The bail-out - is Labour reaping the benefit?
October 9th, 2008The spread markets start moving against the Tories
There’s been a sharp move back to Labour on the commons seats spread markets where the Tory levels have dropped six seats and Labour moved up the same amount since the weekend.
The latest numbers from Sporting Index are CON 344-350: LAB 232-238: LD 43-46 seats.
What’s interesting is that this hasn’t been sparked off by any new polls but Brown’s confident public performances and the difficulty that the Tories have finding something relevant to say.
The critical thing now is whether the changing view of gamblers will be seen in the next crop of polls and if so will it be sustained?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
When are the next polls due?
No.
First!!!
This is all giving commentators a little bit to say, but the fundamentals remain the same - people are not going to reward Labour for their ‘age of irresponsibility’ at the ballot box.
Labour may have pulled back to around 30% of the vote, but this is not some kind of huge resurrection that the commentators are trying to tell us it is. They’re still over 10 points behind in the polls. They are not doing anything but badly.
Small point, but in the Lab Sporting Index numbers, I think you mean 232-238 (you certainly don’t mean 323-238).
In the short term, the pressure has definitely come off Gordon Brown. Whether this makes any practical difference to the general election result is much more debatable.
previous 426 - But if the council has employed professional advisers (normal practice) then this is not the case. Also from what I have heard in order to meet government best value targets they had to lodge with the highest return of double aa rated institution, whilst also not putting all eggs in one basket.
I think it is easy to criticise from afar (as you are finding) without having any knowledge of how things work. Common sense in these situations does not always apply.
For example if the guidance says
Invest money in highest returning account where
:- institution is double A rated
:- ensuring only 20% is retained in one institution at one time.
The person will then look at all double A rated institutions and rank on returns on a periodic basis. They will then move money in accordingly. Only upon guidance from prfoessional body or government would mean that they would move from icelandic banks. If this process is not followed then council will be deemed to be poorly performing affecting grants available from central government. The way the system is set up means it is more important to follow government guidance than find a system that works better.
by Nemtynakht (formerly known as ChrisP) October 9th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
It’s all too early to say. If the Libor doesn’t budge will the PM and Chancellor keep throwing good money after bad and how long will the public put up with that? If it succeeds and the Libor drops then will Brown get the credit or will the grind of recession through the winter take its toll.
Labour have had some good days in Westminster and the Tories appear wrong-footed but what MPs and the commentariat think is not the same as the public’s view and that hasn’t come out clearly yet.
My own view, for what its worth, is that if the Tories can maintain their lead at 10-15 for the next 6 weeks then Brown is in real trouble again. The rebels appear to have shot their bolt and it is unlikely that Brown will be deposed but sniping and positioning for the aftermath of a GE defeat would recommence.
Mr Brown has a small window of opportunity, Cameron’s lead in the polls and the fact that, as leader of the opposition, he has no actual power, means that he can afford to make a few mistakes. The downsides of any Brownian slips are massive.
nickc (form previous thread) The banks were not banging on the Treasury door. The strong ones (HSBC, Lloyds TSB and Barclays) would have survived this. It is the weak banks the taxpayer is saving. They have spent our money, now they want the taxpayer (through the government) to provide more money to save them. It is effectively a call on shareholders, without the shareholders receiving anything in return. Do you think even £500 Billion will make or break this crisis? Lloyds TSB alone have £500 Billion in assets already. The size of these companies dwarfs anything the government can offer. When this all unravels and it becomes apparent the government have got this wrong, do not then say “its easy to comment with the benefit of hindsight”.
On topic
Short term yes
Long term no
5. I personally doubt it has: however you guys should bin Osborne as shadow chancellor, he’s shrill and indecisive and has been awful on the financial crisis. I still think you guys will win handily next time: but tale my tip: drop Boy George, and Pickles while you are at it.
4 That’s just it - the fundamentals HAVE changed - for the first time really since about 1974. I think the jury’s still out as to whether current Labour can benefit under the new paradigm, but I would think it’s pretty certain that the Tories will suffer, as will Lib Dems unless they can make it pretty clear that neo-liberal economics is now off the agenda.
The difficulty for Brown is that there is already a renewed note of negativity entering the media narrative. The FTSE is down again and Libor isn’t shifting. If this bailout is suddenly perceived not to have worked then he really has nowhere else to go.
9 Good grief, have we met Sir ? - Agreed again !
( albeit from an arch disenfranchised unreconstructed right wing Conservative point of view who’s savouring the eventual revolution !)
There is no doubt the polls have shown a Labour recovery over the last couple of weeks, but this is only through visibility rather than a move in the public mood. By November the Tory 20 point leads will be back.
I think worryingly for Labour it has shown that their high point is now 30-31%. I cannot see them breaking this barrier, the only way is down. By December when the bailout has unravelled we will see Labour below 20 points and the Tories touching 60.
11. I don’t buy this ‘end to free market’ stuff, actually. I think it’s clear confidence has taken a bump and when the banking system actually recovers it will probably be slapped with bigger restraints than before; but nothing huge is happening here, I don’t see a population ready and willing to embrace socialism again.
