The Politics Thread

[BWFC_Insane]

See Banks are tugging at reducing ring fencing regulatory protections, which are there because they needed bail outs. No thanks. Or if there is some compromise, and crash of the bank is paid entirely by the bank and the Directors go to jail.

The problem is the banks investors and directory don’t care how many people’s savings or pensions go pop if they do. And whilst they might care about jail time the people who actually will be dictating what happens, those with real power won’t ever be going will they?

You aren’t putting Goldman Sachs’s in prison. Or banco. So it would be some director who is just there as a figure head. And the folks who just want to see the graphs go up walk away scot free.

[Worthy4England]

See Banks are tugging at reducing ring fencing regulatory protections, which are there because they needed bail outs. No thanks. Or if there is some compromise, and crash of the bank is paid entirely by the bank and the Directors go to jail.

The problem is the banks investors and directory don’t care how many people’s savings or pensions go pop if they do. And whilst they might care about jail time the people who actually will be dictating what happens, those with real power won’t ever be going will they?

You aren’t putting Goldman Sachs’s in prison. Or banco. So it would be some director who is just there as a figure head. And the folks who just want to see the graphs go up walk away scot free.

Not sure it'd work well, but I think I'd be a bit more cautious from an overall RMF standpoint, if there was 34 years stacked on the back of it. I might be pursuaded that trading a shitload of CFDs that no bugger knows what's in them wasn't a great idea.

I think just to slacken the regs with nothing in return would once again lead to a bailout

[Hoboh]

Well, apparently it seems, the little beer swilling, doc mart booted heroine from Ashton was threatening to resign her post over the 'ludicrous target' of 1.5 million homes. Seems she was under the impression she was being setup.
Well I'd guess that kinda makes a mockery of yet another of labour's promises soon to be re-enforced by SERCO offering landlords 5 years guaranteed rent and maintenance in return for housing sailors, should help the shortages no end.

[Worthy4England]

Well, apparently it seems, the little beer swilling, doc mart booted heroine from Ashton was threatening to resign her post over the 'ludicrous target' of 1.5 million homes. Seems she was under the impression she was being setup.
Well I'd guess that kinda makes a mockery of yet another of labour's promises soon to be re-enforced by SERCO offering landlords 5 years guaranteed rent and maintenance in return for housing sailors, should help the shortages no end.

Not close to the story, mate, but a crash in the housing market is gonna probably fck growth, which is already depressed through Brexit.

The concern is GDP not affordability. Last lot were wrong, Labour are wrong, Reform will be wrong, because no one is challenging the real economic premise.

[BWFC_Insane]

See Banks are tugging at reducing ring fencing regulatory protections, which are there because they needed bail outs. No thanks. Or if there is some compromise, and crash of the bank is paid entirely by the bank and the Directors go to jail.

The problem is the banks investors and directory don’t care how many people’s savings or pensions go pop if they do. And whilst they might care about jail time the people who actually will be dictating what happens, those with real power won’t ever be going will they?

You aren’t putting Goldman Sachs’s in prison. Or banco. So it would be some director who is just there as a figure head. And the folks who just want to see the graphs go up walk away scot free.

Not sure it'd work well, but I think I'd be a bit more cautious from an overall RMF standpoint, if there was 34 years stacked on the back of it. I might be pursuaded that trading a shitload of CFDs that no bugger knows what's in them wasn't a great idea.

I think just to slacken the regs with nothing in return would once again lead to a bailout

It would be absolute madness for sure. Like we’d learned nothing. But I fear that is exactly the case.

The problem as I see it is that the worst people in the world or close to that end up in the finance sector and banking and know that no government will ever let it just fall over. So they gradually take more and more risks because they have to see the lines go up.

The other problem is simple - banks are mega international corporations that in many cases are close to as powerful as G7 countries. And they have all our money. Who holds the cards?

[BWFC_Insane]

Well, apparently it seems, the little beer swilling, doc mart booted heroine from Ashton was threatening to resign her post over the 'ludicrous target' of 1.5 million homes. Seems she was under the impression she was being setup.
Well I'd guess that kinda makes a mockery of yet another of labour's promises soon to be re-enforced by SERCO offering landlords 5 years guaranteed rent and maintenance in return for housing sailors, should help the shortages no end.

