularly since Miliband didn't really do any of these. Miliband's issues were as follows:
- On a superficial level, he didn't look and sound like a leader.
- He lacked a coherent political vision. Miliband was so caught between his own centre-left politics, and where the Tories had shifted the centre towards, that by 2015 his views were an incoherent muddle of an attempt square both diametric elements together. With no coherent economic and social policies, that meant that the Conservative could focus in on Miliband's long-standing personal flaws even more. Combined with the credibility the Conservatives had on the economy and welfare - two of the central issues at the time - a Miliband loss was inevitable.
On Corbyn: Imagine conflating a hard-left candidate with the rest of the left. As if Corbyn's bizarre attitudes reflects everyone who votes Labour, or everyone left wing. The left is more than just some 18-24 year olds who go on tumblr and twitter FGS.
On immigration: The media pretty much reflects public attitudes towards immigration. Publications like the Mail and The Sun are probably big reasons why the EU Referendum essentially became a hate-fest towards foreigners, as opposed to a genuine examination of the pros and cons of the EU.
- I'm not a fan of the EU myself. However the public are fairly divided on the issue, as the referendum result shows.
- Well, obvious point on the LDs. But I don't see how that has anything to do with SJW/virtue signalling etc. The LDs lost voters because they went into coalition with the Tories for a start, and the Tories successfully in Lib/Con marginals used the LDs to position themselves as a socially liberal, fiscally conservative party. Because they positioned themselves in that centre, that led to the LDs becoming irrelevant, and the Tories winning seats.
- On political correctness: I recall you expressing an opinion along the lines that racism and sexism is merely being impolite. My experiences with people from a range of political perspectives suggest that many think otherwise.
- SNP weren't unpopular because they were a social democratic party. The issue there was that voters were concerned Miliband would become a puppet for Scottish interests which isn't a left/right issue.
The only people who really lost out were Peter and his family and the City charities who owned large amounts of the Perpetuals.
Peter deserves everything he got.
ING lost a lot of goodwill from their shortsighted approach to the Perps.
The shares became worthless.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/trumps-road-to-victory/507203/
Of course, it was a small bank, which made it easier.
The EU tariff on car imports from outside the customs union is 10%.
This is far less than the devaluation of sterling since the referendum.
UK car manufacturers will be quids in, even with a 10% tariff.
Is there a prize/penalty for anyone who posts on Christmas day?
Does it show a) a desperate sadness at being on an internet chatroom on Christmas of all times; or b) a refreshing feet-on-the-ground interest in current affairs whatever the circumstances?
Lib Dems in the next door Tim Farron constituency will be available to campaign, especially to make inroads in centres of population like Keswick and Whitehaven.
There is absolutely no doubt that potential damage to our car industry is the single most worrying economic risk of the Brexit process.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/acts-ordinances-interregnum/p954
Forasmuch as the Feasts of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and other Festivals commonly called Holy-Dayes, have been heretofore superstitiously used and observed Be it Ordained, by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled, That the said Feast of the Nativity of Christ, Easter and Whitsuntide, and all other Festival dayes, commonly called Holy-dayes, be no longer observed as Festivals or Holy-dayes within this Kingdome of England and Dominion of Wales, any Law, Statute, Custome, Constitution, or Cannon to the contrary in any wise notwithstandin
Wouldn't be surprised if I posted five hundred times in years gone by.
They ran a candidate that could have scuppered Olney in Richmond, that that did not happen is irrelevant. It COULD have happened.
If the Greens were in with a serious shout (They aren't) then perhaps it could be considered... I think the Greens will run in this one, expecially if the Lab candidate is pro-nuclear.
For me, that falls to Clinton, Bill. It would have been Obama, except I had no expectations of him.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/31/clinton-trump-supporters-deeply-divided-over-use-of-fossil-fuel-energy-sources/
(So Trump's strong aversion to wind power, for example, is not shared by the vast majority of those who voted for him.)
Dear god a lot has changed regulatorily and oversight-wise since then.
So this is what Brexit looks like, does it? Situation no change, free movement, ECJ oversight, single market.
Delighted you've come to realise how good Brexit actually is for the UK.
Such hubris is always punished.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/811977223326625792
This document from HM Treasury may help with your question of Government spending in 2015/16
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-public-spending-was-calculated-in-your-tax-summary/how-public-spending-was-calculated-in-your-tax-summary
It helpfully categories contributions to the EU as the smallest category.
The top three are:
Welfare (excluding state pensions) £174.9bn 25%
Health £138.7bn 19.9%
State pensions £89.3bn 12.8%
Fixed it for you...
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/12/22/putin-russias-military-is-stronger-than-any-potential-aggressor.html
Kweku ran his losing positions and hid them by pretending that he was hedged so the mark to market didn't look too bad. When the market went his way, his bogus hedging trades expired worthless, when it went against him, he put more bogus hedging trades on.
Now, he maintains that "everyone knew" this was happening and he had the agreement of his bosses. But if the compliance/risk dept knew well of course it was fraud so that would have been that.
With Nick Leeson, he was both the compliance/risk officer and the trader so the only person who might have been worried was himself.
State pensions £89.3bn 12.8%
I'm guessing most of that is "cash out", with a small proportion of Labour and tiny tiny amounts of material cost.
Health £138.7bn 19.9%
Would be mostly labour I'm guessing with a small amount of materials consumption and some capital spend...
Wonder how that compares to yesteryear/other countries...
Focusing on NC, FL, and OH, was fair enough, given that they're very marginal, and have 62 ECV's between them. Putting resources into States like Arizona, Texas, and Georgia was absurd and evidence of the hubris I mentioned. Ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan was plain stupid. Ignoring blue collar whites was beyond stupid.
News from Warwick Crown Court:
"Five men have been convicted of sexually abusing and trafficking six teenage girls in Coventry.
Waqaar Khan, Kadeem Bourne, Kenan Kelly, Marcus Woolcock and Zahid Chaudhary were accused of almost 40 offences, Warwick Crown Court heard.
Ringleader Khan befriended the girls, aged 15 to 17, on social media before picking them up and forcing them to have sex, sometimes filming it.
West Midlands Police described them as "brazen, calculating and evil".
The court heard the men took the girls, some of whom were in care, to secluded areas of the city and sometimes gave them alcohol or drugs before abusing and trafficking them for sex."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-38396427
Still leaves those of us who are grandfathered in.
Health spending in the UK less than France, US, Germany, Canada
But more than Portugal, Czech Republic, Greece
Having experienced the Portuguese health system I am not keen to reduce our spend
Portugal is recovering, albeit growth has really stalled since the Socialist-Communist coalition took power. Demographics are a major issue there, and it's hard to see a major recovery.
Greece is a disaster. Syriza plus the Eurozone is like taking arsenic and strychnine.
Bad news = Remoaner propaganda / We haven't left yet
Good news = Brexit
See a unicorn in real life = Laundry day
The big two issues I have with them are: (1) the questions are unbelievably leading, and (2) it's not clear how they achieve a representative sample. If you asked 'Do you think that economic migrants from other EU countries should be allowed to come here and claim benefits?' you'd get very different answers.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-south-yorkshire-38347842
A lorry driver from Rotherham has started a fundraising effort for one of the victims of the recent Berlin lorry attack.
Writing on his fundraising page, David Duncan has already attracted pledges of more than £50,000.
*emanates smug, slighly radioactive glow*
As for the Lib Dems and UKIP, pretty sure Lib Dems will do better than at the General Election and UKIP worse.
Mortimer is out of date on public attitudes to the Lib Dems. He needs to start paying attention to those "parish council" elections.
5:14PM edited 5:14PM
TOPPING said:
« hide previous quotes
AlsoIndigo said:
Yorkcity said:
Rcs100 apologies you are correct bail out the banks customers. I did not agree with Alistair Darling bailing out customers getting a high rate outside the UK the Icelandic Banks.
How does the rescue of the 2008 banking near-fatalities compare with say Barings, to an outsider it seems the former got off rather more leniently than that later ?
The latter was sold to whoever it was for a dollar, or somesuch, IIRC and all employees and shareholders suffered. Neither, in those heady days (I heard the news on the radio as I was on my way to the Kong Kong Derby early one Sunday morning), did banks have the kind of holdings which created the bonkers systemic risk 20 years later. Apart from the name, which might have been vaguely familiar to a few people, no one was touched or aware of Barings.
If Northern Rock had gone down, it would have engendered panic across all high street banks, mass withdrawal and a drawdown of banks' capital reserves, such as they were at the time. There are plenty of left wing critics of the "money creation" system we have now, and it would all have fallen apart under a bank panic if the government hadn't stepped in as it did. Belatedly.
£1 which literally came out of the pocket of the partner closing the deal. Barings was, if you look at the actual exposures, tiny and outside a limited audience, unknown. Plus they had a history of regular insolvency...
****
I think Barings and the Co-op were small enough to fail ... they did so for different reasons, and the Co-op was bailed out by US hedge funds, which took a share in it.
Northern Rock, RBS or HBOS were too big to fail. Zero has been done to split banks up so that the new post-2008 banks can be left to fail, yet that's how capitalism is supposed to work.