11. Wishful thinking, I’m afraid.
Labour might gain some points in the near term. But the Tories have Labour right where they want them - with an unchallenged Gordon at the helm. Because the light is fading, there’s foxes about - and his chickens are heading homwards….
I doubt very much whether spending vast amounts of tax payers money to keep afloat a system that Labour have let get out of control, after Brown promising he had abolished the boom/bust cycle, will actually give Brown/Labour much benefit at all. Think about it.
1. Next poll, YouGov/Sunday Time, will be due at the weekend, I think.
I thought LloydsTSB and Barclays are amongst the ones needing cash to sort their balance sheets out.
My view oft repeated on this site is that Labour don’t get DC - they think he is light-weight and that the Tory lead is ’soft’. It is true but only in the sense that all of politics is sensitive to the vicissitudes of 24 hour news. The underlying economic situation is horrendous. The underlying polling information is rock solid for DC medium to long-term. Labour is clapped out and finished - all of the wiser heads know it. There is no ‘benefit’ for Labour to gain even in the short-term because the package cannot work in the sense of deleting the recession or the slump in house prices, etc, etc, etc
10 - “You guys”? I’m not a Tory.
Surely the question to ask is how close have the spreads been to the actual results in previous elections? ..and is Ave it 08 a more reliable forecaster. Does anyone know the answer to the first question please
Also remember most of the Labour bounce has come at the expense of the LDs - the Tory vote is mostly unchanged.
Both Neil Woodford and Anthony Bolton have called the market as probably near the bottom, with growing investment opportunities appearing.
Let’s hope they’re right.
15. Even if one assumes we are seeing the ‘end to free market’ and the UK going back to a more 1950’s style financial system (and as you point out, thats probably an over-reaction) theres no reason why that damage Tory prospects. The Tories were in power for long periods under that system, just as they have been under the free market system. The great thing about the Conservative Party is its adaptability.
15. “I don’t see a population ready and willing to embrace socialism again.”
Although it depends how you define ’socialism’. Many American politicians seem to regard their bailout plan - proposed by George W Bush, no less - as a form of socialism.
Certainly, may right-wing Americans think we already have a socialist government, with ’socialized medicine’ (ridiculous phrase), a ’socialist welfare system’ and ’socialist gun control legislation’.
19 - Absolutely not. If Lloyds TSB had needed cash to sort their balance sheet out they couldn’t possibly have bought HBoS, likewise Barclays could not have bought Morgan Stanley.
I think Labour will get a permanent improvement in poll ratings from this week, but this will merely move us from looking at a landslide to a moderate Tory majority.
However, the Tories should be careful about assuming that the recession to come will automatically mean people will move toward them - recessions make people more cautious and (as in 1992) there is a tendency to keep hold of nurse. It will be very hard for the Tories to differentiate themselves from the current government’s economic policy - sharing the proceeds of growth and tax cuts are clearly pie in the sky for the next few years at least. And people realise that this is a global crisis which transcends party politics and cannot credibly be blamed on Brown’s chancellorship - it’s hard to criticise his level of borrowing when you have just supported doubling it. And if you do you have to say where you would cut.
i am really hoping that this polling move will make one positive difference to our lives on this site:
CCHQ will realise that this economic situation is pretty neutral for them at best, and Con spin lines (and associated pb.com posters) will stop going on and on and on and on about forthcoming economic doom, how it all started in may ‘97, and is limited to the UK, with no insight or economic facts involved.
I think the global financial crisis in many ways leads to a reset of the political landscape around the world. A government (which basically includes Obama right now) that is able to deal convincingly with the crisis can bring itself in a very favorable position. A government that fails to do this will be punished regardless of previous merits.
Given the situation of the Labour government in the UK, a reset is basically the best thing they could ever have hoped for. I’m fairly sure the past year hasn’t been forgotten, but if Gordon Brown can convince the British public that he is on top of this crisis, that will be a much more important factor than, say, the lost by-elections. I’m not sure if voters’ collective memory will lead them to see that Labour has presided over much of the build-up of this crisis.
So Labour wins? I doubt it. Gordon Brown has shown over the past year that he’s not a good leader. That hasn’t changed just because he now has the opportunity to start anew. He will probably fail to explain why Labour is needed in this crisis (I think this is a crisis that validates the left-wing approach). He will probably make visible mistakes dealing with this crisis.
We will see. For now, I think it’s only reasonable to see that there is a break in the narrative and that if the Tories want to continue their rather unusual polling advantage, they will need Gordon Brown to mess it up. It’s all about governments losing. If the past is (partly) forgotten and Brown currently does well, the next polls should reflect that, too. It makes sense to adjust for that while betting.
19 - More smoke and mirrors. Some of the banks mentioned in the Government statement yesterday, issued their own fairly strong denials later that morning.
28. Pure spin.
27. You mean Barclays buying Lehman dont you? Unless I missed something today.
Oh, and regarding McCain’s “exciting” morning news. So it’s a new Ayers web (!) ad. I think that’s just desperate. The McCain campaign should try to not to cry “wolf” too many times. Next time they announce something major is about to happen, the press may just not care.
