reds8n wrote:
From the Sun with regards to Corbyn



...God yeah, what a monster to think that eh ?

GoatboyBeta wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
From the Sun with regards to Corbyn



...God yeah, what a monster to think that eh ?

Reminds me when they made a big fuss about his opposition to using nukes. Sure Corbyn definitely has his faults. But I wouldn't count not wanting children to go hungry and being against nuclear armageddon among them.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There hasn't been a vote since 2015.

They won a by election a few weeks ago.

And they lost one a few weeks before that.

Labour holding on to Stoke was hardly front page news, but the fact that the Tories stole a seat from Labour, the first government to do so for decades, tells its own story.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
hmm....May ask my local MP what they could be doing.

Maybe MP's could get together and put payrises towards a costco order every month and support constituent foodbanks every month on rotation?

Or put a plan together and actually do something long lasting...

 Kilkrazy wrote:
When I was little every school child got free milk and orange juice. It was considered an important part of public health to make sure that children got a basic ration of vitamins and calcium.

That gradually got eroded in favour of saving money.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'm not sure what calling off the meeting achieves. At worse he would go and nothing would come of it, but better to show willing. Expecting the situtation in Syria to improve by refusing to talk to Russia seems odd.

 Haighus wrote:
I dunno, the US has never been particularly fond of our colonial interests, and have been pretty unsupportive in other examples like the Faulklands. So I doubt that would make much difference in the Gibraltar case.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
I dunno, the US has never been particularly fond of our colonial interests, and have been pretty unsupportive in other examples like the Faulklands. So I doubt that would make much difference in the Gibraltar case.

IIRC it is more complicated than that for the Falklands. I think the USA and most of South America have a mutual defence pact. If I remember the documentary correctly Thatcher had to go and ask for permission to invade the Falklands to check that the US wouldn't come into the conflict on the side of Argentina. The US stayed independent because of the conflicting interests.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
I dunno, the US has never been particularly fond of our colonial interests, and have been pretty unsupportive in other examples like the Faulklands. So I doubt that would make much difference in the Gibraltar case.

IIRC it is more complicated than that for the Falklands. I think the USA and most of South America have a mutual defence pact. If I remember the documentary correctly Thatcher had to go and ask for permission to invade the Falklands to check that the US wouldn't come into the conflict on the side of Argentina. The US stayed independent because of the conflicting interests.

Umm far as I'm awsre the united states let the us task force refuel at a American influenced or controlled to get there.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Things I will never understand #3249857893123

How local Councillors can received pay in excess of that received by the Prime Minister

Now, I don't know if the PM is under or overpaid - that's an irrelevance to this bafflement.

But how can people representing a much lower political station possibly justify claiming a greater reward than the person ostensibly running the country and making the really, really big decisions?

And they do like to jack up their council tax to pay for it, no?

 Haighus wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
I dunno, the US has never been particularly fond of our colonial interests, and have been pretty unsupportive in other examples like the Faulklands. So I doubt that would make much difference in the Gibraltar case.

IIRC it is more complicated than that for the Falklands. I think the USA and most of South America have a mutual defence pact. If I remember the documentary correctly Thatcher had to go and ask for permission to invade the Falklands to check that the US wouldn't come into the conflict on the side of Argentina. The US stayed independent because of the conflicting interests.

Umm far as I'm awsre the united states let the us task force refuel at a American influenced or controlled to get there.

Well, they had an airbase on Ascension island they let us use.

Having looked into it a bit more, yeah, the US was actually unusually cooperative in the case of the Falklands, considering their history with the Monroe doctrine. They kinda settled in a non-inteference, but officially pro-Britain stance, although there were political divisions at a senior US level.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Things I will never understand #3249857893123

How local Councillors can received pay in excess of that received by the Prime Minister

Now, I don't know if the PM is under or overpaid - that's an irrelevance to this bafflement.

But how can people representing a much lower political station possibly justify claiming a greater reward than the person ostensibly running the country and making the really, really big decisions?

