View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #26301
    Scarab Lord Rochana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    USA / EU
    Posts
    4,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    Here we go, the whole "Anyone to the right of Trotsky is a Blairite therefore evil." comments are back again during the labour leadership, proving the far left would rather cry and stomp their feet than actually be able to win elections.
    I believe it is a valid concern to be opposed to wolves in sheeps clothes. I believe politicians should be beholden to the core ideology of their party instead of turning their backs on it.

    Whether this new dude is or isn't though that I can't draw a conclusion on yet. I would first start off with investigating what he worked towards in his past.
    "Who taught you to vote for the fox in order to outrun the wolf? What does the fox give you in return?" - Malcolm X

  2. #26302
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    Here we go, the whole "Anyone to the right of Trotsky is a Blairite therefore evil." comments are back again during the labour leadership, proving the far left would rather cry and stomp their feet than actually be able to win elections.
    Blair can easily be traced back to one of the primary reasons that the red wall crumbled in the north. The voters there don't believe they can trust Labour to look out for them precisely because Labour didn't do very much for them in the 13 years they were in power. Blair and his crew were too busy being "intensely relaxed about people getting filthly rich" to worry too much about the ordinary working class people they should be primarily representing as a Labour government. Too worried about the city of London to concern themselves with the decline and decay of the north.

    It's very easy to forget that the share of the vote fell every election that Blair ran. The party didn't suddenly decline once Blair left, it was declining the entire time he was there. What we are seeing today is part of the fallout of that.
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  3. #26303
    Who cares about labour they have no power, they could make a donkey the leading candidate (the angry burner would then call the donkey a blairite), they cant even mobilise the street.

  4. #26304
    Quote Originally Posted by jonnysensible View Post
    Who cares about labour they have no power, they could make a donkey the leading candidate (the angry burner would then call the donkey a blairite), they cant even mobilise the street.
    Is ctd back?

  5. #26305
    Quote Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl View Post
    Blair can easily be traced back to one of the primary reasons that the red wall crumbled in the north. The voters there don't believe they can trust Labour to look out for them precisely because Labour didn't do very much for them in the 13 years they were in power. Blair and his crew were too busy being "intensely relaxed about people getting filthly rich" to worry too much about the ordinary working class people they should be primarily representing as a Labour government. Too worried about the city of London to concern themselves with the decline and decay of the north.

    It's very easy to forget that the share of the vote fell every election that Blair ran. The party didn't suddenly decline once Blair left, it was declining the entire time he was there. What we are seeing today is part of the fallout of that.
    It was also in a position it couldn't dream of winning before Blair.

    The issue with the North is what they want and what is feasible might not be in the same reality anymore and that's beyond anything any government can do.

    Mines must not be reopened. Coal needs to die as a source within a decade. Any industry needs to be able to keep prices low or they'd never be able to compete. Plus it would need to be low polluting.

    Plus it's not like these areas are losing out cause immigrants when they generally don't go there so the whole "the damn Pole took muh jerb." outlook holds no water either.

  6. #26306
    Scarab Lord Rochana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    USA / EU
    Posts
    4,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Thathmirthal View Post
    New Labour gave one trillion dollars of bailout money to the super-rich from the people.
    Slightly diverting the topic here, but...

    There isn't a single government in the world that didn't do this.

    In some countries it was the conservative parties, in others it were the socialist parties. The reality behind this is that... whenever the banks are in crisis the rest of the world is -forced- to bail them out. Our entire model of economy is build upon them being the foundation and the pillars. If the banks go down the entire world goes down, not only do the banks go bankrupt, but all the money -you personally own- will also disappear or lose it's value.

    This should be a lesson to try and reshape the economy away from everyone's worth and wealth depending entirely on how well the banks are doing or not.
    "Who taught you to vote for the fox in order to outrun the wolf? What does the fox give you in return?" - Malcolm X

  7. #26307
    Scarab Lord Rochana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    USA / EU
    Posts
    4,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Thathmirthal View Post
    The bailouts not only created a massive transference of wealth from rich to poor: they cost trillions in profits by maintaining old-school systems that should have been put to sleep years ago. For example, it takes three days for a bank transfer to clear: there is absolutely no reason for that (paypal does it instantly) other than greed. There are a dozen major issues like that.
    This is a major oversimplification.

    Nowadays you have the option of performing instant payments if you really want to, but there is it's own huge technological hassle with that.