29
Borrowing as a percentage of GDP has increased every year since 1997 (Economic fact).
This is a problem (Insight).
Job Done
21 - if you are not labour you are tory didn;t you know
28 1992 is exceptional though. It’s more likely for a recession to result in a vote against the incumbent.
33 Freudian slip
37, and even in 1992, the Conservative majority was cut by 80%.
33 Watch this space for a Barclays / Bank of America merger.
21. Whoops. Sorry Antifrank, sometimes I get mixed up. Quite often in fact. Most days, if I’m honest.
34. Indeed. It is the lamest anti climax ever: Those Bill Ayers ads have been running (Jack W tells me) in swing states for weeks with no effect.
I think the betting markets are re-acting to yesterday’s highly unusual news… the govt. actually doing something. However, the FTSE has finished down on the day, the LIBOR 3-month rate has actually gone up & Halifax(?) release house-price figures showing the largest year-on-year drop for a very long time. Given that recessions usually hurt incumbents, this lurch to Labour will be short-lived, i.e fill yer boots before reality re-establishes itself.
37 - I set out my theory on this question this morning. I would be interested in your views:
“These poll ratings mean something, but the central question is what they mean. I don’t know about anyone else, but I cast my vote on a composite of different criteria, the weighting to which varies according to external circumstances. In wartime, I would generally choose the best war leader. In bad economic times, I would generally choose the most financially capable.
This leads me to a point that I made yesterday. It is possible that Gordon Brown is a Giffen good:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giffen_good
He may be generally poorly thought of and he may be partially blamed for the current crisis, but if the perception is that he is the most financially capable of the party leaders (and David Cameron is transparently not particularly comfortable talking about economic issues), his polling will rise in bad times, even if his stock has gone down.
What I draw from all of these polls is that point has not yet been reached. Even where Gordon Brown polls well ahead on economic issues compared with David Cameron, Labour still are way behind the Tories in the party polling. The economy has not - yet - become important enough for any advantage that Gordon Brown might have to accrue.
If my analysis is correct, then generally, bad times would be bad news for the Liberal Democrats as the least tested party. Of course now, Vince Cable has established a real name for himself on economic issues. So far, the Lib Dems haven’t profited. Might they do so yet? And if so, at whose expense? My guess is that Vince Cable has done enough to neutralise a squeeze on Lib Dem votes in hard times, but no more than that.
by antifrank October 9th, 2008 at 9:03 am”
37. Yes, we keep hearing about 1992 over and over again, but that was an extremly unique situation. Neil Kinnock was virtually unelectable and John Major was personally quite popular in the early days of his Premiership.
re. boylesports odds on obama winning margin from last thread…..odds on 80 or less now 5/1; did the poster get any money on at 8/1? they currently have 200+ as the 4/1 favourite……
40 You serious? Why would Barc merge with BOA?
29 Ed - GB told us what to think
“An end to boom and bust”. Therefore I can now expect no boom and bust.
“I will not let property prices get out of control” Therefore no property bubble to ruin consumer confidence.
I have not said at any point that world problems are GBs fault. But his ego over 10 years as chanacellor has, as he increased spending, and bent his golden rules, and allowed a property bubble, all in order to be personally popular. I would have more respect for him if we were in frances shoes. They have had unspectacular growth, as they have not let spending get out of control. Therefore they are now in recession, but can do something about it because they have put money aside rather than borrowing huge amounts. GBs problem was that he believed his own hype, and now we will all pay.
19, 27 No - Lloyds TSB is not spending any cash to buy HBOS - it proposes to pay in shares. Had it not done this it could possibly have survived without needing to recapitalise (as HSBC can). But the banks have so many interbank liabilities that the failure of one would lead to the failure of them all - the current crisis was triggered when Lehman collapsed - it is uncertainty about exposure to Lehman that led to the drying up of interbank lending which pushed RBS to the brink on Monday.
20. My view is that the Tory lead is not soft and DC is a huge asset for you chaps. However, the shadown front bench does have weak links:
1. George Osborne. Always sounds like a silly, badly informed schoolbiy.
2. Eric “Flip Flop” Pickles. Opens mouth before engaging brain.
3. Dominic Grieve. Woeful public speaker and purveyor of dangerous, unworkable policies.
Hack them three out and replace with thoughtful MPs such as Damien Green and you’ll have a good team and will win handily.
Not sure whether reported earlier, Nottinham Council (Labour controlled) has / had £42m invested with Icelandic Bank. FTSE closes down 54 points with Dow trading in negative territory. LIBOR has also increased today. This lot has still some way to run before we get back to an even keel.
Good theory but Giffen Goods don’t actually exist in reality (hey - its a better analogy than I thought). Another Economic theoretical assumption that has never been proved. Like capitalism or socialism.
46. Still think 5-1 is keenly priced, although 8-1 was a truly fantastic value bet.
52. Or like the Laffer Curve and how a NMW causes unemployment… Oh no!!!
BTW, you sort out the missus’ pay by the way? Hope so chap.
