Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Buce]

32 minutes ago, MattP said:

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 41% (-)
LAB: 41% (-)
LDEM: 7% (-)
UKIP: 5% (+1)
GRN: 3% (+1)

(via ICM Research)

 

I guess you must have forgotten to post the bit about which party is most fit to run the economy?

 

You know, the bit where it says Tories are down three points and Labour up two.

[Buce]

2 hours ago, Innovindil said:

I have to ask, the **** is a moosebreath and why is he/she so notorious? 

 

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

Who on earth is moosebreath?

 

I rate a "I'm Spartacus" moment as 50/50 here.

 

Moosebreath is an erstwhile poster who was ostensibly right-wing politically, but was a consummate troll so may not have been.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, MattP said:

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 41% (-)
LAB: 41% (-)
LDEM: 7% (-)
UKIP: 5% (+1)
GRN: 3% (+1)

(via ICM Research)

I can't really see the polls moving anywhere for the foreseeable. There's only really Brexit, possible change of tory leadership (though of be surprised before Brexit) or a significant economic failure that is likely to have any real impact now.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

 

Moosebreath is an erstwhile poster who was ostensibly right-wing politically, but was a consummate troll so may not have been.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This could be said of most the right wingers on here.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

 

Moosebreath is an erstwhile poster who was ostensibly right-wing politically, but was a consummate troll so may not have been.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It'd be fun to know how we'd all be described in 12 months if we left the forum now.

I think I'd be pretty popular.....

[Buce]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

This could be said of most the right wingers on here.

 

No, trust me, Moose was in a league of his own when it came to trolling.

 

If you could punch someone over the internet, I'd be doing a ten stretch for GBH.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rogstanley]

26 minutes ago, Webbo said:

I think toddy's answer was closer to the truth.

Maybe.

 

Congrats though. You’ve successfully deflected attention away from the near decade of dismal failure under the conservatives and onto speculation about Corbyn’s personality again. Textbook stuff. You’ll have pleased the dominatrix.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

Maybe.

 

Congrats though. You’ve successfully deflected attention away from the near decade of dismal failure under the conservatives and onto speculation about Corbyn’s personality again. Textbook stuff. You’ll have pleased the dominatrix.

I find that answer vacuous beyond belief.

[Guest]

Just now, Webbo said:

I find that answer vacuous beyond belief.

How come you learn big words from the left but not sensible politics?

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

How come you learn big words from the left but not sensible politics?

 

[Guest Kopfkino]

I'm sure those that lauded such institutions' doom-laden Brexit interjections will find some way of dismissing this as a case of special interests, but a somewhat interesting note from Morgan Stanley all the same. I'm sure some will do exactly the same in reverse, for the record. I would be interested to know how much markets are pricing Corbyn into things aside from the obvious of Severn Trent et al being down.

 

Corbyn more dangerous for markets than hard Brexit, warns Morgan Stanley

 

The prospect of a radical Left-wing lurch under Jeremy Corbyn is a more serious threat to British asset markets than Brexit and risks setting off a drastic repricing of UK plc, a leading US bank has warned.

 

Morgan Stanley has told clients that there is a two-thirds likelihood of snap elections in the second half of 2018 once it becomes clear that the UK cannot secure the sort of Brexit deal it wants and the Conservative Party starts to fracture, bringing political risk into sharp focus.

“We could see the biggest shake-up in the political backdrop since the Seventies. This is much more scary from an equity perspective than Brexit,” said Graham Secker, the bank’s chief European equity strategist.

 

The bank said the "double whammy" of Brexit and a Labour government together could prove toxic for UK stock markets, with the bank’s full-blown ‘bear case’ leading to an economic recession and a 32pc crash in the FTSE 100 index by 2019.

 

Gilts could also face a reckoning given that 10-year yields are trading at 1.26pc while inflation is running at 3pc, with a further depreciation of sterling on the cards. “Bond investors are losing money faster in the UK than almost anywhere in the world,” said Andrew Sheets, the bank’s global asset strategist.

 

Fund managers must plan for the serious possibility that a developed OECD country may nationalise power utilities, water companies, mail delivery, and rail transport in sweeping moves unseen in the trading life of most investors now alive.

