Who should be next UK PM?

Be specific please Mickeyfinn...removal of which regulations are you referring to?

Ads, firstly, you mean Vulture Funds.  There are no such things as Vulture Funders.  

Secondly, on the whole, you are correct that Vulture Funds or Hedge Funds or your Pension Fund as an Investor is not regulated except in terms of what it invests in.  The target of So called Vulture Funds are failing, illiquid debts that have low prices because they are usually already in default with little or no prospect of recovery.  They are usually purchased for a few pence on the pound.  They then choose to sit back and wait until they see an opportunity to secure a good return by blocking debt restructuring or by suing to obtain assets.  The most usual target is failing Sovereign Debt. 

In the case of mortgages, it is completely normal practise for blocks to be bought and sold in the secondary market.  Sometimes as securitised debt but sometimes the full mortgage book.  It provides liquidity, gap management, and a source of refunding for on going or failing lenders   It means that the private sector takes on the risk rather than the Government in those cases.   

When a mortgage or car loan or credit card debt or any debt you can name Ie student loans is sold on the borrower should be notified and the terms must not be any worse than the original debt covenent set out   

I feel you are flogging a very old and very dead horse here.   It has been done this way for centuries and has no bearing on the debt crisis.   That came about because of poor lending practises and poor risk management by people and companies that bought repackage sub-prime debt.   The hint was in the name; sub-prime meant it was low quality.

Thanks Perrypower but in that article relating to this EU directive it quotes

“Instead of making the sub-prime loans that formed part of these securities safer by mixing them with higher quality loans, the sub-prime loans infected the rest of the sector, until major investment banks could no longer put a price on certain securitisation vehicles.”

So who is to say they won’t repeat this failure?

Also are you saying that there is not a likelihood of reoccurrence of bad lending practice and poor risk management when Vulture Funds are picking up the debt and not regulated? Where is the disincentive to Banking bad practice if the Banks just keep offloading their debt in this way?

Is it in effect a dead horse as you suggest, when these concerns are now being expressed in Ireland as the article implies?

The article went on to suggest that “A proposed new EU Directive aims to develop a secondary market for non-performing loans and poses a serious threat to the rights of borrowers and consumers”

and also

“That’s why it is so important that Irish campaigners highlight the massive problems that we have experienced – from the NAMA debacle to the mass sell-off of distressed loans to unregulated vulture funds.

It is not a model to follow but a lesson in what to avoid.

The debt vultures will be encouraged to spread their wings and move from operating mainly in Ireland and Spain, where they are currently concentrated, to operating across the EU.

A private equity fund will be able to register in one member state and get a ‘passport’ to operate in any EU state, while only being bound by the regulations in place in the state where it is registered.”

So the inference is being made that this is of concern NOW, and lessons do not appear to have been learned.

The list [of EU rules] stretches from banking and financial services, to agriculture and fisheries. 

It will be an opportunity for this country to get rid of some of the burdensome regulation that has accreted over the last 44 years

"Let us leave and then the Conservative Party at the next election needs to say, ‘we can reduce the cost on business and on individuals by reducing regulations which will improve our competitiveness, our productivity and therefore ultimately our economy.’”

Boris Johnson

Re BJ,

 He quoted “ some regulation” so until we know what regulation it’s difficult to draw conclusions. 

All too suitably vague!

On another thread Mickeyfinn wrote in relation to Jeremy Hunt:

“Jeremy Hunt has said he's willing to let businesses and peoples lives go to the wall in a no deal exit as simply part of the cost of leaving. That reveals all in Tory thinkspeak.”

But according to this, JH made mention of a relief fund,..... see the following countdown to Brexit (6 hours ago).

https://www.investmentweek.co.uk/investment-week/news/3006026/brexit-blog-hunt-outlines-no-deal-plans

”Despite having voted Remain in the 2016 referendum, the foreign secretary said he will push through a no-deal Brexit, even if it destroys some businesses, and has pledged a £6bn relief programme for the food and agriculture industry in particular, which would face tariffs. 

He is expected to say in the speech: "I will mitigate the impact of no-deal Brexit on you and step in to help smooth those short-term difficulties. If we could do it for the bankers in the financial crisis, we can do it for our fishermen, farmers and small businesses now."

So further detail appears to be emerging as we speak!