Mike, I fear you are misleading people here. The SpreadFair prices have hardly moved since the weekend. The Labour buy price has moved from 235 to 237, and the Conservative buy price has moved from 351 down to 350.4. That could hardly be called a major change. Most of this is profit taking.
37 No - neither of the two deepest post-war recessions - 1980 and 1991 - resulted in a change of government. And it is hard to argue that the 1974-5 recession did either - most people would say that the 1979 election result owed much more to the Winter of Discontent than the preceding recession.
45 - Also Major felt much fresher in 1992 than Brown does now, because he had had a much more rapid rise to the top. He only entered the Cabinet in 1987, three years before becoming PM; whereas Brown has been at the top level of the Labour party since 1992 – 16 years.
Barclays still think that I am good for my mortgage credit cards and other loans. They might be in for a shock! Unless the Gov gave me some of the £50bn of course!
44 I think it’s quite possible that people would support a government which they respect, in hard economic times. But I think this government is past that point.
Codwar restarts. Iceland upset about closure of Kaupthing in the UK - using Anti-terror legislation. Gordon freezing assets of Icelandic firms in the UK. Wartime prime minister boost for Gordon - it is his Falklands moment.
Short term anything could happen.
But
when unemployment hist 2.5million next year,
and the Government starts cutting spending
and companies go bust
and living standards rise for no-one but MPs
and taxes rise on petrol as fuel prices fall
and the Government deficit balloons out of control
and we lose the Afghan war
and ID cards are introduced at vast expense
and house prices fall a further 25%
and 1 million home owners ahve negative equity
and house reposessions soar
and personal bankruptcies soar
the political impacts of who does what and says what NOW will fade..
52. actually, it looks like they probably do. Greg mankiw had a link to this paper last year… http://www.nber.org/papers/w13243
59 - I take that point. I offer my observations simply because it is my preferred explanation as to why the Conservatives won in 1992.
36. That’s a lot of twaddle Nernty.
Good evening. Just back from Oxford Street, London. Joined the minions spending their last cash in a pre-Christmas frenzy. For myself bought some winter gear - Coat, Jumpers, pants - to keep me warm in the freeze to come.
O/T. Unless Cameron and co., get their fingers out and start being an attacking opposition, then Labour may well make some gain in the polls.
On the other hand Iceland is sticking 2 fingers up to Brown and making the Gret Leader v angry indeed. See PH for details.
42 Benbob
To the extent that the Ayer ads are being pushed (and it’s somewhat tentatively I believe), they signify only that the GOP is trying to shore up its core vote. The claims, such as they are, would be unlikely to make much of an impression beyond that base.
It fits in with my own theory that Texas (not Indiana) is McCain’s firewall. If he holds the line there, it isn’t too bad in all the circumstances. Should Texas fall, hey-ho…!
45 GIN Agreed
It might be comforting (ie delusional) for Labour to hope the 1992
parallel might encourage people to stick with better the devil they know, hold on to nurse etc.
Ermm…except the 1992 parallel is not quite valid, since we now have the reverse position with the opposition leader personally quite popular and the incumbent virtually unelectable.
Real Clear Politics electoral map shows:-
Obama: 277
McCain: 163
Toss-Up: 98
VA leaning Obama.
Obama theortical victory!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain
56. The onset of the Great Depression did for Labour. The onset of the 1974/75 recession did for the Conservatives. And the recession of 1980/81 would have done for the Conservatives had there been an election in 1980 or 1981. But there wasn’t an election till 1983, after the Falklands victory, and when the economy was performing strongly.
From Wikipedia (with usual caveats) - “The original population of Iceland was of Nordic and Celtic origin. This is evident from literary evidence dating from the settlement period as well as from later scientific studies such as blood type and genetic analyses. One such genetics study has indicated that the majority of the male settlers were of Nordic origin while the majority of the women were of Celtic origin”
Our Malvinas moment! Merge them (and their banks) with Scotland!
54 now come on - I think when we discussed it we said that it could not possibly have a positive effect (economically, or on employment) but the negative effect may be virtually negligbible, due to the level it is set at, therefore it is an achievement for labour. We can say it is positive in terms of valuing workers contribution, a psychological positive, but unlike some people tried to claim, it cannot create more employment.
61 Reading you makes me feel suicidal.
48. very good example of tiresome, out-of-date and out-of-context propaganda that will hopefully die a death.
New PPP poll for Virginia :
McCain 43% .. Obama 51%
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_VA_1009535.pdf
60. Oops…last time Labour picked a fight with the Icelanders, they ended up being humiliated. Bad move…
69. meanwhile, events and common sense have overtaken your “discussions”.
49 Sorry nickc agree to differ and don’t really want to continue this discussion. I do know a bit about these things; my CV includes the Lloyds TSB merger. Think about it, Barclays is the only global European bank, Bank of America the only global North American bank. What the world needs most is a global bank.