 

The new agenda includes a rise in corporation tax to 26pc, a surtax on financial entities, and a financial transactions tax or "Robin Hood" tax on derivatives and bonds, as well as some shares.  “The direction of travel we have seen for the last 30 years is going to change by 180 degrees,” he said.

 

The thrust of policy would shift “in favour of labour over capital” with rises in the minimum wage, an end to the public sector pay cap, and a revival of sectoral collective bargaining. This would erode profits, especially for low-margin firms such as retailers.

 

“Even if we see good progress in the Brexit negotiations, the scope for UK sensitive assets to rally may be muted, unless we also see an improvement in the Government’s position in the opinion polls,” said Mr Secker.

 

Worries about a duumvirate of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell – the ‘Marx Brothers’ as they are known in the City – are approaching systemic levels. One senior banker told The Daily Telegraph last week that even family owned-firms are exploring cashing in their wealth before the guillotine comes down, either in the form of a higher capital gains or ultimately through de facto wealth confiscation.

 

The sense of unease has faint echoes of the "red scare" that gripped French investors before Leon Blum’s Front Populaire swept to victory in 1936. City veterans no longer rule out capital controls.  

 

Emma Marcegaglia, head of the pan-EU lobby BusinessEurope, said Labour’s apparent tilt towards a softer Brexit would not compensate for the damaging effects of its radical policy manifesto.

 

“What Corbyn proposed during the election campaign is not pro-business, that is for sure. There would not be a good outcome even if there is a fantastic free trade agreement,” she told The Daily Telegraph.

 

Mrs Marcegaglia said her members are pushing the EU institutions to take an open and friendly line in Brexit talks but also warned the British side to eschew wishful thinking. “The UK must put concrete proposals on the table otherwise things are just going to get worse and worse,” she said.

 

“We had a meeting of 24 CEOs along with the Japanese last week and the feeling was that the situation is very bad. Some companies will start to activate their contingency plans even before March: that could be to stop investing, or leaving the UK altogether. I have to tell you that our European members are pretty united, more than I thought they would be,” she said.

 

Morgan Stanley says a Labour Party victory poses a threat to defence companies, UK-focused financial groups like RBS, utilities such as SSE or Severn Trent, telecommunications, bus and rail companies.

 

It has drawn up a basket of those most at risk from changes to UK employment law – made worse if their earnings are generated entirely in Britain – such as Ocado, Wetherspoons, Halfords, Sainsbury’s, Stagecoach, Royal Mail, Card Factory, or Greene King.

 

Those that rely on foreign earnings are far better insulated, led by oil drillers Ophir, Shell, or BP,  as well as miners Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, and Anglo American. British American Tobacco earns 99pc of its revenue abroad, and Diageo 94pc. Astrazeneca and GlaxoSmithKline are also well protected.

 

The problem for Britain is that Brexit talks may come to a head just as the financial cycle enters choppy waters in mid-2018. Morgan Stanley thinks the global economy has enough momentum to steam on through next year, but asset markets will anticipate the next downturn and may decouple much earlier.

 

Stocks could start wobbling – and perhaps roll over – once US inflation picks up in March and April, as investors wake up to monetary tightening by the Federal Reserve and perhaps the Bank of Japan.

 

The epic gap that has built up between over-inflated technology stocks and "old economy" laggards will revert towards its historic mean. “Everyone owns the winners and nobody owns the losers. We think there is going to be a significant rotation over the next six months,” said the bank.

 

For markets, the "Brexit trade" is ultimately binary. Rightly or wrongly, the calculus is that there will either be a bust-up that leads to havoc or a tolerable settlement that sets off a powerful relief rally.

 

“Sitting in Boston or Hong Kong, what you want as an investor are cheap equities in a cheap currency, and the UK is definitely cheap. The UK makes for a very interesting market in 2018,” said Morgan Stanley's Mr Sheets.

Edited 27 November 2017 by Kopfkino

[Rogstanley]

6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

I'm sure those that lauded such institutions' doom-laden Brexit interjections will find some way of dismissing this as a case of special interests, but a somewhat interesting note from Morgan Stanley all the same. I'm sure some will do exactly the same in reverse, for the record.

