Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
kiwiqpr said:
[HASHTAG]#Marcher[/HASHTAG]

@MarchersMedia
·
Oct 7

Don't panic,
despite the high cost of power in Germany,
you'll still be able to get a new BMW.

However,
due to Germany's dependence on high cost renewables it'll be a BMW made in the Dadong Plant in China
- made with power generated from coal-fired power stations.

**applauds**
Click to expand...

That’s the point.
We all cut our making of products so we look good for renewables so it then gets made in China, who laugh at our stupid politicians and suckoles.

Here in Oz, they have now plastered the tv say, electricity, which has double in the last five years, is going to increase 35% next year alone.

I’ved asked how are the public, especially our senior citizens, how are going to come up with the extra, being they are on budget fixed incomes ( pension ).

The Labor and greens don’t give a fcuk, they just want to be seen as ‘going green’.

l detest these fcukwits who don’t see using our coal power etc, which we have abundance of ( and cheapest to run ) and gradually ease into the renewables.

Logic, apparently, has no bearing on it.
Rant over……
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taffvalerowdy and kiwiqpr
  • Like
Reactions: Goldhawk-Road and rangercol
  • Like
Reactions: Goldhawk-Road
rangercol said:
Don't expect anything like the same level of virtue-signalling over this.
Click to expand...
He did fess up to this and apologise profusely when he first raised his issues with his treatment at Yorkshire. It’s not new news. His idiocy and malice does not excuse his treatment. Still, obviously a cretin to think such thoughts, let alone share them on social media.
 
Meanwhile, Jacob Rees Mogg on the wireless just now. Baffling. There is a technical reason for all our problems apparently, mainly it’s the Bank of England’s fault for not matching the Fed’s interest rates in the US (he didn’t mention the impact this would have on mortgages). Nothing to do with what happens every time Kwarteng opens his mouth cf yesterday. No need to take fracking rule changes to Parliament because Erskine May says it’s not necessary. The Pension Funds just made a poor investment in government debt (just think through the implications of this statement). A government planned cap on renewable energy company revenues (a good idea as long as they are left profitable enough to encourage more investment - obviously Rees Mogg would prefer to encourage fracking and new oil and gas sources) isn’t a windfall tax, because Liz Truss doesn’t support windfall taxes, even though it looks, smells and tastes like a windfall tax.

All delivered in the usual patronising ‘it’s really too complicated for you plebs to understand’ tone, exacerbated by the fact that he was being interviewed by a woman. Perhaps he should be interviewed by the editor of the Financial Times, who said yesterday that the recent challenges are down to a fiscal policy which ‘isn’t credible in the eyes of the markets’.
 
Last edited:
sb_73 said:
Meanwhile, Jacob Rees Mogg on the wireless just now. Baffling. There is a technical reason for all our problems apparently, mainly it’s the Bank of England’s fault for not matching the Fed’s interest rates in the US (he didn’t mention the impact this would have on mortgages). Nothing to do with what happens every time Kwarteng opens his mouth cf yesterday. No need to take fracking rule changes to Parliament because Erskine May says it’s not necessary. The Pension Funds just made a poor investment in government debt (just think through the implications of this statement). A government planned cap on renewable energy company revenues (a good idea as long as they are left profitable enough to encourage more investment - obviously Rees Mogg would prefer to encourage fracking and new oil and gas sources) isn’t a windfall tax, because Liz Truss doesn’t support windfall taxes, even though it looks, smells and tastes like a windfall tax.

All delivered in the usual patronising ‘it’s really too complicated for you plebs to understand’ tone, exacerbated by the fact that he was being interviewed by a woman. Perhaps he should be interviewed by the editor of the Financial Times, who said yesterday that the recent challenges are down to a fiscal policy which ‘isn’t credible in the eyes of the markets’.
Click to expand...

Rees-Mogg is a fool, but because he talks in such a supercilious tone some get the impression that he must know what he's talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoop-Leif and SW Ranger
sb_73 said:
Meanwhile, Jacob Rees Mogg on the wireless just now. Baffling. There is a technical reason for all our problems apparently, mainly it’s the Bank of England’s fault for not matching the Fed’s interest rates in the US (he didn’t mention the impact this would have on mortgages). Nothing to do with what happens every time Kwarteng opens his mouth cf yesterday. No need to take fracking rule changes to Parliament because Erskine May says it’s not necessary. The Pension Funds just made a poor investment in government debt (just think through the implications of this statement). A government planned cap on renewable energy company revenues (a good idea as long as they are left profitable enough to encourage more investment - obviously Rees Mogg would prefer to encourage fracking and new oil and gas sources) isn’t a windfall tax, because Liz Truss doesn’t support windfall taxes, even though it looks, smells and tastes like a windfall tax.

All delivered in the usual patronising ‘it’s really too complicated for you plebs to understand’ tone, exacerbated by the fact that he was being interviewed by a woman. Perhaps he should be interviewed by the editor of the Financial Times, who said yesterday that the recent challenges are down to a fiscal policy which ‘isn’t credible in the eyes of the markets’.
Click to expand...