And they do like to jack up their council tax to pay for it, no?

I don't get that either.

 loki old fart wrote:


Quite simple really, Local councils only get back hander's from planning proposals, and building contracts. MP's get back hander's from industry banking and foreign governments. So local councilors need it more.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Hang on, the US are sending their Secretary of State to Moscow, may even speak to Putin directly. Yet Boris just pulled out of the first such meeting in years from the UK.

Boris has badly screwed this up making us look incredibly weak and lacking any independence. Boris should go if he hasn't the gumption or skill to handle our own diplomatic affairs.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And indeed democracy, the international market, the WTO rules, human decency, hypocricy.

There's an awful lot she needs to understand.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Haighus wrote:
I dunno, the US has never been particularly fond of our colonial interests, and have been pretty unsupportive in other examples like the Faulklands. So I doubt that would make much difference in the Gibraltar case.

IIRC it is more complicated than that for the Falklands. I think the USA and most of South America have a mutual defence pact. If I remember the documentary correctly Thatcher had to go and ask for permission to invade the Falklands to check that the US wouldn't come into the conflict on the side of Argentina. The US stayed independent because of the conflicting interests.

Umm far as I'm awsre the united states let the us task force refuel at a American influenced or controlled to get there.

Australia's minister for foreign affairs, Julie Bishop says it's her government's priority to focus on a trade agreement with the EU, and expressed concerns about the current tide of economic nationalism taking hold in certain parts of the world.

The deputy leader of the Liberal Party in Dublin today conducting bi-lateral meetings with her counterpart Charlie Flanagan, as well as the Irish-Australian Chamber of Commerce.

“Our priority is to conclude a free trade agreement with the European Union”, Minister Julie Bishop told Newstalk.

“And we see Ireland as a great opportunity for us to work with countries of the EU, through Ireland.”

Much of the economic argument behind the push to leave the EU in Britain was the notion that the UK could be free to do its own bi-lateral trade deals, without Europe having a say over how trade is conducted.

The UK is not free to engage in any official trade negotiations until Brexit divorce negotiations are concluded, and it is no longer a member of the EU.

The Australian government had hoped for the UK to remain with the EU, and a trade working group has been sent to the UK after the vote, but the Foreign Minister said today that Brexit now gives Australia the “opportunity to reset the relationship [with the EU] and enhance our trade an investment ties.”

“We are committed to free trade that is in the interest of the Australian people. It grows our economy; it provides jobs, particularly for young people.”
Nationalism
She also said the current rising tide of protectionism and nationalism in parts of the US, UK and other countries is a “concern” for Australia.

“We take very seriously this rising sentiment of protectionism and economic nationalism and intend to continue to pursue an economic agenda that involves free trade. We are pursuing free trade agreements – we’ve concluded a number including with the North Asian giants of China, Korea and Japan.

"We’ll continue with a free trade agreement, hopefully with the EU.”

She said she also sees Australia increasing trade with "countries like Ireland where we have so many similarities and complimentary economies."

“Australia’s economic strength; our standard of living depends on our ability to sell our goods and services in to the market places around the world, and I believe Ireland has a similar outlook”, she said.

Tired from months of wondering whether their jobs will be moved or cut, foreign employees at some of London’s biggest banks are taking the initiative and asking to be moved back home, according to people with knowledge of the requests.

Staff at Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and HSBC Holdings Plc have volunteered to return to their native countries inside the European Union should their employers need to relocate staff after Brexit, said the people, who asked not to be identified as the discussions are private. At Societe Generale SA, at least two traders have already moved home -- to France and Italy -- in anticipation that the bank might start dispersing its London-based employees across the continent, one of the people said.

Global banks have begun the process of moving some U.K.-based operations to new or expanded trading hubs inside the EU after British Prime Minister Theresa May triggered the formal mechanism for quitting the 28-nation bloc. Firms are preparing for a so-called hard Brexit -- the loss of their right to sell services freely around the region from their bases in the City -- and want to have offices up and running elsewhere before the end of the two-year negotiation period between the U.K. and EU.



Brexit could help reverse a trend: For decades, the brightest university graduates from across the EU have moved to London to pursue careers in finance because that was where the global investment banks had their European headquarters.

HSBC executives have been vocal about plans to relocate as many as 1,000 traders from London to Paris. After U.K. Home Secretary Amber Rudd last year said she would force companies to disclose how many foreign workers they employed to prevent migrants “taking jobs British people can do,” the bank received requests from French employees eager to return home, one of the people said.

Family Waiting

One managing director at another bank who recently moved from Frankfurt to London to run a trading business left his wife and children behind in Germany on the assumption that his job will be relocated there after Brexit anyway. Only if Prime Minister May secures a good deal for the industry from her EU partners will he consider pulling his children out of school and moving the family to London, said the banker, who asked not to be identified because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.

It’s not just job security that bankers are after. Many of the jurisdictions competing for the spoils of Brexit are promising attractive tax incentives for high-net-worth individuals to relocate. The French government has been among the most aggressive, offering some returning nationals and foreigners income tax breaks of up to 50 percent for eight years, and exempting overseas properties and assets from the wealth tax. In February, Italy unveiled a package of tax measures including a “flat tax” of 100,000 euros ($107,000) on all foreign-source income.

Read more: Italy’s efforts to woo banks

Due to talent shortages in most EU financial centers outside London, bank executives are hoping to staff their new EU hubs largely with current employees returning home, according to two people familiar with their firms’ plans. The objective is to save time and money recruiting and training new staff, and avoid having to offer generous packages to move those who aren’t as keen to relocate.

At Citigroup, which last week sent a memo to U.K. staff warning that some "client-facing roles" may be relocated, at least two Italian bankers have offered to be relocated back to Milan, one person said. Foreign bankers at Goldman Sachs, which is considering moving as many as 1,000 bankers to Frankfurt, have made similar approaches to managers.

Spokesmen at Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, HSBC and Societe Generale declined to comment.

London could lose 10,000 banking jobs and 20,000 roles in financial services as clients move 1.8 trillion euros of assets out of the U.K. after Brexit, according to think tank Bruegel. Other estimates range from as much as 232,000 jobs to as few as 4,000. There are about 45,000 EU nationals working in financial services in London, according to PwC data.

London Impact

One Dublin-based headhunter said she’d already seen a spike in inquiries from Irish bankers living in London keen to return if the right jobs came up. None have made the move as banks are still in the early stages of implementing their contingency plans, she said.

London’s high-end real estate market, already suffering after investment banks cut staff and slashed bonuses last year, could be hit again as European deal-makers and traders start to leave. Demand is slowing for rental properties charging between 3,000 pounds ($3,750) and 5,000 pounds a week that are traditionally popular with senior executives in financial services, broker Knight Frank said in a report Monday. In some cases, landlords are having to make double-digit percentage reductions to rents to keep apartments occupied.

“Every time I’m with a group of Irish bankers all the talk around the table is about when they’re going to move back home,” said John Purcell of Purcell & Company, a London-based executive recruitment firm. “If you think it’s inevitable that you’re going to be moved, and you have a pretty good sense of where to, then you’re better off getting in there early so you can get a decent house and get your children into a decent school.”

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Things I will never understand #3249857893123

How local Councillors can received pay in excess of that received by the Prime Minister

Now, I don't know if the PM is under or overpaid - that's an irrelevance to this bafflement.

But how can people representing a much lower political station possibly justify claiming a greater reward than the person ostensibly running the country and making the really, really big decisions?

And they do like to jack up their council tax to pay for it, no?

 reds8n wrote:


Bodes well eh ?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Exports are up, thanks to the weaker pound.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Exports are up, thanks to the weaker pound.

 Compel wrote:
To be fair, that is basically how the world economy works...