Current market carnage - anyone selling or buying?

Sapphire

Glen_Clark wrote: »

For example, Churchill and Thatcher needed an enemy - when there was no enemy to fight they were ousted. (We now know (from the TV programme 'Portillo's State Secrets') that when WW2 finished in 1945 Churchill wanted us to join Germany who we had spent the previous 6 years fighting, and fight Russia who we had spent the previous 6 years supporting - fortunately wiser heads prevailed.

Hm – not sure about this (not sure whether the British public would have put up with the scenario you suggest), especially about the 'wiser heads prevailed'. In effect what happened was that countries such as Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary were put under the yoke of Russia, which had terrible effects on the societies, of course with consequences that reverberate through to today (something that few people learn about in English schools!)…

Now you've managed to make me deviate from the subject of this thread.

Glen_Clark

Sapphire wrote: »

Hm – not sure about this (not sure whether the British public would have put up with the scenario you suggest), especially about the 'wiser heads prevailed'. In effect what happened was that countries such as Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary were put under the yoke of Russia, which had terrible effects on the societies, of course with consequences that reverberate through to today (something that few people learn about in English schools!)…

Now you've managed to make me deviate from the subject of this thread.

Britain declared war on Germany to get Hitler out of Poland, then left Poland with Stalin who was worse. If we could have got rid of Churchill we could have stood aside and let our 2 worst enemies annihilate each other.
As for the subject of this thread/forum - well politics and war has a big effect on it. .

masonic

Malthusian wrote: »

I automatically imagined Al and Bud to be crouched on the sidewalk, which in my mind is the traditional place for a game of dice. Craps is another thing entirely, of course.

Ah, but racing blue specifically mentioned a tabletop

Thrugelmir

Glen_Clark wrote: »

just like today they portray Jeremy Corbyn as a no-hoper, but he keeps winning elections.

Yet to be put to the test of public opinion.

PS one election and that required a surge in new membership.

masonic

Thrugelmir wrote: »

PS one election and that required a surge in new membership.

If that many people could be bothered to join the party in order to vote for him, then that probably isn't a bad start.

bowlhead99

masonic wrote: »

If that many people could be bothered to join the party in order to vote for him, then that probably isn't a bad start.

Well, if you believe the conspiracy theories the surge in membership is just tory supporters paying their three quid to vote Corbyn in because of their expectation that he will split the party and be unelectable in a General...

lawriejones1

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Britain declared war on Germany to get Hitler out of Poland, then left Poland with Stalin who was worse. If we could have got rid of Churchill we could have stood aside and let our 2 worst enemies annihilate each other.
As for the subject of this thread/forum - well politics and war has a big effect on it. .

You might want to do a bit more reading about history im afraid. Hitler did consider us as an ally, but there was an ultimatum: either join with the Axis powers (of which Russia was one) or stand against them. We chose the right option.

In the end, we didn't care about Poland per se, as we had ignored German aggression beforehand. It was that Germany's expansionist policies and military might which could have threatened us that became clear to us in Britain. News was slow to filter through in those days.

Churchill wasn't PM when we declared war, but was appointed part way into the conflict, in 1940 from memory. At that point. We'd already declared war, so getting rid of him would have been a show of weakness that could have reignited Hitlers attempts to invade. Operation Sealion 2.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Looking at the graph the auld Footsie is near the point it was in January 2011

JohnRo

lawriejones1 wrote: »

You might want to do a bit more reading about history im afraid. Hitler did consider us as an ally, but there was an ultimatum: either join with the Axis powers (of which Russia was one) or stand against them. We chose the right option.

In the end, we didn't care about Poland per se, as we had ignored German aggression beforehand. It was that Germany's expansionist policies and military might which could have threatened us that became clear to us in Britain. News was slow to filter through in those days.

Churchill wasn't PM when we declared war, but was appointed part way into the conflict, in 1940 from memory. At that point. We'd already declared war, so getting rid of him would have been a show of weakness that could have reignited Hitlers attempts to invade. Operation Sealion 2.

The winners write the history. The Nazi expansion threatened the British Empire... and Churchill was an insufferable imperialist.

bowlhead99

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Looking at the graph the auld Footsie is near the point it was in January 2011

Is the auld Footsie the UK 100? According to Trustnet benchmarks, FTSE 100's total return over five years to last Friday is about 18.3%.

Or the UK All-Share, total return over five years to last Friday is about 24.6%

Or the All World, total return over five years is about 38.8%

So basically if you invested in one of those three indexes five years ago this week, you'd have grown your wealth by somewhere in the range of a fifth to two fifths, which isn't bad, especially considering the generally fragile economic conditions and the stellar returns of the two years directly before that when emerging from the 2008-9 dip.

You could say it is 'near the point' but if 'near' means almost a 20% return including capital and divs reinvested, that's fine really in an environment when bank base rate has been at 0.5% throughout the entire period.