 

Corbyn more dangerous for markets than hard Brexit, warns Morgan Stanley

 

The prospect of a radical Left-wing lurch under Jeremy Corbyn is a more serious threat to British asset markets than Brexit and risks setting off a drastic repricing of UK plc, a leading US bank has warned.

 

Morgan Stanley has told clients that there is a two-thirds likelihood of snap elections in the second half of 2018 once it becomes clear that the UK cannot secure the sort of Brexit deal it wants and the Conservative Party starts to fracture, bringing political risk into sharp focus.

“We could see the biggest shake-up in the political backdrop since the Seventies. This is much more scary from an equity perspective than Brexit,” said Graham Secker, the bank’s chief European equity strategist.

 

The bank said the "double whammy" of Brexit and a Labour government together could prove toxic for UK stock markets, with the bank’s full-blown ‘bear case’ leading to an economic recession and a 32pc crash in the FTSE 100 index by 2019.

 

Gilts could also face a reckoning given that 10-year yields are trading at 1.26pc while inflation is running at 3pc, with a further depreciation of sterling on the cards. “Bond investors are losing money faster in the UK than almost anywhere in the world,” said Andrew Sheets, the bank’s global asset strategist.

 

Fund managers must plan for the serious possibility that a developed OECD country may nationalise power utilities, water companies, mail delivery, and rail transport in sweeping moves unseen in the trading life of most investors now alive.

 

The new agenda includes a rise in corporation tax to 26pc, a surtax on financial entities, and a financial transactions tax or "Robin Hood" tax on derivatives and bonds, as well as some shares.  “The direction of travel we have seen for the last 30 years is going to change by 180 degrees,” he said.

 

The thrust of policy would shift “in favour of labour over capital” with rises in the minimum wage, an end to the public sector pay cap, and a revival of sectoral collective bargaining. This would erode profits, especially for low-margin firms such as retailers.

 

“Even if we see good progress in the Brexit negotiations, the scope for UK sensitive assets to rally may be muted, unless we also see an improvement in the Government’s position in the opinion polls,” said Mr Secker.

 

Worries about a duumvirate of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell – the ‘Marx Brothers’ as they are known in the City – are approaching systemic levels. One senior banker told The Daily Telegraph last week that even family owned-firms are exploring cashing in their wealth before the guillotine comes down, either in the form of a higher capital gains or ultimately through de facto wealth confiscation.

 

The sense of unease has faint echoes of the "red scare" that gripped French investors before Leon Blum’s Front Populaire swept to victory in 1936. City veterans no longer rule out capital controls.  

 

Emma Marcegaglia, head of the pan-EU lobby BusinessEurope, said Labour’s apparent tilt towards a softer Brexit would not compensate for the damaging effects of its radical policy manifesto.

 

“What Corbyn proposed during the election campaign is not pro-business, that is for sure. There would not be a good outcome even if there is a fantastic free trade agreement,” she told The Daily Telegraph.

 

Mrs Marcegaglia said her members are pushing the EU institutions to take an open and friendly line in Brexit talks but also warned the British side to eschew wishful thinking. “The UK must put concrete proposals on the table otherwise things are just going to get worse and worse,” she said.

 

“We had a meeting of 24 CEOs along with the Japanese last week and the feeling was that the situation is very bad. Some companies will start to activate their contingency plans even before March: that could be to stop investing, or leaving the UK altogether. I have to tell you that our European members are pretty united, more than I thought they would be,” she said.

 

Morgan Stanley says a Labour Party victory poses a threat to defence companies, UK-focused financial groups like RBS, utilities such as SSE or Severn Trent, telecommunications, bus and rail companies.

 

It has drawn up a basket of those most at risk from changes to UK employment law – made worse if their earnings are generated entirely in Britain – such as Ocado, Wetherspoons, Halfords, Sainsbury’s, Stagecoach, Royal Mail, Card Factory, or Greene King.

 

Those that rely on foreign earnings are far better insulated, led by oil drillers Ophir, Shell, or BP,  as well as miners Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, and Anglo American. British American Tobacco earns 99pc of its revenue abroad, and Diageo 94pc. Astrazeneca and GlaxoSmithKline are also well protected.