Runnymede - You return to 1215 if you like, but plenty of wishful thinking from your direction. I think it unlikely we will end up with a fully command economy, but it is worth looking at the perspective that this crisis is only a very mini rehearsal for the Big One - when environmental chickens really come home to roost. In that case, this is a very useful process, to remind us all forcefully that we live in an ever more interdependent world, and by golly if we don’t get collaborating soon and saving resources, there will be the most almighty blow-up!
If you choose to describe this as saying “the end of the free market”, fine. I think I would say something more like, we cannot do in the 21st Century what we did with laissez faire in the 18th and early 19th Centuries - there must be much more cooperation and democratic control (again, if you want to call that “regulation”, fine).
71 only it wont.. it will be Gordo’s epitaph
61 Madasafish I think the incumbent government will be able to reap a huge reward from having experience and being able to steer the hard working families and small businesses of the country through those difficult times (Not).
I feel quite sorry for the left minded on here as I really think the government is giving them little to support. Despite his claims brown proves again he himself is spin not substance (timing of rate cut announcement, bi-partisan until the opposition cannot reply, the happiest pictures of gordon as the economy goes belly up). I think there is a real debate on schools / hospitals / social services which labour should be sticking to.
64. I don;t get your drift. If Indiana falls… it’s one big fat landslide for Obama… Texas is way down the list. Are you suggesting the GOP consider the race lost and are just trying to protect their congressmen and senators in red states?
67. Hi SeanF. Have all you guys noticed that we are still talking of recession, when in fact this apears to be the start of a full blown depression.
Stock markets are still falling for the 7th straight working day, inspite, or perhaps one should say despite, all those billions being thrown on the Bonfire of Governmental insanities.
Dosn’t matter how much interest rates are cut now, (US is close to zero), the great march has begun.
Latest YouGov/Economist national poll :
McCain 43% .. Obama 46%
Note - All sampling pre debate. Under poll of AA - 2 points.
http://media.economist.com/media/pdf/econ_reg.pdf
79 That and loss of face, Ben.
79 benbobjim. BTW Selzer are in the field polling Indiana. I understand out this weekend.
76 etc. What has been very little discussed here is how a Obama victor affects the world markets. It would cause a collective orgasm in Europe and in the big blue states of the USA, which make most of the money, as well as in other areas across the world. US elections always affect the markets: an Obama victory may well have the potential to kick start the world economy.
80 Quite a lot still speak of “negative growth”!!
60.”Wartime prime minister boost for Gordon - it is his Falklands moment.”
No, its not! And if it has not already escaped your notice, we are in two war zones already under this government, neither of which seems to have brought out any signs of strong leadership or courage from Brown.
Benbobjim - Yes - my wife obviously doesn’t work during holidays (1/4) of the year. She only effectively gets paid for the 3/4 of the year when she is working. To smooth the payments, Birmingham Council pay 3/4 of the minimum wage all year, so instead of getting £6.00 per hour for 9 months she gets £4.50 per hour for 12 months. Same difference. It was my ignorance of this arrangement that caused my confusion.
74 - don;t know what you mean ed. I think that there is not an economic argument for NMW. This does not mean it is not a good policy for labour. I think Labour have done the right thing.
However the economic argument on here was that NMW had led to higher employment, which was a spurious argument. Like saying the government did the wrong thing yesterday because ftse down libor up. We could only say if it was wrong if we could compare what the ftse and libor would have been like without their intervention.
87. she only charged me GBP 4.25
83. Be very interested to see that poll. Re: YouGov, why have they underpolled AA by two points? These gremlins in polling help nobody. Any news on Gallup?
80 Well, I doubt if the World’s governments are going to reduce the money supply, or impose retaliatory tariffs on each other’s exports, as in 1931-33, so I suspect not.
88. No the argument on here was that NMW caused unemployment. There is no evidence whatsoever that it has done so – and I cannot believe we are going over this one again.
88. well the “economic argument”, like many economic arguments, turned out to be BS. it had negligible effect on employment - while obviously making a large difference to the lives of people working at this end of the payscale.
68. That explains why their women are so pretty then.
91. Another great post by Mr Fear. I am sick of this depression stuff: less of the hysteria and hyberbole please pbers.
85. ‘Negative Growth’. Yes we live in a world of oxymorons.
88. please note that interpreting intraday FTSE and LIBOR movements as “success” or “failure” for any policy, even an economic one, is fallacious.
70
I’m sorry I make you suicidal.
Adds note “next time add rise in number of attempted suicides”
87. With you. Yes that is legal then – I did wonder why Birmingham Council was breaking the law!
95. hopefully CCHQ will get the message soon - they lose a percentage of polling lead every time Osborne opens his mouth.
79/83 Ben and Jack
In the last 24 hours, North Carolina and Missouri have tipped Obama’s way on the Intrade map, which is now ‘predicting’ 364/174.
100 - Interesting psephological observation. Could you direct me to the detailed data?
‘Scottish councils tangled in Iceland’s web of banking woes’
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/33349-scottish-councils-tangled-in-icelands-web-of-banking-woes/
The local government umbrella body, Cosla, said the sums involved were considerably less than those deposited by English councils - which has now risen to more than £600m.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/7661206.stm
http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/880433?UserKey=
Some of us oldies can remember the 1976 crisis, when sterling fell 12%, there was a loss of confidence in the country’s financial standing and the IMF intervened.
