politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour chooses a Corbyn critic to fight Copeland and this and

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

TOPPING said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Sales and trading to Frankfurt???

They'll have to rip the annual membership of 5HS from their cold dead hands.

Pong said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effect in ancillary services: i.e. other businesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

lol

I wouldn't like to be Philip Hammond;

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-research-and-information/research-publications/Documents/research 2016/total-tax-leaflet.pdf

That's the equivalent of 4 new hospitals every week.

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effect in ancillary services: i.e. other businesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

RobD said:

Pong said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effect in ancillary services: i.e. other businesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

lol

I wouldn't like to be Philip Hammond;

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-research-and-information/research-publications/Documents/research 2016/total-tax-leaflet.pdf

That's the equivalent of 4 new hospitals every week.

The entire financial sector is going to leave?

NickPalmer said:

foxinsoxuk said:

On topic:

I rather like Gillian Troughton's politics, and they seem not too far from my own, or Tim Farron for that matter!

I don't think it is so much that the 5 Labour candidates are anti Corbyn, but rather that all the 5 were genuinely local longstanding activists with local roots. These are the people that outperform the national party, as we also see in Bromsgrove tonight too.

This bodes well for the Labour party in the long run. Corbyn is allowing the grass roots to thrive, and deliberately so. He is killing the Spadocracy.

I think that's right - Southam is right that Momentum did try to influence the selection, but Corbyn and his immediate team (which doesn't include the Prescotts!) didn't.

My large local branch had its AGM this week - a number of new Corbynista members there, contrary to legend, but all the constituency nominations were made on the basis of competence rather thasn ideology, and agreed unanimously. It's possible to be both left-wing in leadership elections and pragmatic in everyday matters.

DavidL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Although Scotland voted to REMAIN the reaction to May's proposals in the YouGov sub-sample, while less enthusiastic than total UK's are in the same direction:

Net right - Scotland (Total UK)
Control Immigration: +45 (+62)
Open Border Ireland: +61 (+63)
Out of Single Market: +21 (+36)
Out of Customs Union: +21 (+36)
Mutual guarantee citizens rights: +77 (+71)
Continue Security Cooperation: +80 (+83)

If achieved Deal would respect result of referendum (net): +39 (+49)

Interesting. Not a great base for the SNP to seek to build indignation from.

CarlottaVance said:

Although Scotland voted to REMAIN the reaction to May's proposals in the YouGov sub-sample, while less enthusiastic than total UK's are in the same direction:

Net right - Scotland (Total UK)
Control Immigration: +45 (+62)
Open Border Ireland: +61 (+63)
Out of Single Market: +21 (+36)
Out of Customs Union: +21 (+36)
Mutual guarantee citizens rights: +77 (+71)
Continue Security Cooperation: +80 (+83)

If achieved Deal would respect result of referendum (net): +39 (+49)

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effect in ancillary services: i.e. other businesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

London is London and rules. Stuff will always happen there. One small thing: within the next five years six of the 20 biggest sports stadiums in Europe - Wembley, Twickenham, Spurs, Arsenal, Wrst Ham and Chelsea - will be located there. An NFL franchise, too. Then there's Lord's & the Oval, plus various other smaller capacity venues. I doubt there is anything else like it in the world. We also have two of the 10 best universities in the world and Europe's biggest technology start-up community, as well as big established tech players setting up operations. And the City may get smaller, but it's not going away. The energy, the vision, the confidence, the sheer beauty of things happening everywhere all the time makes London utterly and wonderfully unique. And that's before you throw in the parks, the different villages that make it up, the river, the architecture, the museums, the galleries, the theatres, the music and everything else. London rules. London rocks. It's not London we have to worry about!

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not iack-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effeusinesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

We don't know what will happen. London before the EU was a rusty crumbling wreck. If the money goes it might go that way again. Equally, London might benefit from cooling down a bit. The people are currently being priced out, which can't be good long term.

London boomed in the 80s because of Thatcher and the Big Bang, low taxes, etc. Also because of English law, globalization, and so on. The EU has benefited london in terms of free movement, but the EU has not been crucial to the city's success.

Clearly leaving the EU will take some wind out of the city's sails. But I don't think it will damage it, long term.

Besides, all these negative prognoses ignore the possible upsides, and the extra flexibility Brexit brings. The City can happily kiss goodbye to the stupid EU banker bonus laws, for a start.