Not close to the story, mate, but a crash in the housing market is gonna probably fck growth, which is already depressed through Brexit.

The concern is GDP not affordability. Last lot were wrong, Labour are wrong, Reform will be wrong, because no one is challenging the real economic premise.

I know what you mean mate in a macroeconomic sense. Letting house prices rise so long as matched by salaries and wage growth would be a cracking thing. But the reality is that we’ve had a disproportionate period of very low borrowing costs and low barriers to borrowing that has contributed to huge and unsustainable house price rises. Coupled with in many areas a supply and demand issue further inflating the market.

So in a macroeconomic sense yes. But not in the sense of why will so many people under 40 today never own a house in the UK. Yes a lack of growth has not helped but housing prices would have outstripped even our strongest growth periods - since of course there would be added inflationary pressures.

[Worthy4England]

Well, apparently it seems, the little beer swilling, doc mart booted heroine from Ashton was threatening to resign her post over the 'ludicrous target' of 1.5 million homes. Seems she was under the impression she was being setup.
Well I'd guess that kinda makes a mockery of yet another of labour's promises soon to be re-enforced by SERCO offering landlords 5 years guaranteed rent and maintenance in return for housing sailors, should help the shortages no end.

Not close to the story, mate, but a crash in the housing market is gonna probably fck growth, which is already depressed through Brexit.

The concern is GDP not affordability. Last lot were wrong, Labour are wrong, Reform will be wrong, because no one is challenging the real economic premise.

I know what you mean mate in a macroeconomic sense. Letting house prices rise so long as matched by salaries and wage growth would be a cracking thing. But the reality is that we’ve had a disproportionate period of very low borrowing costs and low barriers to borrowing that has contributed to huge and unsustainable house price rises. Coupled with in many areas a supply and demand issue further inflating the market.

So in a macroeconomic sense yes. But not in the sense of why will so many people under 40 today never own a house in the UK. Yes a lack of growth has not helped but housing prices would have outstripped even our strongest growth periods - since of course there would be added inflationary pressures.

We build houses at the rate determined by those building them, their attractiveness to pension funds and offshore asset washers and as a significant component of GDP growth (as invesment not housing), is largely undiminished and will continue. Labour's view of the housing markets may have some localised impacts. Overall it won't solve the housing problem, because the problem is inaffordability, not volume.

[Hoboh]

Well, apparently it seems, the little beer swilling, doc mart booted heroine from Ashton was threatening to resign her post over the 'ludicrous target' of 1.5 million homes. Seems she was under the impression she was being setup.
Well I'd guess that kinda makes a mockery of yet another of labour's promises soon to be re-enforced by SERCO offering landlords 5 years guaranteed rent and maintenance in return for housing sailors, should help the shortages no end.

Not close to the story, mate, but a crash in the housing market is gonna probably fck growth, which is already depressed through Brexit.

The concern is GDP not affordability. Last lot were wrong, Labour are wrong, Reform will be wrong, because no one is challenging the real economic premise.

I know what you mean mate in a macroeconomic sense. Letting house prices rise so long as matched by salaries and wage growth would be a cracking thing. But the reality is that we’ve had a disproportionate period of very low borrowing costs and low barriers to borrowing that has contributed to huge and unsustainable house price rises. Coupled with in many areas a supply and demand issue further inflating the market.

So in a macroeconomic sense yes. But not in the sense of why will so many people under 40 today never own a house in the UK. Yes a lack of growth has not helped but housing prices would have outstripped even our strongest growth periods - since of course there would be added inflationary pressures.

We build houses at the rate determined by those building them, their attractiveness to pension funds and offshore asset washers and as a significant component of GDP growth (as invesment not housing), is largely undiminished and will continue. Labour's view of the housing markets may have some localised impacts. Overall it won't solve the housing problem, because the problem is inaffordability, not volume.

Oh absolutely and folk wonder why large amounts of land gets purchased then left undeveloped for years. In a nutshell with the rest of that sentence, you just summed up the reason for population overgrowth, numbers equals potential for demand and growth.
Unless someone puts a very large warhead on Davos at the right time of year and individuals membership of the WEF attracts capital punishment, then nothing will change.
Bit like religion politicians and the wealthy, one man goes, the faithful are jolted back to support, another comes along, the show goes on, nothing changes.