Perhaps  best we all don’t jump to conclusions too soon, before the contenders are pinned down further on the detail !

Much depends of course on the speed of ongoing negotiations, but not holding my breath given that the EU are renowned for last minute negotiated deals!

looks like the "fiscally responsible " tories are about to borrow £billions to alleviate the economic shock of Brexit. Considering their austerity policies  slashing police numbers and the NHS budgets have resulted in a national debt of £1trillion in 2010 increasing to £1.8 trillion last year I suppose we should be grateful they've found the same money tree they used to bribe the DUP....but of course Corbyn and Labour going to that same money tree will bankrupt the country. 

It's no coincidence that Brexit invades every process these days, every discussion. The economy in Britain is stalled, house prices falling and Sterling stuck in the doldrums at very low levels. It's likely to continue to haunt an entire political generation for years. There's no getting away from it. The impact on Europe and Britain is likely to be profound. What is in reality a Tory party schism has now spread and infected the wider population and European nations.

I don't believe any good will spring from it. History will not be kind to they who are responsible for supporting it.

We’re all doomed! 

Perhaps that 38 billion might come in handy after all....

Seriously though it is important to review the detail and seek out solutions and strive for sensible mutually acceptable deals  for the benefit of us all, and educated debate is essential to keep abreast of the goings on from all quarters.....including the EU ! ;) and what’s happening in terms of other trade deals with those outside the EU. 

Where does this £39 billion figure come from? I thought in truth we only paid about £13 billion and then had a rebate.

Even the other figure of £350 million a week don't make £39 billion.

The 39 billion represents current and future spending committments the UK signed up to. Its a national obligation not a bargaining chip.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-divorce-bill/

The UK's EU membership fee. The UK pays more into the EU budget than it gets back. In 2017 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EUspending on the UK was forecast to be £4 billion. So the UK's 'net contribution' was estimated at nearly £9 billion. 3rd Dec 2018

So what is this then, seems a far cry from other figures.

Is the difference related to future commitments? But if we won’t be benefactors from these future commitments once we come out????? 

It would help to know the specific detail of how these figures have been arrived at.... again the devil is in the detail.

It's always US versus THEM isn't it instead of inclusivity of community. Presumably, the negotiating bodies in the Uk government arrived at a consensus agreement with the EU that the 39 billion was justified. Something ads in particular constantly supports. There are no winners in a divorce both sides lose. It's a failure on every level.

The broad details of what the payments will cover is available but remember it is a negotiated settlement not a bill at the end of a meal.  It is much smaller than originally suggested so in this case T May did a good job.  

it includes Pension Liabilities out to 2064 amongst other things.  

If the UK does not pay it, it will end up in court and could be bigger or smaller and will affect our standing in the iInternational Capital Markets.  

Just thought I would forward an article  by Sir Noel Malcolm, Senior Research Fellow, All Souls College Oxford.

It makes for interesting reading when trying to establish the objective truth from those wishing to remain.

Article Titled

Universities and a ‘no-deal’ Brexit: some rather desperate misrepresentations

(Published 7 Jan 2019.)

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/oxford-and-brexit/brexit-analysis/universities-and-no-deal-brexit

Or, it is a slanted view from a Tory Academic who has consistently been critiqued in his work for, his "reluctant to examine and document more carefully and critically"

Strange is it not that one-sided internet links keep being posted on here using the English language most of us don't use. Rambling posts that appear to be lifted from academic textbooks that chip away with critics of the Liberal democratic order...Never any of the normal personal references to personal experience or personal problems.

Maybe I'm just suspicious by nature. 

This is so crazy that whenever an alternative viewpoint is posted how the suggestion is made that it is false news or has hidden intent? 

Sad to try and consistently personally undermine those who query the remain arguments, and are perfectly entitled to use whatever form of English language they like and are perfectly entitled to make their own judgements and communicate, just as the remain arguments are communicated. We are all entitled to make our own judgements and your recent posts and personal messages on the pm messaging facility are inciteful and uncalled for..

Enough of these crazy inferences  Mickeyfinn. 

This message was last edited by ads on 05/07/2019.

Ads

Perhaps we should set them h7ntingbthe background and achievements on the latest EU appointments, even Der Spiegeleisen is rather scathing about the antics and abilities of the new EU President.