The FTSE

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

View attachment 152219

Hold my beer.

I guess the Truss debacle is a good example of parliament acting to overrule a party leader.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

I guess the Truss debacle is a good example of parliament acting to overrule a party leader.

It was a terrible example of popularity politics intefering with economic policy.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

It was a terrible example of popularity politics intefering with economic policy.

Populist politics is in my book. Low IQ politics.

Truss put a campaign together that was pure gravy for the circa 200k tory party membership.

But she failed completely to think beyond winning and understanding the implications of her policy. And in the face of warnings about the lack of substance the tory party members just voted or tax cut gravy. It's notable that Kwarteng was her Chancellor. By all accounts he has a very strong cv and could be described as an intellectual heavyweight. Yet he got wrapped up in the delusion.

 

[BlueHammer85]

You seem unable to see the bigger picture.
Not my problem tbh so there is no cause or need for your foul mouth attacks because words on the internet.
Like i said, go have a break, you are wound up.

You’re the only one making yourself look a idiot and everyone can see that.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

You’re the only one making yourself look a idiot and everyone can see that.

Maybe so.
No need for the crass insults though eh?
Just debate the points and i'll debate back. If the points are valid, i'll learn something.

I'm ok with being wrong sometimes.

 

[hampshireblue]

Oddly enough, i don't worry much about what my pension(s) will be tbh.
They will rise and fall with the winds and generally, i haven't much say on it.
I would hope the goverments of the world have a broader and longer term viewpoint than the few miserable years i will have left after i retire lol.

It depends what age you are. As you say markets rise and fall but there will be many that will be having all of their retirement plans (something you don't seem to have going off your comment above) drastically changed. There will be some working a notice period thinking their invested retirement pot was enough when they gave their notice, only to find they are now maybe 20% shy of that amount. YOU may well be happy to go into retirement on a wing and a prayer but fortunately most of don't and do plan not to be a burden on the state apart from drawing the state pension.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

It depends what age you are. As you say markets rise and fall but there will be many that will be having all of their retirement plans (something you don't seem to have going off your comment above) drastically changed. There will be some working a notice period thinking their invested retirement pot was enough when they gave their notice, only to find they are now maybe 20% shy of that amount. YOU may well be happy to go into retirement on a wing and a prayer but fortunately most of don't and do plan not to be a burden on the state apart from drawing the state pension.

I'm not yet at the point of retirement.
At a reasonable time before i get there (5 years?) my pension funds will be moving into low risk mode.

This is standard practice IIANM and i see no reason to do anything other.

Whatever is in that pot when i give up working will be it. My pension is my house. I'll have a roof over my head and enough cash to potter about and not freeze/starve to death.

 

[ganganvince]

View attachment 152219

Hold my beer.

Correct me if I am wrong (often am) but our system allowed parliament to remove her easily don't think the US has that option?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I'm not yet at the point of retirement.
At a reasonable time before i get there (5 years?) my pension funds will be moving into low risk mode.

This is standard practice IIANM and i see no reason to do anything other.

Whatever is in that pot when i give up working will be it. My pension is my house. I'll have a roof over my head and enough cash to potter about and not freeze/starve to death.

But and it's a big but, for every Mr Grumpy there will a 1000s of other people who don't think like that and who will naturally want some financial security going forward, these reckless actions are ruining that option for millions.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

Correct me if I am wrong (often am) but our system allowed parliament to remove her easily don't think the US has that option?

Over there, they usually just shoot any politicians they don't like....

 

[Mr Grumpy]

But and it's a big but, for every Mr Grumpy there will a 1000s of other people who don't think like that.

I don't disagree.

..who will naturally want some financial security going forward,

Short termism with your pension isn't the pathway to financial security. We are barely through the froth regarding the numbers.

these reckless actions are ruining that option for millions.

Reckless for who? The US?
The US is doing this for itself. (Who is precisely whom it should be for)

 

[One Fan Clapping]

Thanks for the last comment.

I did a bit of research at the weekend on the issue of tarrifs.
It is not black and white (Warren Buffet is thrilled!).

Also, one has to be realistic. The Trump administration or any administration isn't doing things because they want to make things worse. Yes, sometimes shit goes badly wrong but there is usually a solid rationale behind key rules and policies. I am cynical enough to think that generally, politicians don't get much say in the really important stuff. It's the mandarins in the back room who really pull the strings and if something was really off, those strings wouldn't get pulled.
There is a team of highly paid professionals behind these tarrifs who must think its adventagous for the US. It is difficult though for some to look past the immediate politics of the front man and it is not like every other chump in the hot seat hasn't promised tarrifs themselves.

