• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

So Brexit would be your main issue (that's what I'm reading from your post, correct me if I'm wrong.) Which is fair, it's the main issue for a lot (maybe most?) voters. What would you like to see re. Brexit?

My main issue is "a plan", one that faces Brexit first but shows understanding of a life post Brexit as well.

re. Brexit? Anything but BINO/Soft Brexit. Ideally all out - but to be honest just forgetting it all is better than BINO/Soft Brexit.
 
Tbh brown sums this country up, little fuss about raiding pensions for £5b a year but petitions and questions in the house when you take away their free TV.
Anyone with any savvy could see the crash coming, the banks were giving credit to anyone at stupid unsustainable rates.
And brown encouraged it.
That's hindsight - I was working in the city at the time and it wasn't being predicted until it crashed, either by insiders or the press at large. They honestly thought they had a new world with securitization basing all their figures on previous default rates without joining the dots that if you don't hold the debt, your not bothered who you lend to so there will probably be more defaults.

Brown was implicit but so was every politician, if he went against the banks he would have been called a fool.

at the time the common message was- They were on an unprecedented winning run and political control was not needed. - this was on both sides (and globally)
 
He was responsible for the massive pensions grab which led to a huge rise in property prices and the advent of buy to let's being snapped up everywhere as an alternative to pensions investment, something we still haven't recovered from.
I don't think the two are directly linked, it wasn't alternative of pensions that led ot buy to let it was the easy money being made and the laxness of lending. With or without the pension grab house prices would have shot up.
 
That's hindsight - I was working in the city at the time and it wasn't being predicted until it crashed, either by insiders or the press at large. They honestly thought they had a new world with securitization basing all their figures on previous default rates without joining the dots that if you don't hold the debt, your not bothered who you lend to so there will probably be more defaults.

Brown was implicit but so was every politician, if he went against the banks he would have been called a fool.

at the time the common message was- They were on an unprecedented winning run and political control was not needed. - this was on both sides (and globally)

It's not hindsight, we were offered a mortgage at 8 times our combined salary by a major bank. The mortgage advisor knew me and knew I would never take it as I'm way too cautious, but that was their policy at the time.
 
Confirmation bias? Perish the thought!

There are though, many more mainstream news outlets who are either right/centre-right/centre as opposed to left. The Guardian I would say is a centre newspaper (they loved Clegg for example) with some left-wing commentators. But the left (such as Owen Jones) are outnumbered by lib-dem/blairite types by a distance, in that paper. The Times, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Express, The Sun are all to the right. On the left is basically The Mirror. It's a far from balanced picture.

Who would you vote for if there was a general election tomorrow? For the sake of argument, we'll assume that Johnson is Tory leader and the Brexit Party will stand too.

Ha, ha, ha. Nayimfromthehalfwayline talks about confirmation bias, then goes on to say that we have a balanced press. What a fudging joke! You can't make this brick up. Also, there is no party to vote for, but certainly one to vote against. So what difference does that make? :confused:
 
Last edited:
It's not hindsight, we were offered a mortgage at 8 times our combined salary by a major bank. The mortgage advisor knew me and knew I would never take it as I'm way too cautious, but that was their policy at the time.
You can get 6 times your combined salary now fairly easily, very few people are calling for more regulation.

UK mortgage lending (or any lending)was not the cause of the credit crunch, it was a very small part.
 
Ha, ha, ha. Nayimfromthehalfwayline talks about conformation bias, then goes on to say that we have a balanced press. What a fudging joke! You can't make this brick up. Also, there is no party to vote for, but certainly one to vote against. So what difference does that make? :confused:

Are you trolling? Or are you really the frothy mouthed nut job you appear as here?
 
I've previously done a fairly big post re. Abbott and the press coverage she gets compared to others, so won't repeat all that. But her maths is better (or at least, no worse) than the current Chancellor. But when he gets his figures wrong by the billion, it's kinda forgotten about.

None of the Tories in government are normal imo, they just have a friendlier press than the Labour lot. Even their own think similarly, when you get them in a candid moment:

Are you comparing forecasts and estimates being out from reality against being able to add up her own figures in her own policies? Because I shouldn't need to tell you why the two are so different.
 
You can get 6 times your combined salary now fairly easily, very few people are calling for more regulation.

UK mortgage lending (or any lending)was not the cause of the credit crunch, it was a very small part.

It was a global crash and all for the same reasons, one of which was too money loaned wih too low interest rates to too many people/businesses that couldn't repay.
 
It was a global crash and all for the same reasons, one of which was too money loaned wih too low interest rates to too many people/businesses that couldn't repay.
Driven by securitization, those issuing loans were not bearing the risk. At the time it was not seen as an issue due to historical precedent.

We are in a similar situation now, borrowing 6 times wages & personal debt at a record high. There are very few calls for more regulation and in the UK we probably want to go the other way. Are we on the edge of a crash or will it plug along for another decade?

This is where the hindsight comes in.
 
Driven by securitization, those issuing loans were not bearing the risk. At the time it was not seen as an issue due to historical precedent.

We are in a similar situation now, borrowing 6 times wages & personal debt at a record high. There are very few calls for more regulation and in the UK we probably want to go the other way. Are we on the edge of a crash or will it plug along for another decade?

This is where the hindsight comes in.
(Artificially) Low interest rates have been a life support since 2008.

If you want another bubble look at the car leasing/finance world.....jeez
 
This has just lost Hunt my vote:


It's one of the things that really irritates me about modern politics. If one's opponents propose a good idea, for some reason it's not acceptable to agree with it. If Hunt wants to raise the 20% marker why does that mean dismissing Johnson's excellent plans for the higher rate?
 
(Artificially) Low interest rates have been a life support since 2008.

If you want another bubble look at the car leasing/finance world.....jeez
Help to buy.. Homeowners isa... Etc

It will pop just when and who is left holding the baby. Even a weaker financial system are keeping back any real intrusive regulation
 
Sadly I think Rory Stewart would get eaten alive by the BS in the Tory party.

But if it meant a split, great. The nutjobs can join Farage.
A new cente right party gets created.
The centre left Labour break away.
Plus the lib Dems and we have nice healthy five party coalition politics.
Scandi style.
 
Nope. He just didn't know his numbers on the cost of HS2, was out by about £20Billion or so iirc. Not that I think it matters, anybody can make a mistake or mis-remember in an interview. It's not like they don't have civil servants to work the spreadsheets for them. But compare the coverage one gets vs the other, it's not balanced.
Does he do it often? Because Abbott does this brick all the time.

She's just not very bright - not even in comparison to the rest of her party.
 
Sadly I think Rory Stewart would get eaten alive by the BS in the Tory party.

But if it meant a split, great. The nutjobs can join Farage.
A new cente right party gets created.
The centre left Labour break away.
Plus the lib Dems and we have nice healthy five party coalition politics.
Scandi style.
He doesn't stand a chance. He's softer than a wet tossrag
 
Back