[BWFC_Insane]

^^Dear me Hoboh you really are just a right wing social media meme. Bet all those bots put the goddamn milk in first. Probably worried that if they don’t the wef will add some voodoo magic to it that hands them an instant high class education.

[Hoboh]

^^Dear me Hoboh you really are just a right wing social media meme. Bet all those bots put the goddamn milk in first. Probably worried that if they don’t the wef will add some voodoo magic to it that hands them an instant high class education.

If reality is right wing, then so be it.
20 million and rising extra bodies landing in a relatively small country will benefit everyone except the puppet masters? Yeah right.

[Worthy4England]

Bit of a drop from the 85m Turkish people who were on their way under EU freedom of movement. Anyhow Brexit and restoring our control of our own borders will solve it....I guess it's somewhere just to the North West of sunlit uplands.

[Hoboh]

Bit of a drop from the 85m Turkish people who were on their way under EU freedom of movement. Anyhow Brexit and restoring our control of our own borders will solve it....I guess it's somewhere just to the North West of sunlit uplands.

I haven't forgotten you rabid Blair was God types and the discussions on here about 'only' a few thousand Eastern Europeans coming to the UK if we relaxed the rules at that time.
Worked well that did it?
You need to face facts, sooner or later all you champagne socialists sat in your 4/5 bedroom houses on your middle class incomes and twee kids in uni, blah, blah, blah, will reap what you sow.
Oh and isn’t our socialist nanny state, the EU doing s well these days? Breakup of the socialist code throughout the countries, everywhere except in Brussels, economy that, like everywhere else is bumping along, power cuts, bricking it over war with Russia, and the takeover of Europe by little Napoleon without actually invading anywhere.
Oh yeah, great, let's get back in and have our arses wiped again.

Stop fcuking weeping, it's embarrassing wailing for the dark sewers of Brussels.

[Worthy4England]

Oh a rant to tuck into! Whoop, whoop.

I set myself two broad objectives - like most people - protect my family from bad politics and bad economics. We've seen little but either over a very long time now, with (who coulda guessed this one) flood-up capitalism - you know, the one where they say it trickles down, but it actually does the opposite? I think this generally occurs quicker under Tory govts and swings back a bit under Labour ones, but the overall trajectory is the same.

I ceased any affiliation with the Labour party, the very day Tony Blair got elected as leader, because Blair got elected as leader. (Hardly a ringing indictment but I did think he'd get Labour elected).

No matter, lets address some points GB News tells you are important. When you look at the foreign born population of the UK, it's right in the middle of "everywhere else" in the world, in percentages - so nothing to do directly with the EU. US, 14%, Australia, 31%, France 14%, Germany 18%, New Zealand & Canada 22%, UK 15%. It's amazing how US is about the same % as us, Oz, Canada and New Zealand quite a bit higher. Must that pesky EU, eh, sending people to the US, Canada, Oz and New Zealand? Hmmm maybe not.

Champagne socialists? Are you having a laugh? Have you seen the price of Cristal, since we dropped out of the EU, we've had to switch to Prosecco and Asti Spumante, just to keep appearances up, which as you know under EU legislation can't call themselves champagne. I think you should withdraw your scurrilous slur and refer to us as sparkling wine socialists from now on. it's a real cost of living impact along with the price of alioli. There's nothing much better to indicate socialist tendencies than statements like.

You need to face facts, sooner or later all you champagne socialists sat in your 4/5 bedroom houses on your middle class incomes and twee kids in uni, blah, blah, blah, will reap what you sow.

Us "socialists" are the ones supposed to be awaiting the great day, brother and being all bitter and twisted that capitalism has failed us. It's because we're lazy and not committed to getting on in life. Thatcher told us in the 80's

There are hardly any commentators nor architects of Brexit like Farage, Tice, JRM, who haven't said Brexit has failed. Just admit you were wrong. It's easy, and in my socialist way, it might be good to get it off your chest, I'll put an arm round and you can cry, I won't tell anyone, honest. It failed, because it could never achieve anywhere near what it was sold to achieve, because the EU, whilst being problematic in plenty of areas, wasn't the fundamental problem. Those trade agreements with good old UK holding all the cards - we're still holding them, apparently. Had someone said we need a reshaped agreement, I'd have been in favour of that.