As with all things Brexit, the process is so huge, dynamic and unique it really is impossible to predict what will or won't happen 5 or 10 years down the line.

SeanT said:

Pong said:

RobD said:

Pong said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

.

.

lol

I wouldn't like to be Philip Hammond;

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-research-and-information/research-publications/Documents/research 2016/total-tax-leaflet.pdf

That's the equivalent of 4 new hospitals every week.

The entire financial sector is going to leave?

Not all of it. I'm sure the Co-op will stick around.

The overall tax take is very likely to go down though. It would be sensible to plan for -1 hospital/week, although it could feasibly be -2

I think the tax take will go down. But maybe not for the reasons you state. It might decline because we have to slash corp tax and the bank levy to persuade them to stay (or return). Either way a headache for Hammond.

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effect in ancillary services: i.e. other businesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

London is London and rules. Stuff will always happen there.

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not iack-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'llactivity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

We don't know what will happen. London before the EU was a rusty crumbling wreck. If the money goes it might go that way again. Equally, London might benefit from cooling down a bit. The people are currently being priced out, which can't be good long term.

London boomed in.

Clearly leaving the EU will take some wind out of the city's sails. But I don't think it will damage it, long term.

Besides, all these negative prognoses ignore the possible upsides, and the extra flexibility Brexit brings. The City can happily kiss goodbye to the stupid EU banker bonus laws, for a start.

As with all things Brexit, the process is so huge, dynamic and unique it really is impossible to predict what will or won't happen 5 or 10 years down the line.

London's renaissance predates big bang, it started in the 70s. It continued in the 80s. It really accelerated around the millennium. Early 90s London was still very drab.

Many here interpret Brexit as an attack on London, it's international culture and it's dominance of the UK.

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

SouthamObserver said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not iack-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'llactivity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

We don't know what will happen. ng term.

London boomed in.

Clearly leaving the EU will take some wind out of the city's sails. But I don't think it will damage it, long term.

Besides, all these negative prognoses ignore the possible upsides, and the extra flexibility Brexit brings. The City can happily kiss goodbye to the stupid EU banker bonus laws, for a start.

As with all things Brexit, the process is so huge, dynamic and unique it really is impossible to predict what will or won't happen 5 or 10 years down the line.

London's renaissance predates big bang, it started in the 70s. It continued in the 80s. It really accelerated around the millennium. Early 90s London was still very drab.

Many here interpret Brexit as an attack on London, it's international culture and it's dominance of the UK.

London is profoundly disliked in many parts of the UK, as are Londoners. When I lived in Birmingham in the 1980s I learned to change my accent in certain pubs. Cockney Scum Gerrouta Brum was a popular refrain at the Blues and the Villa.

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

TOPPING said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Sales and trading to Frankfurt???

They'll have to rip the annual membership of 5HS from their cold dead hands.

5HS?

5 Hertford Street.

Where up and coming or already there sales traders go to look at Eastern European hookers.

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The only place with, in the lingo, the same ecosystem (all ancillary and related services in the same place) is New York.

If bits move it will be a gradual blunting of London's preeminence rather than a collapse.

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

chestnut said:

London started to blossom in the mid 1980s.

MTimT said:

rcs1000 said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

Dromedary said:

Theuniondivvie said:

williamglenn said:

Listening to Portillo talking about trade on This Week I'm reminded of why he did such a terrible job as Shadow Chancellor against Brown. He doesn't seem to have any deep understanding of what he's talking about.

He certainly seemed very keen on repeating that the EU was a protectionist rather than a free market as if it was the greatest piece of economic insight of the age.

It's common for commentators to use "protectionist" as a dirty word without saying what's wrong with a bit of market protection.

Protectionism moves power from the individual (to make their own choice about whom to buy from) to the group.

It also tends to lead to corporatism, where chosen industries are 'protected' from foreign competition, to the benefit of the owners of those businesses, and the detriment of consumers.

The next paragraph of that is that corporatism leads naturally to corruption, because there is now a lot of money in getting politicians to choose your industry to be protected from competition (while also forcing your suppliers to remain unprotected to keep your own costs down).

After that comes George Monbiot's Pollution Paradox:
https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/822072394680586240
...except in this case we're not talking about dirty companies, we're talking about shitty, inefficient ones.

I'm not normally a Monbiot fan, but that's an excellent quote.

This is as old as story as the hills. Another way to assess the situation is to see which companies have large offices in the DC Metro area. Those that need to lobby are all here - those that don't are not.

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Indie reporting German press:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-move-half-london-jobs-3000-employees-new-york-europe-eu-frankfurt-a7534776.html

I think finance in Europe will become much more like the US - that is much more spread out, without one city having such complete dominance.

We'll probably most feel the negative effeusinesses that were headquartered in London so as to be near the source of so much financial services activity. (Accounting, law, etc.)

I wouldn't like to be long prime London property. Oops.

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

We don't know what will hapg term.

London boo

As with all things Brexit, the process is so huge, dynamic and unique it really is impossible to predict what will or won't happen 5 or 10 years down the line.

London's renaissance predates big bang, it started in the 70s. It continued in the 80s. It really accelerated around the millennium. Early 90s London was still very drab.

Many here interpret Brexit as an attack on London, it's international culture and it's dominance of the UK.

Simply wrong. London's population (the surest measure of a city's success) declined throughout the 1970s and early 80s, and bottomed out in the mid 80s. From the late 80s on it began to rise, just as Thatcher's reforms were kicking in, and it hasn't stopped climbing since.

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Population_of_Greater_London_graph.png

The idea London enjoyed a "renaissance" in the 70s is deliciously ridiculous.

SeanT said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. T, by that definition, Mexico City is more successful than London. And Shanghai is more successful than Portugal.

Shanghai IS more successful than Portugal

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The government has no choice but to soften. It's not just the City, it's high-tech too, as wellas pharma, the universities, the health service and so on. Reducing net immigration to the tens of thousands will have a devastating affect on high-skill job recruitment and will do immense damage.

No one's going to reduce skilled immigration. Not even TMay. And the best estimates reckon migration will be brought down to 150,000-200,000. Still big big numbers by historical standards.

One way they will do this is by reclassifying unskilled migrants coming for agricultural/hospitality work as "seasonal workers", rather than actual immigrants. Etc etc. These people will get six month work permits and so forth, but not settlement rights and benefits.

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The only place with, in the lingo, the same ecosystem (all ancillary and related services in the same place) is New York.

If bits move it will be a gradual blunting of London's preeminence rather than a collapse.

TOPPING said:

@MaxPB suppose we do get equivalence.

Ask yourself equivalence with what and under the jurisdiction of which rule-making body?

It will still be the EU which grants it, rules over it, ensures it remains current (equivalence is only granted at a point in time and governs an existing set of rules rather than a regulatory environment) and, finally, enforces it.

Some control.

DecrepitJohnL said:

SeanT said:

Simply wrong. London's population (the surest measure of a city's success) declined throughout the 1970s and early 80s, and bottomed out in the mid 80s. From the late 80s on it began to rise, just as Thatcher's reforms were kicking in, and it hasn't stopped climbing since.

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Population_of_Greater_London_graph.png

The idea London enjoyed a "renaissance" in the 70s is deliciously ridiculous.

In the 1970s, the Eurodollar market took off in London, mainly because it was not hampered by the American Glass-Steagall Act (which split domestic from investment banking in the US, and whose repeal is blamed by some for recent financial crises). Mrs Thatcher's 1980s Big Bang led to huge increases in capitalisation as American and other foreign banks bought the old British merchant banks, building societies turned into banks (what could possibly go wrong?) and so on.

Edit: removed screwed up quoting history.

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The government has no choice but to soften. It's not just the City, it's high-tech too, as wellas pharma, the universities, the health service and so on. Reducing net immigration to the tens of thousands will have a devastating affect on high-skill job recruitment and will do immense damage.

No one's going to reduce skilled immigration. Not even TMay. And the best estimates reckon migration will be brought down to 150,000-200,000. Still big big numbers by historical standards.

One way they will do this is by reclassifying unskilled migrants coming for agricultural/hospitality work as "seasonal workers", rather than actual immigrants. Etc etc. These people will get six month work permits and so forth, but not settlement rights and benefits.

That wont affect immigration numbers.

A seasonal worker arrives and they are classed as an immigrant, when they leave they are classed as an emigrant and so cancel out.