In the short-term it lead to greater belt-tightening and cuts in government spending. The ugly choices which needed to be made helped split the Labour Party. Callaghan even toyed with the idea of scrapping Polaris which would have been a big symbolic move. If the Brown gamble does not work, government debt balloons as it is threatening to do and sterling, already weak, goes into freefall, what would be the equivalent, big symbolic gesture in 2008/9? I wonder if we became really desperate we would scrap the Olympics, saying that we had more important uses for the money and just could not afford it. This would be a horrendous blow to British prestige but just possible. Anyone know any betting market on this possibility?
91. Agree that tariffs wont be erected, but have you noticed that the EU states have taken the position of, ‘every man for himself’, and bugger the union.
It wont happen like the last G. Depression, - nothing repeats exactly - but it will happen nethertheless.
83 benbobjim. Old model from YouGov.
Meanwhile …. two more polls on who won the 2nd debate. No surprises :
Rasmussen
McCain 28% .. Obama 45%
Gallup/USA Today
McCain 23% .. Obama 56%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/voters_say_obama_won_debate_mccain_more_prepared_to_be_president
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/10/gallup-poll-sig.html
106. Where is the Gallup tracker?
46. Yes primed I had £20 at 8/1. Was going to put on more but then the price changed!
Also, if you want to bet on an Obama landslide you are better off doing it with Boylesports (4/1 200+ victory) than ladbrokes (2.5/1 Obama 370+)
Our Great Leader goes to war. Send out the herring fleet!
We aint got no navy.
95
You can believe the IMF if you want..
The banks decided about 1990 to screw the world’s economy properly and they have succeeded very well. The LTCM fiasco of 1997 was a trial…it was successful but had no lasting impact so they went to Plan B.
91
It’s not the Governmenys I worry about. it’s the Banks and Insurance companies who are doing it..
Our Great Leader goes to war. Send out the herring fleet!
We aint got no navy.
Gordon Brown, Prime Minister
BBC News
Mr Brown criticised the Icelandic government with regards to the treatment of the deposits placed by local authorities in Icelandic banks, he declared: “What happened in Iceland is completely unacceptable.”
He said that the government was: “freezing the assets of Icelandic companies in the UK where we can.” Mr Brown said that he had spoken to the Icelandic Prime Minister, telling him that his government’s behaviour was “effectively illegal.”
The Prime Minister went on to promise that the £500bn rescue package for the banking system would not damage
public services: “I can assure patients of the NHS and mothers and fathers who send their children to school and pensioners…that this will not effect them.”
He argued that securing a stable banking system was the essential prerequisite to other action: “A sound banking system is at the essence of everything we do in our economy.” Mr Brown concluded by affirming that the action did not public service cutbacks: “We are not doing this at the expense of the health service or education, we’re doing it because it is the right thing to do to get the economy moving again.”
75 For someone who has worked in banking you do come out with some very odd statements “Barclays is the only global European bank??”
Surely Deustche and UBS would be considered global?? And if you asked the banks most of them would consdier themselves “global” operators.
109. Where’s Bjork right now? Could we get her renditioned extraordinarily by the yanks?
105. in other words, it will be a “depression” but not like the “depression”.
so what does that actually mean?
Dow down 131. Real risk it could test the 9,000 level….
97 my point exactly
92, 93. As stated above the conclusion was that it did cause unemployment. Just because this is negligible does not mean a number of jobs have not ot created and it is BS, just that it was not as bad as the scaremongers predicted. However I agree and stated above that there are intangible benefits, which probably offset the negative effect.
112. lots of people have worked in banking and don’t have a clue. that’s why we’re in the situation we’re in
108 Noisy
Definitely. I just had £100 at 4/1. My post at 101 explains why.
116. in science, when you come up with a testable theory, test it, and find that the theory was wrong, the effect you predicted did not happen, etc. you ditch the theory and try again.
it appears to be the case that in debating the NMW, you have an alternative approach, and i can’t say that i entirely agree with it.
105 Even the most pessimistic commentators aren’t predicting 25%+ unemployment, at a time when unemployment meant being just above starvation level.
114. It means exactly what it says. If you read carefuly, you may find the answer for yourself.
104 1976 was a British crsis and it was caused by a loss of confidence in UK public finances. We now have a global crisis caused by a loss of confidence in financial institutions. At the moment it seems unlikely that sterling will collapse because there are few “safer” currencies into which money could be moved. All major currencies - excepting the yen perhaps - are pretty much equally affected by institutional crises and the yen is unattractive because interest rates are so low.
Didn’t the media get a bit hysterical about the trails and tribulations that Brown had to survive through in his first months as PM blanking out 1945-2007? I think that Mike did a thread at the time which got it into perspective. We are in tough economic times, and we don’t yet know how its all going to pan out.
But, trying to invoke the wartime spirit in this way while we have troops in two war zones already is bit below the belt, especially with a PM who has been so lacking in even political courage throughout his career.