To the EU economy, like everywhere else bumping along. Sorta suggests, bit like immigration numbers, that the problem isn't exclusively "the EU," as I've said plenty of times, the thing that needs resetting, is capitalism, not politics.

It might have escaped your notice, but coal seems to be pretty popular these days, lot more popular than say, 1982. Talk of re-nationalization of key industries is also spoken about. I remember the conversations when they were sold about having to buy some sort of utility from some people we were at war with. Laughed at by the same people that are now saying "that might be a good idea." Part of the reason I wanted to remain within a larger trading bloc, was so that, if say in the future some large orange man baby (or a bloke called Vlad or Xi), decided to unilaterally try and change all the rules, because capitalism wasn't working there either and didn't give a shit about it's impacts on allies, we might have a few more cards to play. Good job, that'll never happen.

I can only imagine how it might feel, to head through an entire lifetime of being wrong. I don't expect you to be embarrassed but would heartily recommend the benefits of further education to improve your chances, because I can tell from your posts, you're not attuned to your own chakras, I suspect you barely do yoga classes, but as all good preppers, I suspect you're ready. Please lob the first molotov cocktail through a window in the East Wing of the manor, as we can't afford to heat that and it might give us time to get to the helipad.

[BWFC_Insane]

Oh a rant to tuck into! Whoop, whoop.

I set myself two broad objectives - like most people - protect my family from bad politics and bad economics. We've seen little but either over a very long time now, with (who coulda guessed this one) flood-up capitalism - you know, the one where they say it trickles down, but it actually does the opposite? I think this generally occurs quicker under Tory govts and swings back a bit under Labour ones, but the overall trajectory is the same.

I ceased any affiliation with the Labour party, the very day Tony Blair got elected as leader, because Blair got elected as leader. (Hardly a ringing indictment but I did think he'd get Labour elected).

No matter, lets address some points GB News tells you are important. When you look at the foreign born population of the UK, it's right in the middle of "everywhere else" in the world, in percentages - so nothing to do directly with the EU. US, 14%, Australia, 31%, France 14%, Germany 18%, New Zealand & Canada 22%, UK 15%. It's amazing how US is about the same % as us, Oz, Canada and New Zealand quite a bit higher. Must that pesky EU, eh, sending people to the US, Canada, Oz and New Zealand? Hmmm maybe not.

Champagne socialists? Are you having a laugh? Have you seen the price of Cristal, since we dropped out of the EU, we've had to switch to Prosecco and Asti Spumante, just to keep appearances up, which as you know under EU legislation can't call themselves champagne. I think you should withdraw your scurrilous slur and refer to us as sparkling wine socialists from now on. it's a real cost of living impact along with the price of alioli. There's nothing much better to indicate socialist tendencies than statements like.

You need to face facts, sooner or later all you champagne socialists sat in your 4/5 bedroom houses on your middle class incomes and twee kids in uni, blah, blah, blah, will reap what you sow.

Us "socialists" are the ones supposed to be awaiting the great day, brother and being all bitter and twisted that capitalism has failed us. It's because we're lazy and not committed to getting on in life. Thatcher told us in the 80's

There are hardly any commentators nor architects of Brexit like Farage, Tice, JRM, who haven't said Brexit has failed. Just admit you were wrong. It's easy, and in my socialist way, it might be good to get it off your chest, I'll put an arm round and you can cry, I won't tell anyone, honest. It failed, because it could never achieve anywhere near what it was sold to achieve, because the EU, whilst being problematic in plenty of areas, wasn't the fundamental problem. Those trade agreements with good old UK holding all the cards - we're still holding them, apparently. Had someone said we need a reshaped agreement, I'd have been in favour of that.

To the EU economy, like everywhere else bumping along. Sorta suggests, bit like immigration numbers, that the problem isn't exclusively "the EU," as I've said plenty of times, the thing that needs resetting, is capitalism, not politics.