Merely trying to fiddle the numbers will only make people angrier - its the 'voices in the supermarket' that people notice re immigration.

rcs1000 said:

Re Goldmans and the like, I think it's inevitable that London will lose its status as the only City in European finance. And, long-term, that's probably a positive for the UK economy. It means we'll be less reliant on a few mega-earners, trophy asset prices won't be so inflated, and we'll lose a boom-and-bust sector.

Now this doesn't mean London won't be bigger or more significant than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin. It just means that more finance will happen in these other places. Other places will reach critical mass.

The biggest near term consequence of this will be that property prices will be pressured - first in London, then the South East, then countrywide. (Again, this is a long term good thing.) Falling UK property prices will reduce the UK wealth effect, and drive up the savings rate.

And this will be the Brexit recession.

A necessary rebalancing of the UK economy. Albeit an incredibly painful one. And one that will likely cause massive recriminations.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Observer, that's an interesting point. Would PBers prefer to live in Portugal, or Shanghai? Reminds me a little of an eastern European country (might be Hungary, not sure) which tried regaining independence from the Soviets in the 1950s (maybe 60s, but I think it was 50s). The rebellion was crushed, and the country did see increased prosperity in the years that followed.

But the economic growth was coupled with a decline in life expectancy, which is a quite intriguing phenomenon.

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Goldmans and the like, I think it's inevitable that London will lose its status as the only City in European finance. And, long-term, that's probably a positive for the UK economy. It means we'll be less reliant on a few mega-earners, trophy asset prices won't be so inflated, and we'll lose a boom-and-bust sector.

Now this doesn't mean London won't be bigger or more significant than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin. It just means that more finance will happen in these other places. Other places will reach critical mass.

The biggest near term consequence of this will be that property prices will be pressured - first in London, then the South East, then countrywide. (Again, this is a long term good thing.) Falling UK property prices will reduce the UK wealth effect, and drive up the savings rate.

And this will be the Brexit recession.

A necessary rebalancing of the UK economy. Albeit an incredibly painful one. And one that will likely cause massive recriminations.

It sounds like a recession which will hit London hardest and longest.

Its the recession which should have happened after 2008 but which a trillion pounds of borrowed money was used to stop.

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The government has no choice but to soften. It's not just the City, it's high-tech too, as wellas pharma, the universities, the health service and so on. Reducing net immigration to the tens of thousands will have a devastating affect on high-skill job recruitment and will do immense damage.

No one's going to reduce skilled immigration. Not even TMay. And the best estimates reckon migration will be brought down to 150,000-200,000. Still big big numbers by historical standards.

One way they will do this is by reclassifying unskilled migrants coming for agricultural/hospitality work as "seasonal workers", rather than actual immigrants. Etc etc. These people will get six month work permits and so forth, but not settlement rights and benefits.

There are other ways skilled immigration can reverse: people might choose to go somewhere else.

London, and Cambridge have been magnets for finance and technology. What if other places achieve magnet status?

As Sean_F pointed out, cities that get cut off from their Empire rarely thrive. London was capital of the British Empire and was then the commercial capital of the EU.

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Goldmans and the like, I think it's inevitable that London will lose its status as the only City in European finance. And, long-term, that's probably a positive for the UK economy. It means we'll be less reliant on a few mega-earners, trophy asset prices won't be so inflated, and we'll lose a boom-and-bust sector.

Now this doesn't mean London won't be bigger or more significant than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin. It just means that more finance will happen in these other places. Other places will reach critical mass.

The biggest near term consequence of this will be that property prices will be pressured - first in London, then the South East, then countrywide. (Again, this is a long term good thing.) Falling UK property prices will reduce the UK wealth effect, and drive up the savings rate.

And this will be the Brexit recession.

A necessary rebalancing of the UK economy. Albeit an incredibly painful one. And one that will likely cause massive recriminations.

It sounds like a recession which will hit London hardest and longest.

Its the recession which should have happened after 2008 but which a trillion pounds of borrowed money was used to stop.

That's a fair assessment.

I'm glad I'm not leveraged long prime London property. Oh wait...

HYUFD said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

DavidL said:

Yeah but those people in Goldmans would much rather live in Frankfurt, honest.

@rcs1000 may have a good line on GS, but Frankfurt is unlikely. Amsterdam would have been more believable. A lot of this is going to be lobbying manoeuvres to try and get the government to soften on immigration so the City can keep the passport or have some equivalent status.