120. I think we are entering totaly uncharted territory, so past history may be meaningless in this case.
111 - Ah the old money grows on trees defence
Latest Gallup tracker :
McCain 41% .. Obama 52%
Yesterday - No change.
Crosstabs to follow.
124 history repeats itself. there’s not much new under the sun.
95
Well the Govt think we are in a recession… or at least McNumpty does.. oh dear.. The R word that dare not speak its name.. Just like the N word that couldnt be used.
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/10/mcnulty-we-are.html
I reckon we could take out Iceland - send in th gunboats - with Kerry Katona to lead the troops!
Certainly if Labour can look to be in control of events or bringing events into control then they must look better than they have for months and so will reduce their deficit.
However, it would be difficult to believe that their own actions did not contribute to the present unhappiness even if they had had an heroic and statesmanlike record on the economy. “No more boom and bust” was a particularly unfortunate mantra. This leaves endless scope for irony in the next GE campaign and the English are famed throughout Europe for their love of irony.
COUNCIL FINANCE: As any fule kno, but apparently not the Beeb, once a year councillors are faced with an extremely lengthy and tedious paper which lists those institutions which the council is allowed/forced to put its money in. There is then a discussion as to what a particular bank used to be ect ect ect. Agreeing this paper is not optional either for councillors or councils,it is a clear diktat from DCLG or whatever it calls itself this week. Most councils will have a broad portfolio. Ibelieve the council of which I am a member has money in five countries, all but one in the EU. So, it will not be enough to declare war on Iceland.
One issue which will arise is that as the banks are merged as has happened some councils could come into a situation where they will have too great a proportion of their assets in one newly merged bank.
Labour has been in electoral decline since 2001 and only got a Parliamentary majority in 2005 on 35% of the vote owing to the way votes stacked up in individual constituencies.
The blue crossed above the red line three years ago having been trending towards doing so for quite some time previously.
Aside from the Broon bounce of last year, when people gave him the benefit the doubt for unquestionably being Not Blair, nothing’s changed, and presiding over a fiscal catastrophe isn’t going to rehabilitate Labour any time soon IMHO.
I say this as a Tory who doesn’t actually think this stuff is Labour’s fault. They are having to deal with something they didn’t wholly create, but they do deserve censure for failing to mitigate it. And also I guess for lyingly claiming the credit bubble was genuine prosperity and trying to claim credit for having engineered it.
108. 8/1 was a great price, no i won’t be backing the landslide, think it will be tighter in the end up…….i reckon there will be value in backing the reps in some of the swing states where the polls show a dem lead, just need to choose them!
I hope our mental PM isn’t thinking of having a Falklands moment, start a war with Iceland, then sweep to victory in a snap election on the back of it
Can imagine Alistair Campbell and Mandy, are working on the scripts right now
119 But with all economic theories they are difficult to prove as you cannot run 2 parallel economies at the same time. So don;t come up with the scientific theory line!!
I agree with NMW as a policy, as it values work, and should equate to a living wage. It is just stupid to argue that it created employment because employment went up. It has to have a negative effect (yet negligible) on employment numbers.
In the Falklands metaphor Brown is Galtieri - desperate dictator trying to win an unwinnable war (on the economy) to shore up support.
Glenrothes is the Belgrano.
129 Gordon Brown: Give us our money back!
Iceland: Shan’t!!
Gordon: Don’t make me threaten you! I would hate to have the chance for a “Falklands Moment”….
Iceland: Really? Meet my mate Vladimir…..
131 hear hear.
New American Research Group polls :
Minnesota
McCain 46% .. Obama 47%
Missouri
McCain 49% .. Obama 46%
Montana
McCain 50% .. Obama 45%
New Hampshire
McCain 43% .. Obama 52%
Ohio
McCain 45% .. Obama 48%
Texas
McCain 57% .. Obama 38%
West Virginia
McCain 42% .. Obama 50% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/
132 Hmmm…not so sure, Primed.
Just been playing a little imaginary game, trying to guess which are the next States to go blue. Now let me see…
Indiana, Montana, North Dakota, Georgia, Texas….in that order.
Of course, McCain could always stage a comeback…..
Link to the Gallup tracker :
http://www.gallup.com/poll/111052/Gallup-Daily-Obama-52-McCain-41.aspx
139 Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!
re 100. I don’t seem to recall that happening in October 2007.
If you want to quote polling “facts” please ensure that there is at least a grain of truth there.
I have no idea why ARG bother to publish polls at all - the figures are way off what every one else is printing - especially in MN which has firmed to blue in the past polls - every time I see ARG by a poll I too go AAAAAARRRRRGHHHHHHH
There obviously will be some benefit to Labour but the real question is will Gordon have the minerals to take advantage of it. When the polls get to level pegging or even show a Labour lead will he pull the trigger for a snap election? I’d say, yes, he will.
Almost heaven, West Virginia….
#118 lots of people have worked in banking and don’t have a clue. that’s why we’re in the situation we’re in
Substitute government for banking, and the statement is also true.