It might have escaped your notice, but coal seems to be pretty popular these days, lot more popular than say, 1982. Talk of re-nationalization of key industries is also spoken about. I remember the conversations when they were sold about having to buy some sort of utility from some people we were at war with. Laughed at by the same people that are now saying "that might be a good idea." Part of the reason I wanted to remain within a larger trading bloc, was so that, if say in the future some large orange man baby (or a bloke called Vlad or Xi), decided to unilaterally try and change all the rules, because capitalism wasn't working there either and didn't give a shit about it's impacts on allies, we might have a few more cards to play. Good job, that'll never happen.

I can only imagine how it might feel, to head through an entire lifetime of being wrong. I don't expect you to be embarrassed but would heartily recommend the benefits of further education to improve your chances, because I can tell from your posts, you're not attuned to your own chakras, I suspect you barely do yoga classes, but as all good preppers, I suspect you're ready. Please lob the first molotov cocktail through a window in the East Wing of the manor, as we can't afford to heat that and it might give us time to get to the helipad.

Ooof. Double oof.

I’m a Blairite I guess. Love Blair. Hate the activist Labour left with a passion. But I think your analysis is spot on. Wealth floods up under the right Labour governments merely slightly slow it.

And the right use the divide and conquer tactics to dupe the working class into accepting more and more wealth transfer. Clearly as Hoboh prove these tactics in the long term work. I used to think inherently we were a selfish society but actually over the years I’ve changed significantly. I don’t think we are. I actually think we are generous and kind. I think the issue is we are deeply deeply tribal. Or at least a significant number are. And that they can only exist with us a them dividing lines and indeed revel in that. See the middle class elites tag used above….

But Canada has proven it haven’t that? Voting for the right until Trump intervened and Carney stood against him. Tribal. Only this time the ‘centre left’ won out through the innate tribalism of people.

I

[Worthy4England]

I generally know what I'm not in terms of political alignment. What I am is a bit trickier. Fortunately, Hoboh has a good grasp of it for me and can tell me over and over again. If he does it enough, it might stick...

[Hoboh]

Oh a rant to tuck into! Whoop, whoop.

I set myself two broad objectives - like most people - protect my family from bad politics and bad economics. We've seen little but either over a very long time now, with (who coulda guessed this one) flood-up capitalism - you know, the one where they say it trickles down, but it actually does the opposite? I think this generally occurs quicker under Tory govts and swings back a bit under Labour ones, but the overall trajectory is the same.

I ceased any affiliation with the Labour party, the very day Tony Blair got elected as leader, because Blair got elected as leader. (Hardly a ringing indictment but I did think he'd get Labour elected).

No matter, lets address some points GB News tells you are important. When you look at the foreign born population of the UK, it's right in the middle of "everywhere else" in the world, in percentages - so nothing to do directly with the EU. US, 14%, Australia, 31%, France 14%, Germany 18%, New Zealand & Canada 22%, UK 15%. It's amazing how US is about the same % as us, Oz, Canada and New Zealand quite a bit higher. Must that pesky EU, eh, sending people to the US, Canada, Oz and New Zealand? Hmmm maybe not.

Champagne socialists? Are you having a laugh? Have you seen the price of Cristal, since we dropped out of the EU, we've had to switch to Prosecco and Asti Spumante, just to keep appearances up, which as you know under EU legislation can't call themselves champagne. I think you should withdraw your scurrilous slur and refer to us as sparkling wine socialists from now on. it's a real cost of living impact along with the price of alioli. There's nothing much better to indicate socialist tendencies than statements like.

You need to face facts, sooner or later all you champagne socialists sat in your 4/5 bedroom houses on your middle class incomes and twee kids in uni, blah, blah, blah, will reap what you sow.

Us "socialists" are the ones supposed to be awaiting the great day, brother and being all bitter and twisted that capitalism has failed us. It's because we're lazy and not committed to getting on in life. Thatcher told us in the 80's

There are hardly any commentators nor architects of Brexit like Farage, Tice, JRM, who haven't said Brexit has failed. Just admit you were wrong. It's easy, and in my socialist way, it might be good to get it off your chest, I'll put an arm round and you can cry, I won't tell anyone, honest. It failed, because it could never achieve anywhere near what it was sold to achieve, because the EU, whilst being problematic in plenty of areas, wasn't the fundamental problem. Those trade agreements with good old UK holding all the cards - we're still holding them, apparently. Had someone said we need a reshaped agreement, I'd have been in favour of that.