The only place with, in the lingo, the same ecosystem (all ancillary and related services in the same place) is New York.

If bits move it will be a gradual blunting of London's preeminence rather than a collapse.

New York and Singapore is the real threat. I don't much like Sadiq, but he is right. If London loses business it won't be to Paris and Frankfurt, it will be to NYC and Singapore. From what I can tell arm's length locations are to be preferred for EUR transactions. Then again, if we are to lose business I'd rather lose it to non-EU countries anyway so I'm fairly relaxed about it.

HSBC are moving jobs to Paris, Goldman to Frankfurt etc. European cities will narrow the gap with London and NYC may start to pull ahead especially with the incoming Trump administration and the GOP Congress seen as pro business (though if the Democrats win the mid terms things may change a little)

Charles said:

Post hoc proctor hoc

NickPalmer said:

foxinsoxuk said:

On topic:

I rather like Gillian Troughton's politics, and they seem not too far from my own, or Tim Farron for that matter!

I don't think it is so much that the 5 Labour candidates are anti Corbyn, but rather that all the 5 were genuinely local longstanding activists with local roots. These are the people that outperform the national party, as we also see in Bromsgrove tonight too.

This bodes well for the Labour party in the long run. Corbyn is allowing the grass roots to thrive, and deliberately so. He is killing the Spadocracy.

I think that's right - Southam is right that Momentum did try to influence the selection, but Corbyn and his immediate team (which doesn't include the Prescotts!) didn't.

My large local branch had its AGM this week - a number of new Corbynista members there, contrary to legend, but all the constituency nominations were made on the basis of competence rather thasn ideology, and agreed unanimously. It's possible to be both left-wing in leadership elections and pragmatic in everyday matters.

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

@MaxPB suppose we do get equivalence.

Ask yourself equivalence with what and under the jurisdiction of which rule-making body?

It will still be the EU which grants it, rules over it, ensures it remains current (equivalence is only granted at a point in time and governs an existing set of rules rather than a regulatory environment) and, finally, enforces it.

Some control.

ESMA?

I'm really not that fussed, I've said time and again trade is somewhere that compromise is acceptable, even desirable. The EU was and is about much more than trade, which is why I voted to leave and am happy that we are leaving.

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Goldmans and the like, I think it's inevitable that London will lose its status as the only City in European finance. And, long-term, that's probably a positive for the UK economy. It means we'll be less reliant on a few mega-earners, trophy asset prices won't be so inflated, and we'll lose a boom-and-bust sector.

Now this doesn't mean London won't be bigger or more significant than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin. It just means that more finance will happen in these other places. Other places will reach critical mass.

The biggest near term consequence of this will be that property prices will be pressured - first in London, then the South East, then countrywide. (Again, this is a long term good thing.) Falling UK property prices will reduce the UK wealth effect, and drive up the savings rate.

And this will be the Brexit recession.

A necessary rebalancing of the UK economy. Albeit an incredibly painful one. And one that will likely cause massive recriminations.

It sounds like a recession which will hit London hardest and longest.

Its the recession which should have happened after 2008 but which a trillion pounds of borrowed money was used to stop.

That's a fair assessment.

I'm glad I'm not leveraged long prime London property. Oh wait...

Clearly now is the time to come to Zurich.

I'm possibly heading to LA...

showbiz beckons ?

TOPPING said:

DavidL said:

TOPPING said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

I think you missed an 'ergo' in there.

Yesterday, I heard a story (whether true or not is another matter) that Goldman was going to substantially reduce its London footprint. The European back-office was going to Warsaw, sales & trading for the bulk of European clients would go to Frankfurt, and a number of investment banking jobs would be moved back to the US.

I don't know the veracity of the story, although the source is a plausible one.

Sales and trading to Frankfurt???

They'll have to rip the annual membership of 5HS from their cold dead hands.

5HS?

5 Hertford Street.

Where up and coming or already there sales traders go to look at Eastern European hookers.

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Goldmans and the like, I think it's inevitable that London will lose its status as the only City in European finance. And, long-term, that's probably a positive for the UK economy. It means we'll be less reliant on a few mega-earners, trophy asset prices won't be so inflated, and we'll lose a boom-and-bust sector.