Whilst the government are clearly inept, the Bank of England have been culpable too by only reacting and not seeing anything coming.
As I understand it, the pension funds at risk are a relatively small number who have taken massive risks for a relatively small return and are being burned by the all powerful markets.
The media headlines like to suggest that every pension in the land is about to collapse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goldhawk-Road
rangercol said:
Whilst the government are clearly inept, the Bank of England have been culpable too by only reacting and not seeing anything coming.
As I understand it, the pension funds at risk are a relatively small number who have taken massive risks for a relatively small return and are being burned by the all powerful markets.
The media headlines like to suggest that every pension in the land is about to collapse.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid your understanding is mistaken. Anybody who has a defined benefit pension - either an existing pensioner, a deferred pensioner or one of the few still paying into these schemes has the potential to be affected by this market turmoil. That’s 18 million people. Defined benefit pension funds like(d) gilts because they gave a long term return which sat nicely against their long term fixed liabilities. What Kwarteng and Truss have done - not the Bank of England - by introducing an unfunded wave of government spending and tax cuts has undermined confidence in this market and massively increased the cost of government borrowing, which you and I and our children will have to pay for, regardless of our pensions.

I think there are sufficient safety protocols in place to make any real threat to defined benefit pensions very unlikely - unless this rubbish goes on and on. Most pensions, either company or private, of course aren’t defined benefit any more, just building up a fund which is equally if not more vulnerable to the ‘market’.

The Bank of England is definitely cack though, especially this Bailey bloke. They have one job to do, control the money supply to keep inflation around 2%. Lots of external factors at play, and perhaps they don’t have the tools to do the job, but they don’t inspire any confidence.
 
Last edited:
Truss had just said in PMQs that she won't reverse tax cuts, but also that she won't cut public spending. That'll go down well with the markets.
 
sb_73 said:
I’m afraid your understanding is mistaken. Anybody who has a defined benefit pension - either an existing pensioner, a deferred pensioner or one of the few still paying into these schemes has the potential to be affected by this market turmoil. That’s 18 million people. Defined benefit pension funds like(d) gilts because they gave a long term return which sat nicely against their long term fixed liabilities. What Kwarteng and Truss have done - not the Bank of England - by introducing an unfunded wave of government spending and tax cuts has undermined confidence in this market and massively increased the cost of government borrowing, which you and I and our children will have to pay for, regardless of our pensions.

I think there are sufficient safety protocols in place to make any real threat to defined benefit pensions very unlikely - unless this rubbish goes on and on. Most pensions, either company or private, of course aren’t defined benefit any more, just building up a fund which is equally if not more vulnerable to the ‘market’.

The Bank of England is definitely cack though, especially this Bailey bloke. They have one job to do, control the money supply to keep inflation around 2%. Lots of external factors at play, and perhaps they don’t have the tools to do the job, but they don’t inspire any confidence.
Click to expand...

Not sure my understanding is incorrect.
A quick search suggests around half the number of such pensions of the figure you quoted.
Plus, I maintain that the media (and you:biggrin:) are over exaggerating the problem for effect.
 
rangercol said:
Not sure my understanding is incorrect.
A quick search suggests around half the number of such pensions of the figure you quoted.
Plus, I maintain that the media (and you:biggrin:) are over exaggerating the problem for effect.
Click to expand...
How many pensions are affected?
A total of more than 18 million people are affected by the pension crisis in some way. Of these, a little more than 2.7 million people still pay into defined benefit schemes.

About 4.77 million people belong to schemes closed to new members. A further 3.4 million are in schemes that have shut to new accruals or are winding up.

The regulator says a further 5 million have left the employer and are deferred members while 4.3 million are pensioners paid by a defined benefit scheme.

Source: the Pensions Regulator

But believe Jacob Rees Mogg if you like. You don’t have a defined benefit pension do you Col?
 
sb_73 said:
How many pensions are affected?
A total of more than 18 million people are affected by the pension crisis in some way. Of these, a little more than 2.7 million people still pay into defined benefit schemes.

About 4.77 million people belong to schemes closed to new members. A further 3.4 million are in schemes that have shut to new accruals or are winding up.

The regulator says a further 5 million have left the employer and are deferred members while 4.3 million are pensioners paid by a defined benefit scheme.

Source: the Pensions Regulator

But believe Jacob Rees Mogg if you like. You don’t have a defined benefit pension do you Col?
Click to expand...

No, I don't.

When did I say I believed Rees Mogg?

Just feel these things get deliberately over exaggerated, both by the media and anyone opposed to the Tories (for whatever reason).

There's little doubt that the markets are dictating a lot of these problems.
A good argument against Capitalism I'm sure you'd argue?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Goldhawk-Road
Here’s an extract from an article written by a Partner in Aon Investments that I read:

For pension funds, the last week of September was a race against time. They knew they had plenty of assets to meet collateral calls and they knew their solvency was improving. However, the money was not where it needed to be and in a crisis environment liquidity becomes king.

Now, pension funds are working to shore up their collateral positions before the end of the Bank of England’s liquidity operation on October 14.

Leverage in the LDI system is reducing rapidly. This means that more money will be required up front to support hedges. This is being driven by advisers, trustees, corporates and the LDI managers who were all looking to avoid a repeat of the last week of September.

Across the industry, we expect to see higher levels of collateral and less leverage. This could mean that in the “new LDI” environment, pension funds hold enough collateral to withstand a 200 basis point or 300bp change in yields, compared with a 125bp or 150bp change previously. Put another way, the multiple of hedging to assets (gearing) is expected to fall from 2x-4x to 1x-3x.

This is a big change. For context, imagine all mortgage holders were suddenly told to reduce their mortgage loan to value ratio from 75 per cent to 50 per cent in a few weeks. It would cause a lot of selling of savings.

Things are no different in the pension world where, to reduce leverage, pension funds must sell other assets.

While deleveraging will cause many pension funds to sell assets, there are a number of long-term investors that are ready to buy assets, potentially at a discount.

These include pension funds that have a long-term time horizon and can tolerate lower levels of liquidity. As with any crisis, particularly one involving liquidity, there will be winners and losers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rangercol
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back