 

The problem for Britain is that Brexit talks may come to a head just as the financial cycle enters choppy waters in mid-2018. Morgan Stanley thinks the global economy has enough momentum to steam on through next year, but asset markets will anticipate the next downturn and may decouple much earlier.

 

Stocks could start wobbling – and perhaps roll over – once US inflation picks up in March and April, as investors wake up to monetary tightening by the Federal Reserve and perhaps the Bank of Japan.

 

The epic gap that has built up between over-inflated technology stocks and "old economy" laggards will revert towards its historic mean. “Everyone owns the winners and nobody owns the losers. We think there is going to be a significant rotation over the next six months,” said the bank.

 

For markets, the "Brexit trade" is ultimately binary. Rightly or wrongly, the calculus is that there will either be a bust-up that leads to havoc or a tolerable settlement that sets off a powerful relief rally.

 

“Sitting in Boston or Hong Kong, what you want as an investor are cheap equities in a cheap currency, and the UK is definitely cheap. The UK makes for a very interesting market in 2018,” said Morgan Stanley's Mr Sheets.

PROJECT FEAR!! 

 

Corbyns comin to confiscate your wealth!

 

Interesting that returns on gilts are that much lower than inflation, which means in effect the government can borrow £100 and only have to pay £98 back - a great argument for now being the time to borrow if ever I’ve seen one.

 

Also interesting that they’re claiming to have no confidence at all in the Tories delivering brexit and think they’re on the verge of falling apart, but to be honest it’s such a blatant attempt at scare mongering I can’t take it seriously.

[Guest Kopfkino]

2 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

I'm saying his policies, ie the things he actually campaigned on as a politician and which he said he would put into action aren't socialist. He might see himself as a socialist personally but as a politician i cant see how he can describe himself as one when his policies aren't.

Just two parts of a John McDonnell speech suggest very different to me

 

"We’ll build on the good example of Labour Councils like Preston, here in the north-west, using public procurement to support co-operatives where they can. And we’ll introduce a “Right to Own”, giving workers first refusal on a proposal for worker ownership when their company faces a change of ownership or closure."

 

"In this party you no longer have to whisper it, it's called Socialism."

 

 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

I'm sure those that lauded such institutions' doom-laden Brexit interjections will find some way of dismissing this as a case of special interests, but a somewhat interesting note from Morgan Stanley all the same. I'm sure some will do exactly the same in reverse, for the record. I would be interested to know how much markets are pricing Corbyn into things aside from the obvious of Severn Trent et al being down.

 

Corbyn more dangerous for markets than hard Brexit, warns Morgan Stanley

 

The prospect of a radical Left-wing lurch under Jeremy Corbyn is a more serious threat to British asset markets than Brexit and risks setting off a drastic repricing of UK plc, a leading US bank has warned.

 

Morgan Stanley has told clients that there is a two-thirds likelihood of snap elections in the second half of 2018 once it becomes clear that the UK cannot secure the sort of Brexit deal it wants and the Conservative Party starts to fracture, bringing political risk into sharp focus.

“We could see the biggest shake-up in the political backdrop since the Seventies. This is much more scary from an equity perspective than Brexit,” said Graham Secker, the bank’s chief European equity strategist.

 

The bank said the "double whammy" of Brexit and a Labour government together could prove toxic for UK stock markets, with the bank’s full-blown ‘bear case’ leading to an economic recession and a 32pc crash in the FTSE 100 index by 2019.

 

Gilts could also face a reckoning given that 10-year yields are trading at 1.26pc while inflation is running at 3pc, with a further depreciation of sterling on the cards. “Bond investors are losing money faster in the UK than almost anywhere in the world,” said Andrew Sheets, the bank’s global asset strategist.

 

Fund managers must plan for the serious possibility that a developed OECD country may nationalise power utilities, water companies, mail delivery, and rail transport in sweeping moves unseen in the trading life of most investors now alive.

 

The new agenda includes a rise in corporation tax to 26pc, a surtax on financial entities, and a financial transactions tax or "Robin Hood" tax on derivatives and bonds, as well as some shares.  “The direction of travel we have seen for the last 30 years is going to change by 180 degrees,” he said.

 

See

 

“Even if we see good progress in the Brexit negotiations, the scope for UK sensitive assets to rally may be muted, unless we also see an improvement in the Government’s position in the opinion polls,” said Mr Secker.

 

Worries about a duumvirate of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell – the ‘Marx Brothers’ as they are known in the City – are approaching systemic levels. One senior banker told The Daily Telegraph last week that even family owned-firms are exploring cashing in their wealth before the guillotine comes down, either in the form of a higher capital gains or ultimately through de facto wealth confiscation.

 

The sense of unease has faint echoes of the "red scare" that gripped French investors before Leon Blum’s Front Populaire swept to victory in 1936. City veterans no longer rule out capital controls.  

 

Emma Marcegaglia, head of the pan-EU lobby BusinessEurope, said Labour’s apparent tilt towards a softer Brexit would not compensate for the damaging effects of its radical policy manifesto.

 

“What Corbyn proposed during the election campaign is not pro-business, that is for sure. There would not be a good outcome even if there is a fantastic free trade agreement,” she told The Daily Telegraph.

 

Mrs Marcegaglia said her members are pushing the EU institutions to take an open and friendly line in Brexit talks but also warned the British side to eschew wishful thinking. “The UK must put concrete proposals on the table otherwise things are just going to get worse and worse,” she said.

 

“We had a meeting of 24 CEOs along with the Japanese last week and the feeling was that the situation is very bad. Some companies will start to activate their contingency plans even before March: that could be to stop investing, or leaving the UK altogether. I have to tell you that our European members are pretty united, more than I thought they would be,” she said.

 

Morgan Stanley says a Labour Party victory poses a threat to defence companies, UK-focused financial groups like RBS, utilities such as SSE or Severn Trent, telecommunications, bus and rail companies.

 

It has drawn up a basket of those most at risk from changes to UK employment law – made worse if their earnings are generated entirely in Britain – such as Ocado, Wetherspoons, Halfords, Sainsbury’s, Stagecoach, Royal Mail, Card Factory, or Greene King.

 

Those that rely on foreign earnings are far better insulated, led by oil drillers Ophir, Shell, or BP,  as well as miners Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, and Anglo American. British American Tobacco earns 99pc of its revenue abroad, and Diageo 94pc. Astrazeneca and GlaxoSmithKline are also well protected.

 

The problem for Britain is that Brexit talks may come to a head just as the financial cycle enters choppy waters in mid-2018. Morgan Stanley thinks the global economy has enough momentum to steam on through next year, but asset markets will anticipate the next downturn and may decouple much earlier.

 

Stocks could start wobbling – and perhaps roll over – once US inflation picks up in March and April, as investors wake up to monetary tightening by the Federal Reserve and perhaps the Bank of Japan.

 

The epic gap that has built up between over-inflated technology stocks and "old economy" laggards will revert towards its historic mean. “Everyone owns the winners and nobody owns the losers. We think there is going to be a significant rotation over the next six months,” said the bank.

 

For markets, the "Brexit trade" is ultimately binary. Rightly or wrongly, the calculus is that there will either be a bust-up that leads to havoc or a tolerable settlement that sets off a powerful relief rally.

 

“Sitting in Boston or Hong Kong, what you want as an investor are cheap equities in a cheap currency, and the UK is definitely cheap. The UK makes for a very interesting market in 2018,” said Morgan Stanley's Mr Sheets.

You're probably right. I'm going to go labexit on you.

I highlighted two paragraphs.

I couldn't give a stuff is business has to give some of its wealth to the people.

[Rogstanley]

Just now, Kopfkino said:

Just two parts of a John McDonnell speech suggest very different to me

 

"We’ll build on the good example of Labour Councils like Preston, here in the north-west, using public procurement to support co-operatives where they can. And we’ll introduce a “Right to Own”, giving workers first refusal on a proposal for worker ownership when their company faces a change of ownership or closure."

 

"In this party you no longer have to whisper it, it's called Socialism."

 

 

I’m going on the 2017 manifesto. I don’t follow politics enough to know what every politician is saying all the time. As far as I’m concerned the latest manifesto sets out what a party is all about, and labour’s wasn’t socialism.

