Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 9 2016, 10:26 PM

World's most dangerous bank.
Anyone who understands the reality of "assets" v debt would understand they are in serious trouble.

Posted by: On the edge Jul 10 2016, 06:14 AM

I'd not disagree. The leave / stay debate is actually all to do with this; the economic system driving the EU. What is really frightening is that our political leaders have for decades chosen to ignore this; in my view, that is the reason why they've been so shocked at the result. It's a great blessing, that even if for the wrong reason, the people gave the right decision.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 28 2016, 04:56 PM

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3711415/How-Deutsche-Bank-s-35trillion-trades-puts-Europe-peril-Warnings-failure-bring-global-crashing-down.html

This is end of days stuff.... people get your cash out of the banking system before the brown stuff hits the fan.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jul 28 2016, 05:17 PM

Self fulfilling advice (prophecy)?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 28 2016, 05:34 PM

True. Like the remainers after the Brexit vote. The difference being of course that Deutsche banks problems make Brexit issues pale into insignificance. BUT people don't associate banking failures with racism like they do Brexit. So it's not on a certain sort of PC persons "agenda". Funny thing is it WILL affect them a **** sight more!!!😉

Posted by: On the edge Jul 28 2016, 05:57 PM

Brexit doesn't seem to have bothered EdF, the French Government owned energy utility, who are (sadly) going ahead with Hinckley Point.

On the other hand, our government owned Lloyds bank is blaming it for it's pre existing but unpopular branch closure programme.

Shome mistake, surely?





Brexit puts a big question mark on the Wharf toilets......

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 28 2016, 07:06 PM

Just an excuse to cut costs. Lots of businesses will do it. They can use brexit to do things they have wanted to do but were scared to...do fear of public opinion. +Lloyd's are probably aware of the Deutsche train wreck to come. You could spin it and say they were being prudent with tax payers money.....

Posted by: On the edge Jul 28 2016, 08:10 PM

We could do with a few more excuses, for instance, as there should be less European directives to implement doesn't Brexit mean we should abolish WBC?

Every cloud and all that

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 28 2016, 09:28 PM

How would people in Newbury feel about that? Personally WBC does nothing for me apart from pick up my bin. I don't use the library or attend any WBC funded event. Lot of dead wood in WBC. They need to be pruned....

Posted by: blackdog Jul 28 2016, 09:29 PM

First we need to spend a couple of years deciding which European directives are actually good news and passing legislation to pass them into UK law. And while we're at it we can review what UK law has been enacted to satisfy European legislation and prepare to repeal some of that.

That said I have no idea how many or which European directives are enforced by WBC?

Posted by: On the edge Jul 28 2016, 09:35 PM

Come on Blackdog.....I've just come up with the excuse, the detail can follow!

If you like, we could test the basic idea with NTC

Posted by: blackdog Jul 29 2016, 09:47 AM

Following Boris, Nigel and Michael's example?

As a Remainer I should perhaps be prepared to pass control to faceless bureacrats in London, but, strangely, I prefer my faceless beureaucrats to be closer in this instance. Though I'd vote for the return of a Berkshire council to replace WBC.

Perhaps we should have abolished Westminster and Whitehall in favour of a proper European government - save all that waste, economies of scale etc.

Posted by: On the edge Jul 29 2016, 01:24 PM

No, it was simply meant as a light hearted comment on the present let's blame Brexit for everything and load a few more unpopular things for good measure.

As a 'leaver' I wholeheartedly agree that in the many years we were 'in' something should have been done about the proliferation of government and officials. Then, I'm an old fashioned liberal as well.

Being in Europe means we are governed by the European Parliament / Council of Ministers, plus the House of Commons / House of Lords, plus (in most cases) a County Council and a District Council and a Parish Council. Then there are those who would impose a tier between Westminster and the Counties; the devolved regional authority. Little wonder it's all so expensive and such a hideous mess.

All well and good having administrators on hand to be accountable locally - but with the structure we have and the restrictions they are under, means no matter the intention, that just doesn't happen.

With devolution and modern communications, there is no reason why proper regional government shouldn't work, leaving a shorn Westminster to look after real state issues only. If it makes people feel comfortable, perhaps town councils who would have an advisory role only.

We really do need to get rid of the late Victorian arrangements we've tried to maintain for so long and exacerbated by joining the EU.

Posted by: blackdog Jul 29 2016, 05:01 PM

Back to an earlier point:

I see the government is now worrying about Chinese involvement, fearing some state sponsored inclusion of software that could prevent the use of the power plant, or somesuch.

Is this really the same governemnt that was talking about a free trade deal with China a few days ago?

We don't trust you, but we'll let you wreak havoc on our market?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 29 2016, 05:56 PM

The government has changed. If I was May I'd like to take my time over a 30 Billion decision. Or would you just go along with it? Big change from being Home Sec to PM.

What would you do?

Posted by: On the edge Jul 29 2016, 05:59 PM

I suspect it's more the credibility of the French financial arrangements. Given the pressures on EdF it's a doubtful project before it even starts. In project management terms at least, a review is absolutely the right thing to do. An example that could have been usefully followed with many other big government projects.

The Chinese already know of our and American fears about the software. It's a known international issue and it wouldn't be so surprising if any other advance nation wasn't at it. For me, an even bigger concern is the French design and eventual operation. It shouldn't be beyond our home IT skills to detect that anything is amiss, or even to wholly isolate the driving software BUT to do either, we'd need the French designer and operators permission.

If this really is so necessary and likely to be so profitable, why has no British consortium cone anywhere near making a proposal? If we don't have the skill to build and run a nuclear power station, what hope Trident?

Posted by: blackdog Jul 29 2016, 09:35 PM

I would like to think that, as a senior cabinet minister I would have paid attention to the issues - some of which (notably secrurity) would surely come across the Home Sec's desk.

Posted by: blackdog Jul 29 2016, 09:43 PM

I'm not convinced we don't have the necessary skills - I think it's just to big a project. Nuclear power stations have, for some reason, become ludicrously costly. Why not make smaller ones based on the established UK expertise in ship-born nuclear plant?

Trident is a simple design in comparison - for which we have the necessary skills here in West Berkshire.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 29 2016, 10:07 PM

How do you know if she raised questions at cabinet but was ignored. Osborne and Cameron were pretty untouchable for a period. Just saying. I'd keep an open mind...

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jul 29 2016, 10:21 PM

It is such a colossal shame that we don't abandon Trident and invest the £200 billion cost into the scientific and engineering research to develop fusion generation. Fission power is relatively green technology but it is still frightfully dangerous, but fusion power is very much more benign and would do wonders for climate change and energy security - both very real and pressing problems.

Posted by: On the edge Jul 30 2016, 06:43 AM

Quite so, lets just hope that the review going on right now isn't too late and manages to come up with a better answer. In project terms, even the government sponsored project management guidelines would indicate its far to big with an almost zero chance of successful delivery against cost and time.

Then there is the nuclear debate itself, which has been going on since the privatisation of the electricity industry. With growing anger, I've watched as establishment politicians and bankers have consorted so that we have arrived here, a situation that puts a massive physical risk to us in foreign hands and at the same time discounts the nations skills and capabilities. Small scale nuclear generating plant is quite feasible and has been for a good few years. For instance, it was thought eminently feasible for off grid demands such as the Channel Islands. Just as safe as any other small nuclear installations the like of which we have round here. However, I just wonder how many of us have been inculcated with the suggestion that used to be current in political circles locally that the nuclear physics used by AWE or Harwell is different to that used by the electricity industry.

Posted by: On the edge Jul 30 2016, 06:48 AM

...and how much better would it be if Aldermaston was known as a centre for the advanced development of energy for civil use. Now that's were national pride starts to kick in.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jul 30 2016, 06:55 AM

Indeed.

Posted by: GMR Jul 30 2016, 04:22 PM

Such a shame for who? It is the duty of any Government (and the majority of Labour MPs know this) this it is the priority of any government to protect their citizens. Most people support the renewal of Trident over anything else. Of course you get nutters like Corbyn who disagree, but they are in the minority and will never get into power, anyway. Even their own MPs don't support their leader. That should tell you something.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 30 2016, 04:33 PM

Peace and love man. Your really affecting my karma.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 30 2016, 05:28 PM

I did say...crystal balls and all....😉

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36932027

Posted by: On the edge Jul 30 2016, 06:06 PM

First, yes the MPs not supporting their leader does tell you something. In essence, it tells you what's wrong with the Labour Party! If I want a Tory MP I'd rather vote for a real one; Coke is better than Tesco Cola.

Second, I'm not convinced that most people do support the renewal of Trident, particularly when they actually think about it. We are simply bring told that by the Government, the very people who told us most people wanted to stay in Europe.

Third, yes, it's a prime duty of any Government to protect its citizens, but who is it protecting them from? I hope it isn't France or China, they will already have their own response on our soil if we back Hinkley!

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 31 2016, 07:31 PM

Banking.... Italy first followed by Germany? Soros knows.....

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Sep 27 2016, 06:37 PM

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-26/it-all-has-very-2008-feel-it-deutsche-bank-news-just-keeps-getting-worse

Worth a read..... Is this why Merkels telling all Germans to stock up with food and water?