I like to look at these things on a longer basis. How many of the "Controversial" decisions taken by politicians actually get reversed when the othe crew get elected? Very few in reality because most of the time, it is the facts that dictate the reponses, not the politics.

Of course, this could all be a huge lump of politics and gamesmanship by the US to get more favourable trading conditions for itself. One thing that did pop up in my research is the US debt burden. It seems that only by doing what it is doing can it begin to lessen that.

What is that old saying? Follow the money!

Hmm.

He may well have a team of capable economists behind him but I get the feeling nobody can ever say no to him. Or if they do they’re sacked in days.

It’s his way or the highway. I firmly believe this.

 

[Norbert D]

I don't disagree.

Short termism with your pension isn't the pathway to financial security. We are barely through the froth regarding the numbers.


Reckless for who? The US?
The US is doing this for itself. (Who is precisely whom it should be for)

No Trump is doing it for his latest grift. Trusting the worlds economy to a felon who's gone bankrupt multiple times isnt a good thing.

 

[flook]

Over there, they usually just shoot any politicians they don't like....

well done, you've finally said something I can get behind

 

[hampshireblue]

I'm not yet at the point of retirement.
At a reasonable time before i get there (5 years?) my pension funds will be moving into low risk mode.

This is standard practice IIANM and i see no reason to do anything other.

Whatever is in that pot when i give up working will be it. My pension is my house. I'll have a roof over my head and enough cash to potter about and not freeze/starve to death.

So you actually do care/worry about what you pension will be as you are, correctly, stating you will de-risk as you approach retirement.

 

[Mr Grumpy]

So you actually do care/worry about what you pension will be as you are, correctly, stating you will de-risk as you approach retirement.

Sorta.

Better to say that i won't be micromanaging it in a panic as i reach retirement. I'm hoping the job is done by then.
Of course, those safe options (gold/Bonds, Cash etc) can also tank whilst the unsafe options (Stocks) soar so there are no guarantees.

Pension planning is like financial gambling with a 5 year hysterisis :)

 

[city2]

Thanks for the last comment.

I did a bit of research at the weekend on the issue of tarrifs.
It is not black and white (Warren Buffet is thrilled!).

Also, one has to be realistic. The Trump administration or any administration isn't doing things because they want to make things worse. Yes, sometimes shit goes badly wrong but there is usually a solid rationale behind key rules and policies. I am cynical enough to think that generally, politicians don't get much say in the really important stuff. It's the mandarins in the back room who really pull the strings and if something was really off, those strings wouldn't get pulled.
There is a team of highly paid professionals behind these tarrifs who must think its adventagous for the US. It is difficult though for some to look past the immediate politics of the front man and it is not like every other chump in the hot seat hasn't promised tarrifs themselves.

I like to look at these things on a longer basis. How many of the "Controversial" decisions taken by politicians actually get reversed when the othe crew get elected? Very few in reality because most of the time, it is the facts that dictate the reponses, not the politics.

Of course, this could all be a huge lump of politics and gamesmanship by the US to get more favourable trading conditions for itself. One thing that did pop up in my research is the US debt burden. It seems that only by doing what it is doing can it begin to lessen that.

What is that old saying? Follow the money!

Hmm.

Most governments are ruled by people in the background, look at Starmer who is fucking clueless

 

[BlueHammer85]

Most governments are ruled by people in the background, look at Starmer who is fucking clueless

Everyone says that about every PM, after the successive Tory PMs we’ve had I think Starmer looks far more credible.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I don't disagree.

Short termism with your pension isn't the pathway to financial security. We are barely through the froth regarding the numbers.


Reckless for who? The US?
The US is doing this for itself. (Who is precisely whom it should be for)

Yes reckless for the US, for the reasons I stated.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Everyone says that about every PM, after the successive Tory PMs we’ve had I think Starmer looks far more credible.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Let's see where we are at the end of the Parliament. I would say the economy isn't looking so great at present based on the GDP figures we have seen. He also needs to stand up to Trumps ridiculous tariffs but that is probably best done in unison with others , like Canada the EU, Japan and Aus and even China if possible.