Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes of course asking for tenders on the 3rd biggest mortgage lender in the uk, analysing what's on the table, negotiating, thinking about the direction of the global economy, should only take a couple of weeks huh! christ and he's had nearly 20.


They should just take decisions quickly regarding the economy, and think of the political capital just like the Conservative divs with there slide rule calculators in the late 80's....any one for a pint of ERM !

Its ashame Dick didnt get the bank, the govt will make a killing when they reflote it a few years down the line. I , like many others bought in on the low end as it was spiralling down and have lost several grand, at least there will be compensation for shareholders.

1) No. Banks need a commercial driver to work effectively.


2) Darling is not great. But any chancellor who takes over before a downturn would be slated anyway. He'll be quietly sidelined in a summer reshuffle. And I think we all had a part to play in the downturn...who actually thought their 3 bed terrace was really worth ?670,000?! Our greed seems to get the better of us every 7 years...

Michael thats very true, the rock will do well long term, current shareholders wont though (RAB capital must be fuming), current govt has not really proved itself so far though (naming and shaming of nrk). Richard Branson would have been good for the rock and its borrowers.
I know a shareholder who's losing a sizeable pile on this as their shares become worthless. They bought on the advice of a fund manager who advised (last year) that a better spread should include more stable banking stock ala Northern Rock. Now other speculators who bought stock in the last couple of weeks in anticipation of RB succeeding will also lose everything. I wonder if the next chapter on this farce will be a legal battle with the disenfranchised shareholders?

I don't have much sympathy with the shareholders, I'm afraid. It's a known risk ("value of shares can fall as well as rise..." etc) and this time they lost out.


The people I feel sorry for are those whose pensions may be affected.


As for the success of nationalised industries...50/50. Some do well, some private comanies make a cock-up of it and its worse than before. Time will tell, I suspect.

Spadetownboy, as we've piled in from the public purse something to the tune of 500 quid for every man woman and child so far, I'd be pretty concerned about what happens to it all.


I mean, we could probably get another trident submarine for that, or 2 nonfunctioning NHS IT systems, or you know, modernise 1000 hospitals....naa that'd be daft!!

  • 6 months later...

So, given the latest news


This one nothing to Do with Alistair Darling or whelk stalls


Can libertarians answer the question:


Just why is it that the 2 governments most closely aligned with the free market and libertarian ideals (at least compared with any serious contenders) both feel the need to nationalise these banks?

From what I've read before they are government chartered banks and formerly government owned and they provide funding for about 50% of the home loans market.


No matter how libertarian their views, no government could stand by and let them fail - the impact on the economy would be devestating, and of course they'd be booted straight out at the next election. (Perhaps cynically, I think what most government care about the most, whatever their policies, is staying in power.)

Whatever the flaws, and I can't think of a better system, it is the paradox at the heart of any democracy


History has shown that at times of change/need/cause/whatever - leadership has had to do things that would be deemed unpopular. But so led are we by "opinion polls" and fear of being voted out I blame the electorate far more than any political party for the paralysis of any true thought in government

Not sure I agree. The electorate doesn't really get that much say anyway - there's nothing to ensure that any politician you vote for even follows what they've said in their party manifesto.


It's not like the Swiss system where you get to vote locally regularly on issues rather than for a certain party in the hope that on balance they will best respresent your beliefs and interests over the next 4-5 years.

The electorate has far more say than they want


Elect your MP of choice and then make sure they know who you are. No point electing someone and then sitting back for 4-5 years. As a population we is well lazy


Not sure i fancy living in Switzerland either ;-)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
    • I'd quit this thread, let those who just want to slag Labour off have their own thread.  Your views on the economy are worth debating.  I'm just stunned how there wasn't this level of noise with the last government.  I could try to get some dirt on Badenoch but she is pointless  Whilst I am not a fan of the Daily Mirror at least there is some respite from Labour bashing. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/grenfell-hillsborough-families-make-powerful-36175862 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-facing-parliamentary-investigation-36188612  
    • That is a bit cake and eat it tho, isn’t it?    At what point do we stop respecting other people’s opinions and beliefs  because history shows us we sometimes simply have no other choice  you are holding some comfort blanket that allows you to believe we are all equal and all valid and we can simply voice different options - without that ever  impacting on the real world  Were the racists we fought in previous generations different? Were their beliefs patronised by the elites of the time? Or do we learn lessons and avoid mistakes of the past?   racists/bigots having “just as much to say” is both true and yet, a thing we have learnt from the past. The lesson was not “ooh let’s hear them out. They sound interesting and valid and as worthy of an audience as people who hold the opposite opinion” 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...