    As to why a bank transfer is allowed to take 3 days to clear by law under SEPA rules or other payment agreements is because a money transfer isn't as simple as you think it is.

    Customer A -> Bank A -> Bank B (-> route depending on which banks are in a network with each other with known BIC codes // or clearing houses) -> Bank Z -> Customer Z

    First of all:
    Every bank needs it's own infrastructure to be able to let you even place that bank transfer. This can either be a network of office holders (you can pretty much look at banks like big corporate chains. There is the headquarters and then a bunch of offices that agree to represent the brand of malls), who need to pay their own staff and infrastructure or it could be through the internet (internet banking or mobile apps etc). That costs money.

    Then the payment needs to be processed internally at the headquarters. You need infrastructure that is able to receive all those payment requests from your thousands and thousands of different office holders (who want to get paid based on the amount of customers and payments their customers perform / interests and commissions (=extra data that needs processed every day)), but also to internally process all that data. We're talking about IT and hardware here. Then banks have an agreement among each other or with an international clearing house of when these payments are sent over to them. In some cases that might mean that Bank C or Clearing House C requests that all payments (of a specific type: Direct Debits or Credit Transfers or Loan Payments or Refunds etc.) need to be delivered before 11:00 every single day so they can use the remaining hours of the day to process all that data and make sure that every payment is valid and goes to the right destination. That also costs money: staff, infrastructure etc.

    But hold on! You suddenly realized that you made a mistake... You sent the money to the wrong account, so you need to go through the entire chain again and hope that there are some laws in place that delay these payments or your money might be gone as the beneficiary / counter-party is under no obligation to return money given. (It is a law in almost every nation that money given = money lost. You can't demand back gifts or delivered goods).

    It's no different for paypal, you after all have to pay pretty large fees on paying through paypal. They work with big risk models and agreements that target parties will receive their money within 10 days, while the users can already pretend that the money has been delivered... They suffer quite big losses sometimes from charge backs, and obviously they can only perform a single service for a single type of payment. (Delayed credit transfers) They can't do direct debits, they can't do obligations, mandates, loans, standing orders, savings payments, etc.

    Banks also have to keep up with regulations and law. Every time a law is passed, like say for example how much money people are allowed to put tax free on their pension savings account every year, their whole code needs to be updated. Or maybe for example the european clearing house wants extra information to be added to credit transfer data, so the code that generates xml-formats for payments needs to be rewritten, the code that interprets that xml-needs to be rewritten, all the applications (which can thousands of different applications from accounting software to back-office software) needs to be checked if it's compliant still too.

    Banking is a huge web of IT fuckery that only keeps growing larger and more complicated. You got a problem with a payment? You can rest assured that your issue is going to pass through the hands of hundreds of experts from financial to accounting to IT experts to have a look at what went wrong.

    Instant Payments (sorta like PayPal, but with money actually instantly being sent instead of PayPal delaying it to the big suppliers) ? By law it is stated that all messages for such a payment need to be processed within 5-10 seconds. Building the infrastructure (network cables that can send such information fast enough) is not cheap, neither is the software that would be able to instantly interpret all the traffic. Oh... there is a small glitch? Network issue? Memory leak? Sorry, your payment could only be processed within 11 seconds, it is now no longer valid according to law and was rejected? Oh, hey? You've rejected more than 5% of your instant payments this month as a bank? You've to pay a fine...

    I'm not trying to protect banks, there is plenty of immorally irresponsible behavior there (Capitalism encourages that sort of behavior). But let's no oversimplify how easy it is to get your payment from person A to person Z.

    Furthermore. Trust me, every country wasn't just copying "Blair" on how to bail out the banks. Every country knew well enough that they'd descent into bankruptcy, their state, their people, their institutions, if they didn't. There was literally no choice. Our entire world uses banks as a foundation. When big banks go bankrupt it causes huge losses of wealth across the entire planet.
    "Who taught you to vote for the fox in order to outrun the wolf? What does the fox give you in return?" - Malcolm X

  8. #26308
    I am Murloc!
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    5,003
    holidays are over for PM Johnson: EU commission president Ursula vdL is coming to town some 3 weeks before Brexit hits first time.

  9. #26309
    are you only able to express a view of the world, banking institutions and politics via shallow caricatures and buzzwords?

