Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Politics


miamiwhite

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Unfortunately I suspect the £4bn profit for the BOE would have seen a similar loss for many people’s pension pots. 

Not really. Any decent pension fund would have done the same. Lots of economists at the time saying that profits were to be made. 

The point is Rachel Reeves didn’t have a clue what was going on (or she was telling lies) and she could be our next chancellor. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Not really. Any decent pension fund would have done the same. Lots of economists at the time saying that profits were to be made. 

The point is Rachel Reeves didn’t have a clue what was going on (or she was telling lies) and she could be our next chancellor. 
 

Another gormless bint who spends most of her time at the hairdressing salon. Another nasty tongued Labourite who engages gob before brain.

Before the anti misogyny brigade get on their high horses, nowt to do with gender. She's just (to quote Kent) a bit thick.

I would be very happy for the UK to be led by a woman again. Penny for my thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

Another gormless bint who spends most of her time at the hairdressing salon. Another nasty tongued Labourite who engages gob before brain.

Before the anti misogyny brigade get on their high horses, nowt to do with gender. She's just (to quote Kent) a bit thick.

I would be very happy for the UK to be led by a woman again. Penny for my thoughts?

Fucking hell.

This is the rant before you take a shotgun to a room.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Not really. Any decent pension fund would have done the same. Lots of economists at the time saying that profits were to be made. 

The point is Rachel Reeves didn’t have a clue what was going on (or she was telling lies) and she could be our next chancellor. 
 

Hmmmm.

Now come on BB, that's a pretty myopic view, let's not play to the gallery now.

Or rather if you like a daft bint/slag/at the hairdressers type of post you go ahead.

Maybe you'd best getting out the crayons again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Or rather if you like a daft bint/slag/at the hairdressers type of post you go ahead.

Maybe you'd best getting out the crayons again.

What are you talking about!!

Look at the tweet I posted. Tell me what part makes any sense whatsoever. She is a Chancellor in waiting and she posts nonsense like that. She is supposedly one of the better ones in Labour. Doesn’t say much about the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BB seems to be getting desperate.

We have a government that has run down every public service (NHS, Police, prisons,) to breaking point over 13 years. Who also allowed millions of PPE money to be corruptly taken by their donors and friends. Had a chancellor who owed 4 million in taxes. Had a PM that frequently broke his own lockdown rules and allowed parties in Downing Street and then lied to parliament for months. Another PM lasted a few weeks after an inept budget proposed giving tax breaks to the wealthiest during a cost of living crisis. Delivered a brexit deal that has created chaos for small businesses and reduced our GDP. And on it goes.
 

What Rachel Reeves did was tweet the worst case scenario for the BoE bail out (5 billion per day for 13 days) which never came to pass fortunately.  
 

It is not remotely comparable to the Tories list of lies and corruption.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's not difficult to understand the grievance felt in Bolton North East when the chair of Labour North West fails to make the shortlist for the seat, especially given Starmer's pledge to NEC impositions of candidates

I don't agree with Leigh Drennan politically but it can't be denied he had a very strong case for selection

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Farrelli said:

 

 

What Rachel Reeves did was tweet the worst case scenario for the BoE bail out (5 billion per day for 13 days) which never came to pass fortunately.  
 


 

She was talking past tense. It had to be pointed out to her. She said it was tax payers money, it wasn’t. It had to be pointed out to her. You and others on here jumped on the 65 billion quote. Some even typed it vertically for effect, until it was pointed out to them.

Edited by BobyBrno
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 minute ago, BobyBrno said:

She was talking past tense. It had to be pointed out to her. She said it was tax payers money, it wasn’t. It had to be pointed out to her. You and others on here jumped on the 65 million quote. Some even typed it vertically for effect, until it was pointed out to them.

Was it £65 billion made available if required, or something like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Was it £65 billion made available if required, or something like that?

Yes, from the BOE funds not taxpayers money. It was said that it would likely be much less than that but was ingnored. It was as you say, billions not millions. Corrected👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
2 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Yes, from the BOE funds not taxpayers money. It was said that it would likely be much less than that but was ingnored. It was as you say, billions not millions. Corrected👍

That they made a profit on.

Which I think was the whole objective, unless I’ve totally misunderstood the point of gilts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

She was talking past tense. It had to be pointed out to her. She said it was tax payers money, it wasn’t. It had to be pointed out to her. You and others on here jumped on the 65 billion quote. Some even typed it vertically for effect, until it was pointed out to them.

It was 3rd October when she tweeted and the 65 billion was still on the table at that point. I don’t think this government can give anyone a lesson on erroneous facts and blatant lies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
10 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Makes you wonder why everyone got so agitated then if it was that simple.

I think it was more about the panic that “budget” created with its naivety, and the ensuing need for the bank to step in at all that got people a bit triggered.

It’s worth remembering the effect that budget had on the pound at the time. Hindsight isn’t available when you really need it,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.