Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » To force an early election Jezza needs CON defectors – but wou

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited July 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » To force an early election Jezza needs CON defectors – but would Tory remainers really back him?

“We would force a general election” if there was a bad deal or no deal for the UK, says @jeremycorbyn #bbcsp pic.twitter.com/03Qqqodm64

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    Not going to happen
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Again, my first position was hijacked.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    A thread all to myself... Hmm, shall I talk about TC4PM, IHT, Spurs and Bale, World Cup Fantasy Footie League positions (despite having no idea what the rules are) or Gordon Brown.

    What's Lord Falconer up to these days?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574
    A Corbyn premiership would be rather a bad deal for the UK, too.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Hell no.

    I suppose the ERG mob might if they felt their version of Brexit was being betrayed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    On current polling an early general election would repeat last June's result almost exactly if not see a slight swing to the Tories so not only would it be pointless for Corbyn he has nowhere near the numbers to achieve, even the likes of Soubry would oppose it
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,039
    He really hasn't a clue has he?
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    TOPPING said:

    Funnily enough both @archer101au and @Richard_Nabavi agree that commitment to the NI backstop was a mistake. Thus illustrating an unsurprising and surprising lack of knowledge about NI/RoI.

    No British PM could have done anything different and the EU knows it. NI is just one of those things that Leave failed to plan for. Not that it is immediately obvious how it could have been planned for. Perhaps a less ambitious Leave means Leave mantra.

    Funnily enough you just make a statement pretending it is fact but without providing any evidence.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    Corbyn is dreaming and what would his Brexit policy be if he forced a new election? The Tories would be forced to match any promise of a second referendum so what would he gain?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Fpt

    Funnily enough both @archer101au and @Richard_Nabavi agree that commitment to the NI backstop was a mistake. Thus illustrating an unsurprising and surprising lack of knowledge about NI/RoI.

    No British PM could have done anything different and the EU knows it. NI is just one of those things that Leave failed to plan for. Not that it is immediately obvious how it could have been planned for. Perhaps a less ambitious Leave means Leave mantra.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Isn't it a lot harder to force early elections thanks to the FTPA?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Not sure I quite buy Mike's analysis. Of course what he says is perfectly logical, but we are talking about an inherently chaotic situation where the government doesn't have the numbers to get any one version of Brexit through parliament. Some Tory MPs, either strong Remainers or the ultra-Brexiteers, might miscalculate and think that in an election the Conservative Party would not only gain seats, but be able to shape Brexit in a different way afterwards. They'd no doubt be wrong on both counts, but miscalculations are not unknown in politics - see GE2017 for the canonical example.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    FPT

    We need a second referendum if the end state May is proposing for us is continued compliance with all EU rules with no say in their making forever.

    I will reluctantly accept not getting our own trade policy OR not ending freedom of movement. Asking the country to accept both makes a mockery of Brexit, but thanks to negligence we are not ready for a no deal outcome.

    There are no good choices anymore. Thanks to the idiotic acceptance of the backstop, we are faced with a similarly dismal choice as Denmark in the 1860s; accept excessive influence in our domestic affairs to hold all our territory together, or go for broke and risk losing a chunk of it altogether.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,039
    This is turning into a Harold Pinter play.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    RobD said:

    Isn't it a lot harder to force early elections thanks to the FTPA?

    Turns out I should read the header before posting a comment. :p
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited July 2018
    RoyalBlue said:

    FPT

    We need a second referendum if the end state May is proposing for us is continued compliance with all EU rules with no say in their making forever.

    I will reluctantly accept not getting our own trade policy OR not ending freedom of movement. Asking the country to accept both makes a mockery of Brexit, but thanks to negligence we are not ready for a no deal outcome.

    There are no good choices anymore. Thanks to the idiotic acceptance of the backstop, we are faced with a similarly dismal choice as Denmark in the 1860s; accept excessive influence in our domestic affairs to hold all our territory together, or go for broke and risk losing a chunk of it altogether.

    Even Javid is committed to ending free movement and leaving the EEA so whoever succeeds May, including Corbyn if regulatory alignment is not enough to resolve the Irish border issue for the EU and move to a transition period and Canada style FTA then no deal and WTO terms is likely
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited July 2018
    AndyJS said:
    Belgium ought to win without breaking sweat but all we can be sure of from the group stage is Belgium beat two minnows and England reserves. The money for Belgium in the outright market this morning seems to have dried up now people have seen Brazil and 6/1 is the general price back out from 11/2. Lukaku is 11/4 to be top scorer which is probably about right. Harry Kane is 6/4 in a place.

    It might be worth keeping an eye on the mercury. The Japanese team could be more used to the heat if that becomes an issue later in the game.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    RobD said:

    Isn't it a lot harder to force early elections thanks to the FTPA?

    Yes, it requires 2/3 of the whole HoC to vote for it - 434 positive votes in favour, so it’s not happening unless the two largest parties are both supportive.

    Anyone defying the three line whip would find themselves deselected in very short order if there was an election their party didn’t want!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    On topic : no.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Brian Rix.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    I'm thinking more Prince George in Blackadder trying to define 'B' for the replacement dictionary.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401


    Ah, that no doubt explains why you think you know more about how Tory members will behave than David Herdson does.

    Second time today that David has been told by someone who left the Tory party years ago that he doesn't know much about the Tory party and its membership.

    Despite me telling the other person that David's a constituency chairman.
    If only all the people from outside the Party who rate JRM joined, eh? Of course, to win, he'd still need to get past the MPs' rounds.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,340
    QTWTAIN
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    edited July 2018


    Ah, that no doubt explains why you think you know more about how Tory members will behave than David Herdson does.

    Second time today that David has been told by someone who left the Tory party years ago that he doesn't know much about the Tory party and its membership.

    Despite me telling the other person that David's a constituency chairman.
    If only all the people from outside the Party who rate JRM joined, eh? Of course, to win, he'd still need to get past the MPs' rounds.
    Maybe that is why many do not bother,as they have no say in reality who is leader or anything else for that matter.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Tories still over 40 seats ahead of Labour
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    Either:

    - BoJo is trying to wrap up support from the Mogglodytes for a leadership bid.

    Or:

    - BoJo is burnishing his credentials ahead of his big Brexit Betrayal.

    My money's on the latter.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2018
    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,574

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505

    That's joining the prats, surely ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.
    I'd be surprised if they fielded candidates in half the seats next time.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    HYUFD said:
    But we could see a Rainbow Alliance to keep out the Tories.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    QTWTAIN

    QTWTAI are we heading for a constitutional crisis? If the third way does split the Cabinet and ruling party, and is also rejected by Brussels, so all that remains is fear of Jezza, what happens then? No stable government and no early election.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.

    If May does a BINO they probably will contest all the seats.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    HYUFD said:

    twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1013714487206187008

    Tories still over 40 seats ahead of Labour
    But we could see a Rainbow Alliance to keep out the Tories.
    They are the "Progressive Allience", I assume we are the "Evil Empire"?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    QTWTAIN

    QTWTAI are we heading for a constitutional crisis? If the third way does split the Cabinet and ruling party, and is also rejected by Brussels, so all that remains is fear of Jezza, what happens then? No stable government and no early election.
    The FTPA is an abomination.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    Either:

    - BoJo is trying to wrap up support from the Mogglodytes for a leadership bid.

    Or:

    - BoJo is burnishing his credentials ahead of his big Brexit Betrayal.

    My money's on the latter.
    Mine too. It still looks like there is something going on between Boris and Number 10.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 534
    Even though Soubry and Grieve & co have seriously lost the plot over Brexit, they aren't mad enough to give Corbyn a chance at an election. Most of them would be deselected anyway, so the Tories are pretty safe.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.

    If May does a BINO they probably will contest all the seats.

    Maybe they don't have enough resources to contest them all, even if they want to.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    A direct bailout, sure. But the indirect government guarantee that all financial services firms effectively get also needs to be put on the ledger when looking at the cost/benefits of having a very large financial services sector. A strong financial services sector is undoubtedly an asset. But it does not thereby follow that it should get so large that it unbalances the economy and/or causes other indirect costs, borne by others.

    I'm not sure there has been an in-depth study into the costs and benefits of the finance sector. Focusing on tax revenues alone is not sufficient.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:
    But we could see a Rainbow Alliance to keep out the Tories.
    Labour plus SNP plus LD plus Plaid plus Green is the only way to do that and with the Tories still easily the largest party many Tories would not complain about that too much as they would have opposition all to themselves, at least in GB terms
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited July 2018

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    Of course the US let investment bank Lehmans go bust
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    At the time I was scared and bewildered by the idea of 125% LTV mortgages.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    edited July 2018

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505

    You can almost smell the fear. Boris must know that the ERG will take him out along with Theresa if the great betrayal comes. I can't see that fawning to Rees-Mogg will save him either.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated.

    RBS was a disaster waiting to happen. The regulators were warned 18 months at least before it went bust that there was something rotten - verging on the criminal - at the heart of it but did the square root of fuck all, the FSA being more or less unable to take the skin off a rice pudding.

    HBOS was run by a salesman who knew nothing about banking and thought that it was all about selling products.

    They were all very good examples of what went wrong in the City.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2018
    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    Of course the US let investment bank Lehmans go bust
    They did indeed, partly because Alistair Darling refused to provide support for a Barclays take-over.

    It's still not entirely clear that the US was right to pull the plug on Lehmans. The bank was so entangled with trillions of derivative contracts that doing so was the immediate cause of the crash. But as it turned out, those derivative contracts (probably) weren't actually net losing positions overall.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.

    My main point thought was that the crash had very little to do with what people think of as the City - it was nothing to do with fund management, capital raising, M & A, underwriting, hedge funds, currency trading, clearing, etc etc
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.
    The traditional model worked. NR's one didn't. It wasn't just down to poor execution. The strategy was wrong. There was an earlier mortgage entity - The Mortgage Corporation - set up by Salomon Brothers in the mid-1980's which was based on the model you just described (making loans and selling off the securitised mortgages) and it failed. If people in the City had a memory longer than 5 minutes or bothered getting advice from those who did, these problems could - and should - have been avoided.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.
    The traditional model worked. NR's one didn't. It wasn't just down to poor execution. The strategy was wrong. There was an earlier mortgage entity - The Mortgage Corporation - set up by Salomon Brothers in the mid-1980's which was based on the model you just described (making loans and selling off the securitised mortgages) and it failed. If people in the City had a memory longer than 5 minutes or bothered getting advice from those who did, these problems could - and should - have been avoided.
    The traditional model didn't work. History is littered with examples of building societies and mortgage banks which went bust, although pre-Gordon Brown we were very smart at rescuing and dealing with the problem. In the 2008/9 crash German mortgage lenders - supposed to be the most boring on the planet - got into massive trouble, including some spectacular failures. The Spanish property lenders went bust. The Irish banks went bust through property lending. Most of the root causes of the crash come back to property lending.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Although much political attention in Wales at the moment appears to be focusing on elections within parties, the WelshPolitical Barometer poll has also continued to ask the public about levels of electoral support for the parties.

    With the troubles of Brexit looking ever larger, and internal difficulties facing all of our main political parties, what impact has any of this had on how people would vote?

    First, let’s look at voting intentions for a general election. This is what our new poll suggests are the latest levels of public support (with changes on the last such Barometer poll, in March, in brackets):

    Labour: 44% (-2)
    Conservatives: 31% (-2)
    Plaid Cymru: 13% (+2)
    Liberal Democrats: 5% (+1)
    UKIP: 3% (-1)
    Others: 3% (no change)

    http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2018-07-02/what-the-latest-welsh-barometer-poll-tell-us-about-how-the-parties-are-faring/
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.

    My main point thought was that the crash had very little to do with what people think of as the City - it was nothing to do with fund management, capital raising, M & A, underwriting, hedge funds, currency trading, clearing, etc etc
    Er..... credit default swaps etc? Look again at what was happening from 2007 onwards. The problems in the wholesale markets which eventually led to the problems in 2008 had everything to do with standard City activity: the trading of derivative products. The trouble was they created products they did not understand, sold them as "you can't lose" investments (rather than as hedges) to people who did not understand what they were buying.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.

    My main point thought was that the crash had very little to do with what people think of as the City - it was nothing to do with fund management, capital raising, M & A, underwriting, hedge funds, currency trading, clearing, etc etc
    Er..... credit default swaps etc? Look again at what was happening from 2007 onwards. The problems in the wholesale markets which eventually led to the problems in 2008 had everything to do with standard City activity: the trading of derivative products. The trouble was they created products they did not understand, sold them as "you can't lose" investments (rather than as hedges) to people who did not understand what they were buying.
    That's a better description of the US part of the crash than the UK one.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772
    Fantastic.

    And rather blows the idea that Friday's Chequers Cabinet is actually going to resolve anything.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.
    The traditional model worked. NR's one didn't. It wasn't just down to poor execution. The strategy was wrong. There was an earlier mortgage entity - The Mortgage Corporation - set up by Salomon Brothers in the mid-1980's which was based on the model you just described (making loans and selling off the securitised mortgages) and it failed. If people in the City had a memory longer than 5 minutes or bothered getting advice from those who did, these problems could - and should - have been avoided.
    The traditional model didn't work. History is littered with examples of building societies and mortgage banks which went bust, although pre-Gordon Brown we were very smart at rescuing and dealing with the problem. In the 2008/9 crash German mortgage lenders - supposed to be the most boring on the planet - got into massive trouble, including some spectacular failures. The Spanish property lenders went bust. The Irish banks went bust through property lending. Most of the root causes of the crash come back to property lending.
    German banks got into trouble because they bought a vast number of the rubbish derivative products the City was selling. Irish banks were rotten through and through and had been for years.

    But there was far more to the crash than simple over-extended property lending. It was the very complicated derivative products which were sold and resold in a cycle no-one understood which vastly extended and magnified the risk even while those buying thought they were eliminating or managing their risk. In some ways, what happened resembled what had happened to Lloyds (the insurance market) some years earlier.

    People forgot that banking is fundamentally about trust and managing risk. They stupidly thought that complicated products could eliminate risk and they didn't; they did the opposite.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Northern Rock was anything but an old-fashioned mortgage provider. Its reliance on the wholesale markets to fund its loans was what caught it out. It thought it was being oh so clever but was too clever by half and came a cropper. That's not how old-fashioned mortgage providers operated..

    Nothing wrong with writing loans based on wholesale market finance, in fact it should be safer than the traditional model as you don't have the risk of borrowing short and lending long. What's more, what they were doing was in theory even safer than that, in that they packaged up the mortgages and sold them to others, which done properly would have been very secure (no loans to pay off, the buyer of the securitised mortgages takes all the risk). But they were spectacularly incompetent in execution.

    My main point thought was that the crash had very little to do with what people think of as the City - it was nothing to do with fund management, capital raising, M & A, underwriting, hedge funds, currency trading, clearing, etc etc
    Er..... credit default swaps etc? Look again at what was happening from 2007 onwards. The problems in the wholesale markets which eventually led to the problems in 2008 had everything to do with standard City activity: the trading of derivative products. The trouble was they created products they did not understand, sold them as "you can't lose" investments (rather than as hedges) to people who did not understand what they were buying.
    That's a better description of the US part of the crash than the UK one.
    It happened here too. It happened in Germany and Ireland and in most countries in the EU, in fact. One of the benefits, ahem, of a globalised world.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.
    Who gives a cat’s toss? Midterm polling is a pile of steaming horse turd.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2018
    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.
    Who gives a cat’s toss? Midterm polling is a pile of steaming horse turd.
    This is a site which is heavily based around polling so I suppose people are usually going to be talking about it.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487

    A thread all to myself... Hmm, shall I talk about TC4PM, IHT, Spurs and Bale, World Cup Fantasy Footie League positions (despite having no idea what the rules are) or Gordon Brown.

    What's Lord Falconer up to these days?

    He took the unprecedented step of resigning this morning on a point of principle.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited July 2018
    Clearly if an opportunity arises Corbyn will grab it, but it suits him well to watch this govt rot.

    He doesn’t need defectors, abstainers and fools will do just as well.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:
    Belgium ought to win without breaking sweat but all we can be sure of from the group stage is Belgium beat two minnows and England reserves. The money for Belgium in the outright market this morning seems to have dried up now people have seen Brazil and 6/1 is the general price back out from 11/2. Lukaku is 11/4 to be top scorer which is probably about right. Harry Kane is 6/4 in a place.

    It might be worth keeping an eye on the mercury. The Japanese team could be more used to the heat if that becomes an issue later in the game.
    If I were betting at the moment I'd probably put a small bet on Japan and another one on Belgium winning with 4 goals or more.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Cyclefree said:

    German banks got into trouble because they bought a vast number of the rubbish derivative products the City was selling. Irish banks were rotten through and through and had been for years.

    But there was far more to the crash than simple over-extended property lending. It was the very complicated derivative products which were sold and resold in a cycle no-one understood which vastly extended and magnified the risk even while those buying thought they were eliminating or managing their risk. In some ways, what happened resembled what had happened to Lloyds (the insurance market) some years earlier.

    People forgot that banking is fundamentally about trust and managing risk. They stupidly thought that complicated products could eliminate risk and they didn't; they did the opposite.

    I don't disagree, but it's a big mistake to think (as the more naive do) that crashes wouldn't happen or wouldn't affect us if we didn't have the City, as the Spanish, German and Irish examples show. In the case of the German banks, although part of the problem was duff derivatives, a large chunk of it was very simply paying stolid German citizens low rates of interest and lending their money out to Irish speculators on dubious property deals. Nothing very exotic.

    The other point which shouldn't get lost is that the boring banks were being heavily pushed by regulators into buying duff derivatives, because of box-ticking risk-analysis rules which gave ridiculous weight to credit agency ratings and ignored common sense.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    AndyJS said:

    Anazina said:

    AndyJS said:

    The UKIP comparison is a bit doubtful because they only contested half the seats at the general election, but the polls assume they'll contest all the seats.
    Who gives a cat’s toss? Midterm polling is a pile of steaming horse turd.
    This is a site which is heavily based around polling so I suppose people are usually going to be talking about it.
    Unwise. You would be better off with divining rods.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Cyclefree said:

    German banks got into trouble because they bought a vast number of the rubbish derivative products the City was selling. Irish banks were rotten through and through and had been for years.

    But there was far more to the crash than simple over-extended property lending. It was the very complicated derivative products which were sold and resold in a cycle no-one understood which vastly extended and magnified the risk even while those buying thought they were eliminating or managing their risk. In some ways, what happened resembled what had happened to Lloyds (the insurance market) some years earlier.

    People forgot that banking is fundamentally about trust and managing risk. They stupidly thought that complicated products could eliminate risk and they didn't; they did the opposite.

    I don't disagree, but it's a big mistake to think (as the more naive do) that crashes wouldn't happen or wouldn't affect us if we didn't have the City, as the Spanish, German and Irish examples show. In the case of the German banks, although part of the problem was duff derivatives, a large chunk of it was very simply paying stolid German citizens low rates of interest and lending their money out to Irish speculators on dubious property deals. Nothing very exotic.

    The other point which shouldn't get lost is that the boring banks were being heavily pushed by regulators into buying duff derivatives, because of box-ticking risk-analysis rules which gave ridiculous weight to credit agency ratings and ignored common sense.
    Agreed. We are all affected but the UK does need not to be so dependant on the finance sector. Regulation was poor.

    How to get decent regulation that incorporates more common sense and less box-ticking..... well, there's a challenge!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    German banks got into trouble because they bought a vast number of the rubbish derivative products the City was selling. Irish banks were rotten through and through and had been for years.

    But there was far more to the crash than simple over-extended property lending. It was the very complicated derivative products which were sold and resold in a cycle no-one understood which vastly extended and magnified the risk even while those buying thought they were eliminating or managing their risk. In some ways, what happened resembled what had happened to Lloyds (the insurance market) some years earlier.

    People forgot that banking is fundamentally about trust and managing risk. They stupidly thought that complicated products could eliminate risk and they didn't; they did the opposite.

    I don't disagree, but it's a big mistake to think (as the more naive do) that crashes wouldn't happen or wouldn't affect us if we didn't have the City, as the Spanish, German and Irish examples show. In the case of the German banks, although part of the problem was duff derivatives, a large chunk of it was very simply paying stolid German citizens low rates of interest and lending their money out to Irish speculators on dubious property deals. Nothing very exotic.

    The other point which shouldn't get lost is that the boring banks were being heavily pushed by regulators into buying duff derivatives, because of box-ticking risk-analysis rules which gave ridiculous weight to credit agency ratings and ignored common sense.
    Agreed. We are all affected but the UK does need not to be so dependant on the finance sector. Regulation was poor.

    How to get decent regulation that incorporates more common sense and less box-ticking..... well, there's a challenge!
    Common sense isn’t enough. Common sense was at fault in the run up to the crash, which was forseen by next to no one.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2018
    This is one of my favourite TV programmes, Jonathan Meades' humorous documentary about Belgium (from 1994):

    https://vimeo.com/109482700
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Jonathan said:

    Common sense isn’t enough. Common sense was at fault in the run up to the crash, which was forseen by next to no one.

    The aim isn't to foresee crashes, but to make sure you're not kiboshed when the inevitable crash hits you out of the blue, as they invariably do. Pre-Gordon Brown, we in the UK were very, very good at that. With Osborne's changes to regulation we're now back to a sensible solution where the BoE is responsible for overall systemic supervision, a role which should never have been taken away from them, let alone taken away and not given to anyone else.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:
    Indeed - though unlikely that the Tories could continue as a minority Government on those figures. I also suspect that Baxter has the SNP too high and Labour too low.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Seriously?! You'd have let these three go bust?

    The UK economy would have completely frozen up as business after business were unable to pay their invoices and staff, their staff unable to pay mortgages and c/card bills etc. Plus there would have been a run on all the other banks. It would have been carnage on a scale never seen before. It was not an option.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:
    Belgium ought to win without breaking sweat but all we can be sure of from the group stage is Belgium beat two minnows and England reserves. The money for Belgium in the outright market this morning seems to have dried up now people have seen Brazil and 6/1 is the general price back out from 11/2. Lukaku is 11/4 to be top scorer which is probably about right. Harry Kane is 6/4 in a place.

    It might be worth keeping an eye on the mercury. The Japanese team could be more used to the heat if that becomes an issue later in the game.
    If I were betting at the moment I'd probably put a small bet on Japan and another one on Belgium winning with 4 goals or more.
    How has Lukaku missed that one?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Jonathan said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    German banks got into trouble because they bought a vast number of the rubbish derivative products the City was selling. Irish banks were rotten through and through and had been for years.

    But there was far more to the crash than simple over-extended property lending. It was the very complicated derivative products which were sold and resold in a cycle no-one understood which vastly extended and magnified the risk even while those buying thought they were eliminating or managing their risk. In some ways, what happened resembled what had happened to Lloyds (the insurance market) some years earlier.

    People forgot that banking is fundamentally about trust and managing risk. They stupidly thought that complicated products could eliminate risk and they didn't; they did the opposite.

    I don't disagree, but it's a big mistake to think (as the more naive do) that crashes wouldn't happen or wouldn't affect us if we didn't have the City, as the Spanish, German and Irish examples show. In the case of the German banks, although part of the problem was duff derivatives, a large chunk of it was very simply paying stolid German citizens low rates of interest and lending their money out to Irish speculators on dubious property deals. Nothing very exotic.

    The other point which shouldn't get lost is that the boring banks were being heavily pushed by regulators into buying duff derivatives, because of box-ticking risk-analysis rules which gave ridiculous weight to credit agency ratings and ignored common sense.
    Agreed. We are all affected but the UK does need not to be so dependant on the finance sector. Regulation was poor.

    How to get decent regulation that incorporates more common sense and less box-ticking..... well, there's a challenge!
    Common sense isn’t enough. Common sense was at fault in the run up to the crash, which was forseen by next to no one.
    I can assure that there was a lack of common-sense in the lead up to the crash. Common-sense would have asked some basic questions about the derivative products which were being sold like sweeties. Common-sense would have followed up when regulators were warned about some very dodgy behaviour verging on the illegal in relation to some of the top of the cycle deals being lauded by businessmen and politicians.

    It may not be enough. No-one quality is sufficient. But it was - and is - certainly necessary.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Jonathan said:

    Clearly if an opportunity arises Corbyn will grab it, but it suits him well to watch this govt rot.

    He doesn’t need defectors, abstainers and fools will do just as well.

    To get an overall majority he almost certainly needs Tory defectors
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:
    Indeed - though unlikely that the Tories could continue as a minority Government on those figures. I also suspect that Baxter has the SNP too high and Labour too low.
    Albeit the SNP would likely prop up Corbyn anyway over the Tories
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869

    ttps://twitter.com/davidschneider/status/1013836551879643138?s=21

    I find it rather amusing that when we wanted to join the Common Market, all we heard was "Non".

    Now we want to leave the EU, all we hear is "Non/Nein/No".

    Good evening, everybody.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2018
    Japan proving rather harder than expected to break down.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    edited July 2018

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505

    Must admit an out and out "sinner" like Boris and a "man of god" like JRM don't automatically seem like natural bedfellows... More like #TheOddCouple :D
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,669
    Corbyn is unlikely to be able to force a General Election, but I suppose the Tories could decide that a General Election is the best way to get them off the hook of their own making.
    If Labour won any GE the question would then be what could they do that would be acceptable to the E U and the people.
    It's such a mess and there are so many contradictions.
    A 'People's Vote' is looking better and better.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    GIN1138 said:

    Joining the dots has got a little easier:

    https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505

    Must admit an out and out "sinner" like Boris and a "man of god" like JRM don't automatically seem like natural bedfellows... More like #TheOddCouple :D
    Much like the Leave vote united libertarian free traders and nationalist protectionists
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited July 2018

    Corbyn is unlikely to be able to force a General Election, but I suppose the Tories could decide that a General Election is the best way to get them off the hook of their own making.
    If Labour won any GE the question would then be what could they do that would be acceptable to the E U and the people.
    It's such a mess and there are so many contradictions.
    A 'People's Vote' is looking better and better.

    Polls suggest another general election would practically repeat the last general election result, a 'people's vote' could be even closer than the EU referendum, neither would solve a thing in fact arguably they would leave us even more divided than we are now. Just imagine a PM Corbyn propped up by the LDs and the SNP with the Tories still largest party and a 'people's vote' won by 51% either way
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Japan are going to surprise Belgium tonight, aren't they.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    RBS and HBOS were not old-fashioned mortgage providers except in the most legacy sense.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    AndyJS said:

    Japan are going to surprise Belgium tonight, aren't they.

    I expect Gareth Southgate hopes so
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    AndyJS said:

    Japan are going to surprise Belgium tonight, aren't they.

    Or Belgium's 'golden generation' bottles it again.

    As every 'golden generation' always seems to do.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    HYUFD said:

    Corbyn is unlikely to be able to force a General Election, but I suppose the Tories could decide that a General Election is the best way to get them off the hook of their own making.
    If Labour won any GE the question would then be what could they do that would be acceptable to the E U and the people.
    It's such a mess and there are so many contradictions.
    A 'People's Vote' is looking better and better.

    Polls suggest another general election would practically repeat the last general election result, a 'people's vote' could be even closer than the EU referendum, neither would solve a thing in fact arguably they would leave us even more divided than we are now. Just imagine a PM Corbyn propped up by the LDs and the SNP with the Tories still largest party and a 'people's vote' won by 51% either way
    If May was clever she'd see that a 2nd referendum would very likely give her the chance to land a softish Brexit:

    Agree a sensible compromise deal with the EU and call a referendum to confirm acceptance with 'no deal' the alternitive if her deal is rejected by the voters. Much as I'd like her to offer Remain as an option she really doesn't have to do that. I suspect a soft Brexit would win by a country mile but if it were rejected then quite honestly the country would only have itself to blame.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Can anyone explain what the Chris Froome drugs saga was really about ?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited July 2018
    Alistair said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FPT: I could not leave this colourable statement from @TSE about banks unremarked upon:-

    "Blame Gordon Brown who set up an awful regulatory system.

    It was only one or two bad apples.

    I'd have let them fail."

    It most certainly was not one or two bad apples. Pretty much every bank was involved in the LIBOR and FX scandals and nearly all of them in PPI, for instance, as well as some of them having additional scandals of their own. And that's just the ones that are in the public domain. When you add in the others, well, the entire sector was riddled with a culture which had lost sight of what it should be about.

    I meant in terms of needing a bailout.

    Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
    Two of which were old-fashioned mortgage providers who got caught out by over-enthusiastic lending on UK property. Zilch to do with the City as people normally think of it.
    RBS and HBOS were not old-fashioned mortgage providers except in the most legacy sense.
    I worked for one of them and I can assure you it was.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Told you to back Japan.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Turning Japanese....
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    What did I say about Japan.
This discussion has been closed.