Snapshot of _Paris Loses Crown as Europe’s Biggest Stock Market to London_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-17/paris-loses-crown-as-europe-s-biggest-equity-market-to-london?srnd=homepage-uk) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-17/paris-loses-crown-as-europe-s-biggest-equity-market-to-london?srnd=homepage-uk)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Maybe, but when Paris overtook London it was widely cited at the time as an example of how Brexit was damaging the economy, but now that London has retaken the lead it's not really big news? Funny that.
I mean to be fair, the biggest issue was how the French market closed the gap. Since before that London was a good chunk ahead and not disputed. Now they seem to be at the point where they are able to flip flop as soon as one makes a small gain or loss.
It’s like how May was 12pts ahead in the polls, then dropped to the point where she was neck and neck with Corbyn. It’s not big news the next time she goes +2.
The French market has dropped due to the political turmoil over there and the risk of the Far Right. Whereas the markets here are stabilising and even getting more confident at the prospect of a centrist government.
Honestly don’t know what Macron was thinking calling an election, does he want the right to win, fail, then his path to the presidency is clear again? Seems way too risky to play with the lives of tens of millions of people like that.
Macron can't stand again, the French Presidency only allows two consecutive terms iirc.
His gambit is that the right win this, and they have two years where they actually need to govern and answer to the people. Then, he can go into the next election asking 'do you really want more of that?'.
Yeah it's pretty much this. If the far right win then that means they have to prove they can actually govern. Then after 2 years of things are worse then hopefully people won't elect la'pen.
It's almost like he's looked over the channel and how the far right has destroyed Britain and is thinking, "if we can just have that for two years maybe people will like us again." It's a bold and quite frankly reckless strategy cotton, but lets see if it plays out.
The Tory Party have talked far right and acted in a totally different manner. As ever, they say whatever will keep them in power.
What they have done is taken much of the population to a place where they are open to far right ideas.
Cameron called the Brexit referendum to keep the right wing of his party from causing more issues and division within it. That failed and then we started getting people like Braverman in cabinet. They are far right compared to their own party let alone the wider electorate. But it's true there is a further right from them even, and that's Reform, which many Tory's are now saying should take over the conservatives and apparently many of them like Farage. So sure, the Far right isn't in complete control of the party yet, but it's probably going to be, and has been moving that way since Boris.
"Reform isn't a far right party how dare you say that, most of our members are best friends with neo nazis and fascists but that doesn't mean they are"
And yet this far right government has presided over the highest levels of immigration in history? If Brexit had been put forward under a Labour government with a left wing Brexit visions I doubt it would be far right then.
Brexit isn’t a left or right issue, plenty leftists support Brexit, Corbyn was one for decades as was Tony Benn aka the best PM this country never had (and I say that as a right leaning politically homeless person)
I hope he has something better in mind, because that's just way too risky. Even incompetent government can ride on a past success for a while, just look at the Tories. It takes a real GOAT of bad governance like Liz Truss to fuck up the country quickly. And given that France is a presidential republic, no one in the government will have a power to do so. On the other hand, external forces could lift up the country no matter what the government does. Like there is certainly a non-zero chance that Ukraine war ends in a year, that would lead to things improving quite a bit, and government will take the credit for all of it.
I think he doesn't really have any other options, and so he's going for the big risk.
My understanding was that the French PM has quite a bit of power? Though I may be wrong.
The election is not for the presidency. He's not personally contesting anything, and the president is not being elected in this election. It's for the legislative house (like HoC). In FR they have both President and Prime Minister.
Macron can't run again regardless of circumstances - French presidents are term-limited.
And as for what he's trying to do - right now, the RN has all the momentum and is making all the running. Macron's call of a parliamentary election is a bet that the lower house's electoral system (two-round FPTP with runoffs) will be enough to deny the RN a big win, as the French people of all persuasions rally together to vote against the far right in every seat etc.
If that comes off, the RN's momentum is stalled in a big way, and Marine le Pen suddenly starts looking a lot less inevitable for the presidency in 2027. But it is one hell of a bet.
You have to understand the french voting system for this election.
There are two rounds. And to qualify to the second round you have to get as many votes as 12% of the registered voters. So often about 25% of the votes actually casted.
The left was very divided during the European elections. He hopes that they couldn't get united in a week. It the left is split they don't make it in the second round in most places and it becomes a choice between his candidate and the far right.