Now this doesn't mean London won't be bigger or more significant than Frankfurt or Paris or Dublin. It just means that more finance will happen in these other places. Other places will reach critical mass.

The biggest near term consequence of this will be that property prices will be pressured - first in London, then the South East, then countrywide. (Again, this is a long term good thing.) Falling UK property prices will reduce the UK wealth effect, and drive up the savings rate.

And this will be the Brexit recession.

A necessary rebalancing of the UK economy. Albeit an incredibly painful one. And one that will likely cause massive recriminations.

It sounds like a recession which will hit London hardest and longest.

Its the recession which should have happened after 2008 but which a trillion pounds of borrowed money was used to stop.

That's a fair assessment.

I'm glad I'm not leveraged long prime London property. Oh wait...

Clearly now is the time to come to Zurich.

I'm possibly heading to LA...

showbiz beckons ?

From a health perspective, I think it might be better to hang out on muscle beach rather than PB...

SeanT said:

As for cities that lose empires necessarily becoming less important, that is rather belied by the incredible success of Singapore and Hong Kong, which thrive as big, free trading English language cities on the periphery of (but not within) vast economic powers.

If Londoners are nimble enough, there will be opportunities aplenty post Brexit, and RCS can stop having a breakdown.

Bromptonaut said:

Charles said:

Bromptonaut said:

Heard tonight a friend's daughter is losing her job because her call centre is being relocated to Lisbon following Brexit.

Real jobs, real lives.

Post hoc proctor hoc

Heartless.

chestnut said:

London started to blossom in the mid 1980s.

Morris_Dancer said:

Reminds me a little of an eastern European country (might be Hungary, not sure) which tried regaining independence from the Soviets in the 1950s (maybe 60s, but I think it was 50s).

Jonathan said:

Here's a fun question...

Did winning the 2012 olympics make Brexit possible?

By demonstrating that Brtain could actually win something, Blair laid to rest some doubts about what the country could achieve alone.

TOPPING said:

MaxPB said:

TOPPING said:

@MaxPB suppose we do get equivalence.

Ask yourself equivalence with what and under the jurisdiction of which rule-making body?

It will still be the EU which grants it, rules over it, ensures it remains current (equivalence is only granted at a point in time and governs an existing set of rules rather than a regulatory environment) and, finally, enforces it.

Some control.

ESMA?

I'm really not that fussed, I've said time and again trade is somewhere that compromise is acceptable, even desirable. The EU was and is about much more than trade, which is why I voted to leave and am happy that we are leaving.

ESMA is tasked by the EU to implement its will.

But that's fine, I understand your viewpoing. Now some people, even can you imagine some PB Leavers, were all exercised about sovereignty. It is transparently obvious that whatever situation we reach with financial services that we will give up sovereignty to another body, the ECJ, say. But if all Leavers are happy to cede sovereignty to the ECJ then who am I to argue.

Just that one does wonder what all the fuss was about and what it was all for if we are back under the oppressive yoke of the EU.

SeanT said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

Jonathan said:

SeanT said:

London will take a hit, and then it will recover. It always does. It's in the DNA of the place.

It was the biggest city north of the Alps in the 2nd century AD.

We don't know what will happen. London before the EU was a rusty crumbling wreck. If the money goes it might go that way again. Equally, London might benefit from cooling down a bit. The people are currently being priced out, which can't be good long term.

London boo

As with down the line.

London's

Many here interpret Brexit as an attack on London, it's international culture and it's dominance of the UK.

Simply 70s is deliciously ridiculous.

How much is London's 'renaissance' a central London thing ? There's no doubt lots of expensive flats, posh restaurants and trendy bars within three miles of Westminster but that's also happened in pretty much every other city centre as well.

From what I've seen it doesn't extend into the middle suburbia of the likes of Ealing and Croydon.

And the Conservatives have pretty much collapsed in many previous strongholds.

Some outer suburban areas have declined, especially in places like Brent. But in general yes, there has been a huge renaissance. Vast areas of the city, especially in the east and south which were impoverished and grim, are now affluent, or at least speedily gentrifying. Docklands has gone from wasteland to Hong Kong, an incredible change. Ditto Borough, Brixton, King's Cross, Islington, Hackney, Wapping, Camden, Bermondsey, Hoxton... even New Cross and Tottenham are getting makeovers.