    ' but the issue is this: if you are a start-up company with an ingenious payment solution system or other ingenious super-efficient way of doing business your primary problem is competition with existing banks because they have a de facto monopoly.'

    'No one is incentivized to disrupt the tech.'

    lmao what is this nonsense. a babys guide to the world.

  10. #26310
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    21,681
    Quote Originally Posted by jonnysensible View Post
    are you only able to express a view of the world, banking institutions and politics via shallow caricatures and buzzwords?

    ' but the issue is this: if you are a start-up company with an ingenious payment solution system or other ingenious super-efficient way of doing business your primary problem is competition with existing banks because they have a de facto monopoly.'

    'No one is incentivized to disrupt the tech.'

    lmao what is this nonsense. a babys guide to the world.
    Be fair, at least he's trying to act knowingly. He is just that little bit ignorant of how stuff actually works. Should the current system be overhauled, oh sure as hell, but letting banks go bust without something in place to save everyone relying on said banks from also going tits-up is too complicated. Let's just imagine that there is something somewhere figured out by someone that can't garner enough support because the big banks are meanies.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  11. #26311
    Quote Originally Posted by Thathmirthal View Post
    Of the words I used only the truncation of the word "technology" could conceivably be classified as buzzword. The rest are just words and phrases you don't understand because you have a low level of education. I was talking to directly to Rochana and I don't see the need to dumb down the conversation to the level where people like you would actually understand it.

    .
    I would be impressd if you could have dumbed that down anymore. Honestly almost a childlike view of the world and complexity.

    'Few things to do with finance are simple, but the issue is this: if you are a start-up company with an ingenious payment solution system or other ingenious super-efficient way of doing business your primary problem is competition with existing banks because they have a de facto monopoly. It is hard enough to compete as it is. Now the banks go bust and you think "great! all those customers will embrace my new product!", and then the government steps in, your investors pull out and society suffers as a whole by having to route their payments through a fetid oligarchical system in perpetual stasis..' this is not only massively wrong, but comically stupid.

  12. #26312
    Quote Originally Posted by Fruitloopas View Post
    Hours later...

    I'm just imagining ctd dribbling all over his keyboard as he attempts to type words, then hitting the keyboard like a sexually frustrated chimpanzee when he can't do it, then throwing up and starting to cry. Eventually he posts a meme...
    As opposed to you who is so obsessed with this forum and UK politics that you waste your time and everyone else's with spamming accounts of which you say very little of note.
    Expansion leak claiming Legion is the last expansion
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    NO it will be me laughing at how you doubted this....
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    I was right

  13. #26313
    Quote Originally Posted by Fruitloopas View Post
    Fucking masterpieces obviously, it is like Oscar Wilde, Shakespeare and Dickens all came back from the grave to enlighten us with their lucid, intelligent insights. It isn't like you post every fucking thought you ever have, however tedious, despite no one caring.
    I know what I am and don't deny it unlike you. You managed to get permabanned from this website so you can either shove off or finally make one last account you can be proud of and stop getting yourself banned.
    Expansion leak claiming Legion is the last expansion
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    NO it will be me laughing at how you doubted this....
    Quote Originally Posted by golds
    I was right

  14. #26314
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Be fair, at least he's trying to act knowingly. He is just that little bit ignorant of how stuff actually works. Should the current system be overhauled, oh sure as hell, but letting banks go bust without something in place to save everyone relying on said banks from also going tits-up is too complicated. Let's just imagine that there is something somewhere figured out by someone that can't garner enough support because the big banks are meanies.
    Iceland managed it. Banks are businesses, and in a capitalist system, businesses fail. The failure was letting them get so big, through lack of a legislation, monitoring and accreditation or accountability in the first place. And yet here we are with a new government who wants to roll back legislation so it's even weaker than it was pre-2008 because they think the market can manage itself.

    Yet it's an industry that's proven, time and time again, that it needs legislation to protect itself from its own suicidal tendencies. It literally behaves like a gambling addict, because that is frankly what it is.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana View Post
    Slightly diverting the topic here, but...

    There isn't a single government in the world that didn't do this.

    In some countries it was the conservative parties, in others it were the socialist parties. The reality behind this is that... whenever the banks are in crisis the rest of the world is -forced- to bail them out. Our entire model of economy is build upon them being the foundation and the pillars. If the banks go down the entire world goes down, not only do the banks go bankrupt, but all the money -you personally own- will also disappear or lose it's value.