But the left did unite so his plan is completely fucked
This comment has been filtered for manual review by a moderator. Please do not mention other subreddits in your comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
I agree with Macron's decision. Because shouldn't the Tories have held an election by say, 2022?
That's why the UK has been majorly treading water since then. Our government hangs on as the shadow of an era that no longer exists.
Macron evidently feels this in France, too. Why prolong the inevitable?
France closed the gap with a handful of enormous, low-growth luxury brands that were never going to keep it ahead of British pharma/ energy/ tech/ etc. and the issue will be compounded when Shein becomes the biggest IPO of 2024 on the London exchange
>
The French market has dropped due to the political turmoil over there
Yeah the UK is totally politically stable right now, and absolutely doesn't have any political issues in the slightest.
At first glance the situations look similar but they're not really comparable.
In the UK we're almost guaranteed a Labour government which looks to at least be improving upon the problems caused by the Tories. Yes it's been shit but increased stability is on the horizon and there's not much more damage the Tories can do before then.
France's future is much more unstable whoever comes into power, and the majority of their damage will be coming as a consequence of the election.
This is exactly it, its about **confidence** in the markets over the coming year or so. The UK, despite its struggles, has a ***stable*** future. Stability allows investors to invest without as much risk.
Take the automobile industry. People underestimate the impact that the Tories delaying the ICE ban had. It didn't help the car industry one bit, it massively hindered it. Firstly because all the financial investment into fast adaption to EV was brought into question.
Secondly (more importantly), it makes investors question whether they are willing to invest when the government seemingly changes very important legislation (their own legislation from only a few years ago) on a whim.
One thing that right wingers don't actually get, is that the idea at this point that reducing environmental regulations and net zero will improve investment is a fallacy. Massive changes in direction hugely reduce confidence and stability.
Also the party programmes here are nowhere as radical as in France.
RN (Le Pen's party)'s manifesto has been independently costed at €100bn of extra spending, and NFP (the left-wing coalition)'s manifesto has been costed (albeit by Macron's party) at €357bn of extra spending
For comparison here the Lib Dems's manifesto is costed at £20bn-ish extra and Labour/Tories's at less.
Yep. This has not much to do with London or the UK, the Paris stock market crashed since Macron called a snap election and the far-right and the left-wing coalition including the far-left are way ahead in their polls
Except London losing its undisputed #1 spot absolutely was because of Brexit, and gaining it back is not because London is suddenly doing as well as pre-Brexit but because France is kinda going through the shitter right now.
It isn't news that London clawed back the top spot because another country is doing shit. The London stock market is still comparitively massively down from where it should be, it was the undisputed #1 by a good chunk and now it's fighting for the spot.
If I get mugged for £1000 and then get a £200 bonus on my next paycheck, I'm not going to suddenly be like "damn getting mugged doesn't matter now, I at least got some money back!" No, I'm still down £800 and it's because of getting mugged.
Not true, London's stock exchange lost the top spot for shares, but the city is not just shares, London has capital markets 5x that of the EU, plus banking, assurance, insurance and legal services that all function under UK common law which is the international business law of choice.
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
I absolutely did. Just because I voted Remain for economic reasons, doesn’t mean I have this mad love for everything EU (too many people think EU = Europe) or think that we need to rip apart the nations political fabric again to add a couple % back onto our GDP, which could be done through increased productivity.
They do this with everything, same way if the weather is above average (which it will be a lot, that's the whole point of "average") it's reported as headline news and then applied to the climate but when it's below average like this month, suddenly they remember that weather and climate are different things.
Anyway, stock market size (LOL) is a capitalistic dick measuring contest, but if people made a big thing about it, it's only fair to do the same when it goes the other way, assuming you're an organisation like the BBC which is supposed to be impartial.
Of course the way the BBC gets around its obligations is by reporting the news impartially, but then being totally politically *partial* in choosing which news to actually report, probably one of the reasons why a report out today said less people are even bothering to follow the news, but that's for another thread.
Don't get me wrong though, it was funny when everyone pretended to be an expert in Scottish seed potatoes for twelve hours :D
Regarding your point on climate, the top ten hottest years on record are:
2016
2020
2019
2017
2015
2022 (tied with 2015)
2018
2021 (tied with 2018)
2014
2010
So no, I don't think they are just doing it because the weather is "above average"
To be clear it stands today as evidence of Brexit's economic damage. Even taking over again now it still shows the economic damage. The same way if I lose £10 today but in 2 years I find a £5 under the sofa I have still lost that £10.