145 “will he pull the trigger for a snap election? I’d say, yes, he will.”
Well, as Mandy recently said that Gordon would go on the last date legally possible - almost certainly!
does anyone know why ARG are so bad?
Jack is that West Virginia poll for real or is there something dodgy in the methodology?
Recent swings on the spread markets simply make buying Conservative seats/selling Labour ones even better value! I simply can’t see any way back for Labour. For getting to 30% in the polls to be regarded as some sort of achievement or recovery, when the Conservatives are in the mid-40s, is bizarre. The public will not reward Labour at the next election, even if (and I’m not sure if this is right) Gordon is regarded as the best person to handle the current crisis.
I think we need to cast our minds ahead to Spring 2010. Obama will have been president for more than a year, demonstrating a change in America, and this country will be clamouring for a fresh approach and a new leader to sort out the wrecked economy, the rising unemployment and inflation. Any ‘recovery’ in Labour’s position short-term, demonstrated for instance by a poll giving them 34% and the Cons 40%, would provide an outstanding ‘buy’ opportunity for Con seats, IMHO.
Do we really imagine that the alternative scenario is a McCain presidency and Brown being re-elected?? (Not that the two are really connected - just trying to envisage the future).
‘Deposit guarantee to be extended to more banks’
The guarantee was initially supposed to only cover the six Irish-owned banks and building societies.
However, concerns were expressed that the move could breach EU competition laws.
Mr Lenihan has now confirmed that the guarantee will be available to a number of foreign-owned banks - Ulster Bank, First Active, Halifax Bank of Scotland, IIB Bank and Postbank.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/breaking-news/ireland/business/deposit-guarantee-to-be-extended-to-more-banks-13996435.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/09/business/punt.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7661252.stm
151. Alternatively, Obama’s elected and the economy’s not picked up would that work against Cameron?
Reader’s poll in tonight’s Evening Standard (down the bottom of the front page) “Has the bail-out restored your faith in Gordon Brown?”
It was running at 65% ‘no’ when I voted.
153. Helps Cameron even more, I reckon. One of the reasons McCain’s doing so badly is the economy…
We’re starting to get a clearer picture of how it is that Democratic new voter registrations have been so completely swamping Republican new voter registrations, particularly in swing states. This isn’t just a matter of a general trend favoring Democrats, but rather a symptom of massive voter registration fraud perpetrated by ACORN, an Obama-friendly group whose Nevada offices were just raided by the FBI. This article lists some disturbing details about their activities, worthy of other “democracies” like Zimbabwe:
http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=308358130652174
‘Inquiry into defeat of Lisbon Treaty to report in two months’
Terms of reference for the body, a subcommittee of the Oireachtas’s European Affairs Committee, ask that it “contribute to an open, comprehensive and sincere debate on Ireland’s future relationship with the EU”.
Sinn Féin’s Senator Pearse Doherty said the terms were deliberately intended “to prepare the ground for a rerun of the Lisbon Treaty referendum”.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1009/1223445618103.html
‘Rescuing the Lisbon treaty’
By Andrew Duff, MEP
“Ireland’s beleaguered government made great play of mounting yet another survey of public opinion to find out why the naysayers won. In fact this poll, conducted by Millward Brown IMS, added very little to what close observers of the referendum campaign, supplemented by Eurobarometer polls, already knew. IMS began their survey in July, by which time a certain sobering up had taken place. The most interesting feature of the IMS inquiry is that as many as 20 per cent of the 862,415 people who voted No were ready to concede that the result had weakened Ireland’s position. Much now rests on the political evolution of that chastened 20 per cent.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0ec143d8-95e5-11dd-9dce-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=70662e7c-3027-11da-ba9f-00000e2511c8.html
‘Lisbon signature is solemn promise, ex-commissioner says’
“Signing the treaty is the most solemn thing that states can do. It’s a commitment to the other states. The ratification process is not at will, it is an obligation,” said the former industry commissioner who served in Brussels from 1977 to 1984.
“I find it unacceptable that a government that has committed to other governments in good faith that it would carry this [ratification] out, why then is this the only case when a government does not resign [if it fails]? It is not acceptable.”
http://euobserver.com/18/26900
‘MEPs make EU anthem, flag obligatory at Euro-Parliament’
http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1223551923.3
150 Galloglass. The crosstabs, such as they are, are accurate. The party id is accurate. WV had had a tendency to vote (conservative)Dem locally and GOP nationally. That said most recent polling has had the state around mid single digits for McCain. Even allowing for the MoE this looks like an outlier, however nice for Obama.
Nevertheless watch for ad spends and visits to the state - The Clintons perhaps ??
Meanwhile ….
Latest Muhlenberg/Morning Call tracker for Pennsylvania :
McCain 38% .. Obama 51%
Yesterday M-38/O-50.
Link to follow.
139. Some decent polls there for McCain apart from West Virginia! Ohio and Minnesota look like they are still in play. Perhaps talk of an Obama landslide is a little premature. My current prediction is 348 for Obama and 190 for McCain but I wouldn’t be surprised if the race tightens over the coming weeks.