Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » To force an early election Jezza needs CON defectors – but wou
politicalbetting.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
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What's Lord Falconer up to these days?
I suppose the ERG mob might if they felt their version of Brexit was being betrayed.
Japan 10.5
Draw 5.1
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.145046387
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.
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.
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.
Anyone defying the three line whip would find themselves deselected in very short order if there was an election their party didn’t want!
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1013826265739157505
"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.
- 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.
Northern Rock, RBS, and HBOS.
If May does a BINO they probably will contest all the seats.
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.
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.
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.
https://twitter.com/davidbyers26/status/1013832248989188096
https://youtu.be/rblfKREj50o?t=2m3s
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
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/
And rather blows the idea that Friday's Chequers Cabinet is actually going to resolve anything.
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.
He doesn’t need defectors, abstainers and fools will do just as well.
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.
How to get decent regulation that incorporates more common sense and less box-ticking..... well, there's a challenge!
https://vimeo.com/109482700
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.
It may not be enough. No-one quality is sufficient. But it was - and is - certainly necessary.
Now we want to leave the EU, all we hear is "Non/Nein/No".
Good evening, everybody.
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.
As every 'golden generation' always seems to do.
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.