Well gents, David Cameron was just named the British PM by his distant relative, the Queen. What does this mean for banking in the UK ?
(I have a feeling that their Conservative party is more liberal than our Democratic party. At least they are better than the full on socialist Labour party.
| +89 | GF doesn’t care about her looks | 57 | 5h | |
| +57 | Affair with my Associate… In Desperate Need for Advice | 23 | 1d | |
| +50 | How to sound more eloquent? | 19 | 1m | |
| +40 | 400k/year in HVAC sales? | 26 | 1d | |
| +34 | WSO Ranking On Resume??? | 9 | 22s | |
| +33 | Would you rather live alone in an outer borough or with roommates in Manhattan? | 23 | 2d | |
| +28 | Why do people listen to Jim Cramer Investing Advice? | 11 | 4h | |
| +27 | Carnivore Diet | 12 | 5h | |
| +26 | Is my boss gaslighting me? | 3 | 1d | |
| +23 | Chaotic Insane investment banker who passed away in the 90s or 2000s | 12 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Good news for bankers.
The UK Conservative Party is certainly NOT more liberal than the US Democrats
Here is a GENERAL spectrum of the 5 parties:
LEFT-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RIGHT
Liberal-Democrats (UK)------Labour (UK)---Democrats (US)----Conservatives(UK)--Republicans(US)
The conservatives can generally be seen as socially liberal and economically conservative. How it should be.
There was an article on eFinancialCareers about this a few days ago.
Here it is: http://news.efinancialcareers.co.uk/News_ITEM/newsItemId-25301
I wouldn't use the term socially liberal for the UK Conservative party.
Lib-dems and Labour? yes. Conservatives? socially moderate at best.
It depends on what your social frame of reference looks like. To a Republican who opposes abortion and gay marriage, I imagine they look plenty liberal. I'd say an unbiased observer would agree they're socially moderate though.
Anyway, yes, the coalition is good for the UK in the short run, but I really don't see how this seems a sustainable coalition to anyone; granted, I am an expert on neither UK politics nor coalition politics generally, but do the liberal democrats and the conservatives have anything in common? There is only so much the liberal democrats will be willing to tell their back-benchers to vote for; if the UK has to start dealing with free votes, does that really seem like the fastest past to fiscal rectitude?
I personally think Labour and Lib Dems let the media run this election (note that I support the conservatives), and, more importantly, the aftermath - combined, they polled significantly ahead of the tories, but seemed to blithely accept the storyline that the conservatives had been given a mandate to lead, and that it was their duty to stand aside. Clearly Brown had to go, but a lib-lab-etc coalition seems to me what the results of the poll called for. I don't want to make a judgement call on this, but before the lib dems start clamouring for PR & enhanced democracy, they really ought to make use of the democracy they have.
Thing is, Brown recommended to the Queen that Cameron be made Prime Minister. So once the Queen heard that, she almost instantly made Cameron the PM. Thing is, the Lib-Dems got shafted. They had considerable sway and could have forced the party they joined to endorse the PR system in exchange for being in power; Labour, I feel, would have yielded to that demand. But now that the Tories are in power, it seems unlikely that they will get that since the Torries are opposed to it. The Tory party would bleed if they switch to a PR system, which will probably not happen.
As an arch Conservative, I don't trust the Tory party. In fact, I think that the Republican party has too much stupid and not enough true conservatism. Clinton, fiscally, was probably one of the most conservative Presidents over the past 50 years AND he got his dick sucked, baller. He is one democrat I would not mind voting for; even though I am against abortion, I am pro all that gay shit.
The coalition can't possibly hold - the ideological differences are too great. Coalitions can hold, for example Australia was governed by one for more than a decade - however in Oz the Liberals and Nationals are both centre-right parties with many common policies.
A Lib/Con coalition will just involve a lot of horse trading rather than any true common policies. In my opinion cable should move even lower over the next few months due to the ensuing uncertainty. The plus side for the economy is that the Lib Dem Treasurer, Vince Cable (former chief economist at Shell) actually has a clue whereas Osbourne (his Conservative equivalent) is has all the intelligence of an eggplant.
I foresee another election within the next twelve months in which the Conservatives gain an outright majority or get close enough to go it alone as a minority government.
Interesting to note that in England (as opposed to the UK) the Conservatives won well over half of the seats - it is the Scottish and Welsh (where well over half of the population lives off the state either through benefits or working in the public sector) which prevented an outright majority - as someone living in London this really pisses me off as both 'countries' have their own parliaments over which Westminster has no jurisdiction, yet Scottish and Welsh MPs are able to affect legislation for the whole of the UK. Time to let the Scots have that independence they apparently want so badly...
Pinkbanker, I would have to disagree on the PR point, this would be an absolute disaster - there is virtually zero chance of any one party ever winning >50% of the vote in the UK. This would effectively keep the Lib Dems in power as the minority in some form of coalition into perpetuity. I also don't agree the Lib Dems got shafted seeing as they actually won even fewer seats than the last election despite 'Cleggmania'.
You've got to be kidding me, have you read Vince Cable's policies? To quote some guy of efinancialnews, he wants to "restrict cash bonuses to £2.5k, to reveal the identity of people earning more than £200k, and to impose a capital gains tax rate of up to 50% – even on SMEs, which are the engine of jobs growth in this country."
Guy sounds like a socialist nutter.
Nah, I think the anti-banker stuff comes from the party hardliners (they are a left wing party after all), not Cable. Certainly in the televised debate between Cable, Darling and Osbourne, Cable came across as the most knowledgeable and experienced by far. I'd feel far more comfortable with him in No. 11 than Osbourne who I'm quite certain is actually a retard. Ridiculous policies like you've mentioned above are populist rhetoric for the party's artsy fartsy hippy base - I'm sure Clegg and Osbourne are fully aware these could never be implemented and have no real desire to do so.
Putting up CGT (which has now been agreed in principle by both sides of the coalition) is indeed anti-business and job creation, but the hole needs to be plugged somehow and income tax is already very high (No way will CGT go anywhere near 50%). Personally I'd scrap Jobseekers allowance and pull names out of a hat to sack 20% of the civil service to reduce the deficit on the basis very few of them do anything useful anyway but I accept that may be politically unworkable...
Repellendus a ut tenetur aut voluptas. Dignissimos consectetur voluptas possimus est explicabo ea. Fuga sed esse dicta modi enim a.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...