To the EU economy, like everywhere else bumping along. Sorta suggests, bit like immigration numbers, that the problem isn't exclusively "the EU," as I've said plenty of times, the thing that needs resetting, is capitalism, not politics.

It might have escaped your notice, but coal seems to be pretty popular these days, lot more popular than say, 1982. Talk of re-nationalization of key industries is also spoken about. I remember the conversations when they were sold about having to buy some sort of utility from some people we were at war with. Laughed at by the same people that are now saying "that might be a good idea." Part of the reason I wanted to remain within a larger trading bloc, was so that, if say in the future some large orange man baby (or a bloke called Vlad or Xi), decided to unilaterally try and change all the rules, because capitalism wasn't working there either and didn't give a shit about it's impacts on allies, we might have a few more cards to play. Good job, that'll never happen.

I can only imagine how it might feel, to head through an entire lifetime of being wrong. I don't expect you to be embarrassed but would heartily recommend the benefits of further education to improve your chances, because I can tell from your posts, you're not attuned to your own chakras, I suspect you barely do yoga classes, but as all good preppers, I suspect you're ready. Please lob the first molotov cocktail through a window in the East Wing of the manor, as we can't afford to heat that and it might give us time to get to the helipad.

You trip yourself up so many times, it's hilarious.
Having in general countries 2x or more larger, at least in the main doesn't help, does it?

A lifetime of being wrong? PMSL Oh I was a perceived tiny minority of leave voters who were going to get taught a lesson by all you nailed on remain types.

Oh I could go on and on but I'd be wasting energy with rich man bad poor man good as long as they're not next door.

[Worthy4England]

I'll happily work through your list of everywhere I trip myself up, but like most things in your life it'll be made up and imaginary and not forthcoming because GB News hasn't provided you a checklist.

I mean percentages are percentages. 14% of US population is about 50m, 15% of UK is about 10m. I know we don't trust science, but it is a lower number for the UK. Sure, it's a higher population density, but I don't recall you mentioning anything about population density - they're both quite long words.

ICYMI, I did predict Leave would win the vote 52/48 prior to it being counted and won an internet pint of Bijou Bob, but winning the vote wasn't the thing I was worried was right or wrong, it was the impact one or the other would have on us. I was right we'd be worse off and we are.

Enjoy your instant coffee, I'm going to percolate some Kopi Luwak.

[Hoboh]

I'll happily work through your list of everywhere I trip myself up, but like most things in your life it'll be made up and imaginary and not forthcoming because GB News hasn't provided you a checklist.

I mean percentages are percentages. 14% of US population is about 50m, 15% of UK is about 10m. I know we don't trust science, but it is a lower number for the UK. Sure, it's a higher population density, but I don't recall you mentioning anything about population density - they're both quite long words.

ICYMI, I did predict Leave would win the vote 52/48 prior to it being counted and won an internet pint of Bijou Bob, but winning the vote wasn't the thing I was worried was right or wrong, it was the impact one or the other would have on us. I was right we'd be worse off and we are.

Enjoy your instant coffee, I'm going to percolate some Kopi Luwak.

I honestly have never watched GB news and it's more to do with actual space mate, won't be long before Raynor and silly milli will be competing over spare land
Anyway just enjoying a cup of instant, on the go Nesscaff, made the hoboh way, whist sitting in the shade.
Enjoy yours

[Worthy4England]

And do you reckon Red Worthy is generally supportive of Labour's approach on housing or thinks it's just as misguided if not more so and more stupid than the last lot?

Stop nagging, I have Ambrosia to sup, and the croquet lawn needs some attention.

[Hoboh]

And do you reckon Red Worthy is generally supportive of Labour's approach on housing or thinks it's just as misguided if not more so and more stupid than the last lot?

Stop nagging, I have Ambrosia to sup, and the croquet lawn needs some attention.

Phisst, what do you pay your servantsfor? Sack um if you have to do it, it's not on