 

That specific ‘right to own’ policy doesn’t sound especially socialist either to be fair.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

PROJECT FEAR!! 

 

Corbyns comin to confiscate your wealth!

 

Interesting that returns on gilts are that much lower than inflation, which means in effect the government can borrow £100 and only have to pay £98 back - a great argument for now being the time to borrow if ever I’ve seen one.

 

Also interesting that they’re claiming to have no confidence at all in the Tories delivering brexit and think they’re on the verge of falling apart, but to be honest it’s such a blatant attempt at scare mongering I can’t take it seriously.

But borrowing bad, good mr osborne said and wheat runner would have told us if that was lies and smart mr Hammond has said something once.

[fuchsntf]

2 hours ago, toddybad said:

I can't really see the polls moving anywhere for the foreseeable. There's only really Brexit, possible change of tory leadership (though of be surprised before Brexit) or a significant economic failure that is likely to have any real impact now.

I have no idea, but I do wonder now!!!

 

With Brexit, and lets face it poor presentation from both the big parties, and uncertainty running through the so called experienced electorate.

Its going to be interesting how the last 2yrs and in  the next 6, the 18-24yrs will feel like voting, if they are at all interested in putting their feelings and opinions to paper.

Is there a feeling of betrayal of being let down by their olders and electorate predecessors, or will  they be happy With what the status quo of politics have dished up, in their coming of age years.

After discussing with a mix of Uk residents, on holiday, or those I have met since Last year, there has been a mix of opinions, with a various  mix of generations, from ca 100 people, I wont

put any analyse or synopsus forward.I have met alot of young people who came to Europe for short and longterm contracts, who are disappointed, that their movement will eventually be curtailed, and maybe future opportunities for European-mainland work , wont be so easily accessable. An employment-door has been closed...Not just for the avg-top qualified but also the basic lower qualified jobs, for future evolvement or career building.....

Their thoughts  not mine....

There will also be a group of new  younger-generation, who have no intention of moving, and just looking and be happy to find employment locally, some will be totally indifferent, others will have wider opinions.

I just wonder has mentioned, what the stats of the new-young-voters, are showing, and what the  present 15-17yr olds, have already taken on...???

Edited 27 November 2017 by fuchsntf

[Guest MattP]

13 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

They have a great record tbh

 

The Guardian Prediction Poll – PRELIMINARY DATA

| 7th June 2017

 

Conservative 46% (+1)

Labour 34% (nc)

Lib Dem 7% (-1)

SNP 5% (+1)

Plaid Cymru *% (-1)

Green 2% (-1)

UKIP 5% (nc)

Other 1% (nc)

All the ones who had those sort of results have changed the polling methods now to make sure the involve the kids or to reflect the UKIP vote going back to Labour as well as the Comservatives,

 

I've got no doubt we have reached peak Corbyn now, if he was going to be the Prime Minister he would have sped into a lead after the GE, the fact he hasn't been able to do so even with the current shambles in charge shows enough don't trust him to run the country.

 

I wager the polls are even better for the Tories than we are seeing, I think we'll revert to seeing Labour overestimated next election again as it was so easy to vote for Corbyn last time as people thought he was beaten, whether those with houses, jobs, pensions etc come out to vote for him when he has a chance of winning is yet to be seen.

 

13 hours ago, Buce said:

I guess you must have forgotten to post the bit about which party is most fit to run the economy?

 

You know, the bit where it says Tories are down three points and Labour up two.

I think you have me confused with someone else, I don't think I've ever posted a poll regarding who is most fit to the economy.

 

I'd like to see that poll though, just to see the % that would seriously put McDonnell into number 11!

 

11 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

I’m going on the 2017 manifesto. I don’t follow politics enough to know what every politician is saying all the time. As far as I’m concerned the latest manifesto sets out what a party is all about, and labour’s wasn’t socialism.

 

That specific ‘right to own’ policy doesn’t sound especially socialist either to be fair.

Corbyn is described as a "socialist" by himself, his friends, his colleagues, the left wing press, the centrist press, the right wing press, the BBC, Sky, the trade unions etc

 

What have they all missed that you have found for you to not declare him a socialist? You openly admit you have little interest in politics as well so I highly doubt you read through the manifestos (even again which most said was a socialist one).