    This should be a lesson to try and reshape the economy away from everyone's worth and wealth depending entirely on how well the banks are doing or not.
    Also to clarify further, the contagion started in the USA with a very right wing idea of deregulation of banking and investment sectors. The idea such as it was, that after the bailout, there would be new regulations, both in the USA and abroad, that would prevent a need for sovereign bailouts of independent businesses, such as banking.

    What followed however, was that the banks didn't do with the money what they were supposed to do. They didn't lend it to small businesses or the working classes to buy houses, or otherwise invest in the economy at the base level. They lent it to each other to save themselves and rebuild their portfolios.

    The low interest rates only served the already wealthy, since the banks made it harder for the working classes to borrow, while they still needed to lend money (because the creation of wealth is contingent of the extension of loans), so they just lent to the already wealthy where the could reduce costs on existing agreements. There was no investment in businesses, and where corporations did take on new staff, it was because they were able to use the crisis as an excuse to cut wages.

    Quote Originally Posted by Calfredd View Post
    I know what I am and don't deny it unlike you. You managed to get permabanned from this website so you can either shove off or finally make one last account you can be proud of and stop getting yourself banned.
    To go back to those "intelligent insights". The only people Jesus actually hated were money lenders. Charging or paying interest is Haram in Islam. Banking, historically, has never been seen as a particularly positive practice.
    Last edited by Jessicka; 2020-01-06 at 02:55 PM.

  15. #26315
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    21,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Iceland managed it. Banks are businesses, and in a capitalist system, businesses fail. The failure was letting them get so big, through lack of a legislation, monitoring and accreditation or accountability in the first place. And yet here we are with a new government who wants to roll back legislation so it's even weaker than it was pre-2008 because they think the market can manage itself.

    Yet it's an industry that's proven, time and time again, that it needs legislation to protect itself from its own suicidal tendencies. It literally behaves like a gambling addict, because that is frankly what it is.
    Sure, do what Iceland did, just don't cry about hardship or job losses or the required costs to the public. I don't argue against better regulatory measures, but letting them go bust like in Iceland was not an option because the impact would've been devastating.

    Guess the country that was against better regulations of banks within the EU.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  16. #26316
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    4,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Sure, do what Iceland did, just don't cry about hardship or job losses or the required costs to the public. I don't argue against better regulatory measures, but letting them go bust like in Iceland was not an option because the impact would've been devastating.

    Guess the country that was against better regulations of banks within the EU.
    Iceland was (and is) not in the EU though so ...

  17. #26317
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    21,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    Iceland was (and is) not in the EU though so ...
    Thanks for the information, but what does that matter?
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  18. #26318
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Thoplias View Post
    You can bail out the investors directly and avoid most of the hardship and job losses. There is NO reason to give bankers money.
    The objective was that the banks would use the money more wisely than they did in terms of stimulating the economy through loaning businesses to use the money to invest, to continue to lend to the middle and working classes to spend and to stimulate growth.

    They did not do this. They tightened their lending criteria, so the money couldn't end up where it was intended, and used it to speculate further and feather their own beds.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Guess the country that was against better regulations of banks within the EU.
    The UK still pushes for deregulation, it's one factor behind Brexit. But I already said this, so why are you asking?

  19. #26319
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    21,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Thoplias View Post
    You can bail out the investors directly and avoid most of the hardship and job losses.
    The bailout to banks wasn't to save investors, they should fail with the banks if we'd argue for no bailout of banks.

    The bailout was to protect debtors, the problem was the lack of regulations reinstated or introduced.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  20. #26320
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Thoplias View Post
    I recall that argument being advanced at the time. I have some difficulty with it because you would have to have been very naive to believe the banks would lend at that time, given their history of selfishness and corruption up to that point. It really would have been better to reimburse investors directly.

    I don't really believe that Gordon Brown and New Labour supporters really thought it would work like that. They just were always far too close to the corporations. I think they were just giving their city friends backhanders exactly as the Tories do.
    It would have been better to just hand out the billions direct to the working a middle classes in 'helicopter payments'. Or spend the money directly on capital infrastructure investment and houses to stimulate jobs, particularly in the construction industry that was initially hardest hit and bring house prices down so people could meet the stricter lending criteria.

    There are many, many thing the money could and should have been better spent on. But they chose to go with the charismatic lying narcissists and sociopaths in banking who said that's what they were going to do with it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •