| Interesting panel on QT tonight! 21:49 - Feb 14 with 6619 views | Lord_Lucan |
N to the Mrs T |  |
| |  |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:32 - Feb 15 with 1551 views | BlueBadger |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 09:42 - Feb 15 by chicoazul |
JRM is a Thatcherite, of course he is. He literally runs a hedge fund. |
He's the classical right-wing liberterian who is strongly in favour of governments not interfering in 'the running of people's lives' until said people happen to be poor, foreign, women or gay. |  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:40 - Feb 15 with 1528 views | chicoazul |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:27 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
So to prove that point you refer to an article about his father !
And yes it does matter what 'wing' he is on. If those very definite allegiances did not matter or signify anything then the Tory party would not be ripping into each other like ferrets in a sack.
You might just as well state that it matters little what faith muslims or jews follow as they both believe in an Ambrahamic god. |
I gave you the article out of interest more than anything.
It's cute that people think someone who voted for raising VAT and against rises in income tax and corporation tax isnt a Thatcherite though.
The ERG group who you refer to are all uber-Thatcherite free marketeer morons who see Brexit as an opportunity to de-tax and de-regulate the UK. |  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:43 - Feb 15 with 1525 views | chicoazul |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:32 - Feb 15 by BlueBadger |
He's the classical right-wing liberterian who is strongly in favour of governments not interfering in 'the running of people's lives' until said people happen to be poor, foreign, women or gay. |
Yes, but that doesnt make him a stereotypical Tory by any means. It does however make him a Thatcherite. Edmund Burke would be spinning in his grave. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:44 - Feb 15 with 1519 views | Championship |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 07:10 - Feb 15 by BlueBadger |
This is the same logic that let Roy Keane get away with it as long as he did.
'Sure we're bottom of the league, no wins in 12, he's alienating players left,right and centre, he's sold off one of our most promising young players and the team's playing terrible football, but his pressers are brilliant'. |
It really isn't, but nice to see you squeeze that one in for about the fifteenth time since I signed up six weeks or so ago. |  | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:44 - Feb 15 with 1518 views | HARRY10 |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:30 - Feb 15 by BlueBadger |
He's the new Boris.
He's posh and a bit 'funny' therefore idiots like him.
I strong;y suspect that were he ever to come to a ministerial role he'd prove to be as incompetent and lazy as Boris. |
The chances of him rising above the back benchers are as likely as that lard ar se Gemma Collins becoming a jockey.
Both him and Johnson use their contrived 'character' to mask the fact that, intellectually, they are not up to it. |  | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:45 - Feb 15 with 1513 views | footers |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:43 - Feb 15 by chicoazul |
Yes, but that doesnt make him a stereotypical Tory by any means. It does however make him a Thatcherite. Edmund Burke would be spinning in his grave. |
You're hot on the Burke lately, buh!
It may also shock and disturb readers to know I was once in the employ of the Rees-Moggs.  |  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:48 - Feb 15 with 1498 views | chicoazul |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:45 - Feb 15 by footers |
You're hot on the Burke lately, buh!
It may also shock and disturb readers to know I was once in the employ of the Rees-Moggs. |
Fluffer? | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:50 - Feb 15 with 1493 views | footers |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:48 - Feb 15 by chicoazul |
Fluffer? |
Before I arrived on the scene it was like he was playing snooker with a rope. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:00 - Feb 15 with 1464 views | Guthrum |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 09:08 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
err no
His is one of privilege and maintaining that 'order' - a true Tory in the classic sense. What Thatcher believed in (among the wacky stuff) was more free market liberalism, whereby it was a free for all. Grab it while you can and let others pick up the pieces afterwards.
That Rees-Mogg is mockingly derided as the 'minister for the 18th century' is not due to any perceived political stance but his absurd affected mannerisms, that are supposed to project some degree of gravitas.
Unfortunately as with Johnson, a 'gimmick' is only as good as the product it is attempting to promote, and that is where Rees-Mogg falls flat. Hence him only ever being a back bencher.
Carefully rehearsed points cannot mask a lack of political nous, or ability. |
He - as did Thatcher - lacks the social conscience (if perhaps paternalistic) reforming urges of traditional Toryism*. Which is rather the antithesis of the pseudo-Darwinian free market libertarianism you mention. Their approach being instead to allow those who can make money to do so and stuff the rest as the "idle and undeserving poor".
Plus his mannerisms are far closer to late Victorian ideals than anything in the 18th century.
* 19th century reformers such as Shaftesbury, Churchill's oversight of the design of the Welfare State, Macmillan and Douglas-Home's response to witnessing the Great Depression. |  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:02 - Feb 15 with 1458 views | Guthrum |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:00 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
No. Rees-Mogg is from the traditional wing of the party. Thatcher was almost the opposite in social and economic liberalism.
Hedge funds have been around decades before Thatcher was even elected as an MP. |
It was her deregulation which allowed them to thrive, tho. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:14 - Feb 15 with 1445 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:44 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
The chances of him rising above the back benchers are as likely as that lard ar se Gemma Collins becoming a jockey.
Both him and Johnson use their contrived 'character' to mask the fact that, intellectually, they are not up to it. |
Blimey
TWTD doesn't half have a load of brain boxes who mix closely with the Westminster elite. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:22 - Feb 15 with 1437 views | footers |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:14 - Feb 15 by Lord_Lucan |
Blimey
TWTD doesn't half have a load of brain boxes who mix closely with the Westminster elite. |
Really doesn't take a government insider to tell you that BoJo and JRM are all style and no substance, tbf. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:35 - Feb 15 with 1419 views | Ryorry |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 10:32 - Feb 15 by BlueBadger |
He's the classical right-wing liberterian who is strongly in favour of governments not interfering in 'the running of people's lives' until said people happen to be poor, foreign, women or gay. |
Did you catch the bit in the discussion about the pregnant ISIS sympathiser where he said "out of human sympathy (or words to that effect) we must allow her back" ... whereupon my irony meter broke! |  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:00 - Feb 15 with 1397 views | HARRY10 |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:02 - Feb 15 by Guthrum |
It was her deregulation which allowed them to thrive, tho. |
No, that is incorrect.
Firstly we do not have a Presidential form of government where actions are carried out by one person. Hedge funds thrived throughout the world. Deregulation had as much impact as Harold Wilson had on the fortunes of the Beatles.
And if you look it was that deregulation it actually reduced competition within banking and led to the concentration in the hands of a big four. One of which was made up of lots of smaller banks and building societies - HSBO.
With less regulation comes unchecked speculation which in this case had HSBO investing heavily in sub prime (bad risk) mortgages and when the US housing market collapsed due to another unregulated market we had the 2008 crash.
Which ironically the UK was saved from going under by state aid.... bailing out the banks.
But then don't let me destroy a good myth. | | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:22 - Feb 15 with 1372 views | Championship |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 11:35 - Feb 15 by Ryorry |
Did you catch the bit in the discussion about the pregnant ISIS sympathiser where he said "out of human sympathy (or words to that effect) we must allow her back" ... whereupon my irony meter broke! |
I'd argue she's way, way more than a sympathiser. | | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:31 - Feb 15 with 1363 views | Guthrum |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:00 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
No, that is incorrect.
Firstly we do not have a Presidential form of government where actions are carried out by one person. Hedge funds thrived throughout the world. Deregulation had as much impact as Harold Wilson had on the fortunes of the Beatles.
And if you look it was that deregulation it actually reduced competition within banking and led to the concentration in the hands of a big four. One of which was made up of lots of smaller banks and building societies - HSBO.
With less regulation comes unchecked speculation which in this case had HSBO investing heavily in sub prime (bad risk) mortgages and when the US housing market collapsed due to another unregulated market we had the 2008 crash.
Which ironically the UK was saved from going under by state aid.... bailing out the banks.
But then don't let me destroy a good myth. |
No, we have a system where the Prime Minister oversees and controls policy emanating from their cabinet of ministers. Even if only grudging acceptance, it would not be put forward against the PM's veto.
I didn't say Thatcher invented that policy, but it was under her watch that it was introduced to the UK. She was tapping into a movement which also drove Reganomics in the US.
Deregulation may have promoted monopolies in the mainstream banking sector, but it also allowed a proliferation of those operating around the fringes, using short selling, leveraged products and the like. No coincidence we had a near-South Sea sized bubble at the end of the '90s with the dot.com fiasco.
I don't see any irony in state aid having baled the economy out in 2008. It being exactly what was needed at the time to avoid an even more disastrous crash. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:32 - Feb 15 with 1360 views | HARRY10 |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:22 - Feb 15 by Championship |
I'd argue she's way, way more than a sympathiser. |
err, it was a 'he' who made that comment
and the joke was on the association between Rees-Mogg and sympathy | | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:32 - Feb 15 with 1361 views | Ryorry |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:00 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
No, that is incorrect.
Firstly we do not have a Presidential form of government where actions are carried out by one person. Hedge funds thrived throughout the world. Deregulation had as much impact as Harold Wilson had on the fortunes of the Beatles.
And if you look it was that deregulation it actually reduced competition within banking and led to the concentration in the hands of a big four. One of which was made up of lots of smaller banks and building societies - HSBO.
With less regulation comes unchecked speculation which in this case had HSBO investing heavily in sub prime (bad risk) mortgages and when the US housing market collapsed due to another unregulated market we had the 2008 crash.
Which ironically the UK was saved from going under by state aid.... bailing out the banks.
But then don't let me destroy a good myth. |
Did you notice JRM, in response to the woman in the clip, supporting Ineos' passionate pleas for de-regulation of gas/oil/fracking ventures such as their own, post Brexit? Could be worth doing some digging to see if he has shares in them, as so many of his Tory colleagues do. | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:42 - Feb 15 with 1353 views | HARRY10 |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:32 - Feb 15 by Ryorry |
Did you notice JRM, in response to the woman in the clip, supporting Ineos' passionate pleas for de-regulation of gas/oil/fracking ventures such as their own, post Brexit? Could be worth doing some digging to see if he has shares in them, as so many of his Tory colleagues do. |
December 2014
'Rees-Mogg was referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog for failing to declare that he was a founding partner and director of Somerset Capital Management — a firm that held investments worth about £3 million in mining firms, £2.4 million in oil and gas producers, as well as £23 million in tobacco companies — when speaking in relevant debates.'
And still the simple minded cannot see what the real intent of this lot is. | | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:48 - Feb 15 with 1346 views | Swansea_Blue |
Didn’t watch (doesn’t seem to be much point these days as we’re just going round in the same loop of insanity). But I guess this demolishes one of the Moggster’s points.
|  |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:50 - Feb 15 with 1339 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:32 - Feb 15 by Ryorry |
Did you notice JRM, in response to the woman in the clip, supporting Ineos' passionate pleas for de-regulation of gas/oil/fracking ventures such as their own, post Brexit? Could be worth doing some digging to see if he has shares in them, as so many of his Tory colleagues do. |
I was very disappointed that no-one challenged him on the Ineos point. We're on the brink of a global environmental disaster and we desperately need internationally-agreed regulations on industries to try and improve things - the EU is an great model of how to do it. Getting out of the EU might improve Ineos' profitability, but it's irrelevant for most of us if the plant is ruined. [Post edited 15 Feb 2019 12:50]
|  | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 13:00 - Feb 15 with 1330 views | HARRY10 |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:48 - Feb 15 by Swansea_Blue |
Didn’t watch (doesn’t seem to be much point these days as we’re just going round in the same loop of insanity). But I guess this demolishes one of the Moggster’s points.
|
And that is the problem with QT, it allows odious liars like Rees-Mogg and Farage to come out with all manner of misinformation with no rebuttal of any kind.
And more disturbingly we see halfwits actually applauding him !
[Post edited 15 Feb 2019 14:33]
| | | |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 14:29 - Feb 15 with 1297 views | Ryorry |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:42 - Feb 15 by HARRY10 |
December 2014
'Rees-Mogg was referred to the parliamentary standards watchdog for failing to declare that he was a founding partner and director of Somerset Capital Management — a firm that held investments worth about £3 million in mining firms, £2.4 million in oil and gas producers, as well as £23 million in tobacco companies — when speaking in relevant debates.'
And still the simple minded cannot see what the real intent of this lot is. |
Ah, brill, well done & thanks! | |
| |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 14:39 - Feb 15 with 1281 views | Ryorry |
| Interesting panel on QT tonight! on 12:50 - Feb 15 by Clapham_Junction |
I was very disappointed that no-one challenged him on the Ineos point. We're on the brink of a global environmental disaster and we desperately need internationally-agreed regulations on industries to try and improve things - the EU is an great model of how to do it. Getting out of the EU might improve Ineos' profitability, but it's irrelevant for most of us if the plant is ruined. [Post edited 15 Feb 2019 12:50]
|
I suspect that on the night it was down to him literally saying their name very quietly! I barely caught it and wondered if I'd heard correctly - and I'm someone whose antennae are constantly up + alert for any mention of fracking/the companies associated with it.
Of course you're right re profit v planet - I'm baffled almost daily by CEOs, politicians, shareholders etc who can only think as far as their ££££ in the bank - do they not have kids, grandkids etc, and can't they see that all the money in the world will be of no use to them if they haven't got a planet to live on?! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