[Guest MattP]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/27/labour-debt-plan-john-mcdonnell-would-cost-270bn-interest/

 

About twice the cost of the annual NHS budget for those who seriously want to entertain the idea.....

 

Quote

 

John McDonnell’s borrowing plans would cost the taxpayer £270 billion in debt interest alone over the course of just one five-year parliament, new research suggests.

The shadow chancellor’s extra spending proposals would mean a Labour government borrowing £330 billion, adding to the £1.8 trillion of current national debt.

Debt interest payments would add up to more than £270 billion, according to the analysis undertaken by the TaxPayers’ Alliance. It calculated the figures based on the interest rate on government debt forecast over the period.

It comes after Mr McDonnell said any increase to the national debt would “pay for itself” and refused to answer questions about figures for his borrowing plans in a radio interview last week because MPs had “iPads and advisers” for that.

 

 

[Buce]

10 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

I'd like to see that poll though, just to see the % that would seriously put McDonnell into number 11!

 

 

 

It was part of the same poll that you quoted (28% Labour, 36% Tory iirc)

[Guest MattP]

22 minutes ago, Buce said:

It was part of the same poll that you quoted (28% Labour, 36% Tory iirc)

28% seriously want him in number 11 more than Hammond? I'm not Phil's biggest fan but that's fascinating. I wonder what portion of that 28% will be paying for it?

[David Guiza]

Sometimes I read the replies to Guido on Twitter just for some light relief, this is how humdrum my midweek mornings have become.

 

Particular highlights in the past couple of days include a bunch of Tories criticising Emma Dent Coad's appearance because they were offended at her insinuation that Theresa May is ugly. 

 

Guido retweeting some fella whom, based on a survey from a website that I assume he found down the back of the sofa, concluded that the reason Corbyn is so successful with youth voters is because 60% of 16-24 year olds do not know who Mao or Stalin are and thus do not know the negative effects of communism. I wasn't educated about Rasputin at school which is probably why most of dreams revolve around becoming Russia's greatest love machine. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?

[Rogstanley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

All the ones who had those sort of results have changed the polling methods now to make sure the involve the kids or to reflect the UKIP vote going back to Labour as well as the Comservatives,

 

I've got no doubt we have reached peak Corbyn now, if he was going to be the Prime Minister he would have sped into a lead after the GE, the fact he hasn't been able to do so even with the current shambles in charge shows enough don't trust him to run the country.

 

I wager the polls are even better for the Tories than we are seeing, I think we'll revert to seeing Labour overestimated next election again as it was so easy to vote for Corbyn last time as people thought he was beaten, whether those with houses, jobs, pensions etc come out to vote for him when he has a chance of winning is yet to be seen.

 

I think you have me confused with someone else, I don't think I've ever posted a poll regarding who is most fit to the economy.

 

I'd like to see that poll though, just to see the % that would seriously put McDonnell into number 11!

 

Corbyn is described as a "socialist" by himself, his friends, his colleagues, the left wing press, the centrist press, the right wing press, the BBC, Sky, the trade unions etc

 

What have they all missed that you have found for you to not declare him a socialist? You openly admit you have little interest in politics as well so I highly doubt you read through the manifestos (even again which most said was a socialist one).

I've already conceded that Corbyn sees himself as a socialist, but his policies aren't and that's the most important thing. It's natural for a politician in a representative democracy to offer policies that aren't exactly in line with their own views.

 

I do read the manifestos, I tend to ignore the soap opera gossip you get in the media. What was socialist in the labour manifesto, do you think?

[Realist Guy In The Room]

1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

I've already conceded that Corbyn sees himself as a socialist, but his policies aren't and that's the most important thing. It's natural for a politician in a representative democracy to offer policies that aren't exactly in line with their own views.

 

I do read the manifestos, I tend to ignore the soap opera gossip you get in the media. What was socialist in the labour manifesto, do you think?

Who cares?  Jeremy Corbyn is a fvcking nob.

[Guest Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/27/labour-debt-plan-john-mcdonnell-would-cost-270bn-interest/

 

About twice the cost of the annual NHS budget for those who seriously want to entertain the idea.....

 

 

 

It's all scaremongering