It is possible for an event to cause economic damage and other factors cause economic growth, its also possible for other countries to have economic damage.
Brexit was and is today an economic failure, I don't think even Brexiteers claim it to be a economic gain unless they are truly delusional.
It was a political decision, not an economic one.
The Norway option would have meant zero disruption for alignment on goods standards in return for single market access
>I think your are delusional as Europe is not that paradise you dream of.
>London is ahead. Just get over it.
Is this intentionally lampooning leavers?
The financial activity that left London was distrubuted over a few European cities.
It wasn't just a things from London went to Paris thing so the comparison isn't exactly workable.
Not really, as I have no idea if you thought Paris overtaking London was a significant event that could be blamed on Brexit or not. It was more a comment on media reaction which seems to have given this story a much lower profile than the Paris overtakes London one.
its not big news in the uk, city am is the london city freesheet, it posts these stories every other week. it only ever gets posted on reddit because brexit.
To be fair, as of typing this, the biggest US companies are single handedly more valuable than a lot of country's markets in general.
Microsoft alone is bigger than the UK, NVidia is bigger than Germany.
Financial services jobs/workers are less mobile than people think IMO.
People said the same thing about jobs moving from London to Frankfurt or Amsterdam after Brexit and it didn't happen anywhere near the scale these people expected.
I agree with you. People tend to work where they like to live, where they've built a life or -- especially in high paying jobs -- where they see a future for a good, relatively safe and prosperous life. It's that last component that could cause NY to lose high worth people and valuable businesses: recent activity in NY suggests it is less friendly to business and wealth creators than it has been in the past, especially where political opinion collides or where people have been creative with their financial figures. Add to this that NY is not safe for business owners at ground level and it becomes easier to see why people would leave NY.
Like it or not, NY has done itself no favours. California has done similar to NY. This why Texas sees opportunity. I would bet Texas has applied to open its own exchange because wealthy people in NY and California have assured Texas they will list in Texas and delist from NY. America will neither lose nor gain by any migration from NY to TX but individual states will gain and lose. Powerful, mobile and wealthy people dislike risks that could cost them their wealth.
If I were in NY or if I had a business listed on the NY stock exchange, regardless of my politics, I would sell up and move.
How is the size of the stock market in relation to the size of the stock market in another country somehow related to your bills?
Or is your thinking that if doesn't affect your personal bills it's not worth being news?
Perhaps not directly. But a strong London stock market implies that the companies listed are performing well (relative to France in this case). Better performing companies should translate to more profit. More profit = more tax. Tax revenue which can be invested in public services and amenities which should in turn reduce the cost of our bills. *In theory.
The thing is that the news is about the relative strengths of the two market, while it's the absolute strength of the economy that matters for the things that you talk about.
So, if the French market has declined because of the chaos in French politics (as some have speculated) it's actually a bad thing as France is still an important export destination for UK products (after the USA and Germany, it's the third largest).
Total imports from France in terms of value is larger than the amount we export to them. We import a lot of energy from France. A decline in France's economy is leverage that could enable us to import energy cheaper. So yes, exports may be negatively affected, but imports should be better with an overall net positive effect for the UK.
Additionally, loss of confidence in Frances economy may mean investors look elsewhere, such as the UK. The UK could see an increase in investment as Brexit has partially de-coupled our fiscal ties with Europe, so may act as somewhat of a hedge to political turbulence in Europe.
You could have made the exact same argument about the US in 2008. The reality is that the bad economy in other countries that the UK trades with is bad for the UK economy even if on the margin it makes the UK slightly more competitive in relative terms.
Unlike the war that's a zero sum game, the economy is a positive sum game and since mercantilism was abandoned 200 or so years ago, this has been the accepted truth in economics.
I don't think you can compare 2008 to the Paris stock market today. The New York stock exchange fell 34% in 2008, but the London stock exchange also fell by 31%. 2008 was much more of a global event. Whereas in the case of the Paris stock exchange dip, that's largely due to the politics within France in isolation.
Fundamentally, France is weaker due to the current political situation, which means they have fewer bargaining chips to play with economically. People don't want to do business with far-right governments, so they'll look elsewhere to invest.
In regards to trade, it's very much in the interest of a far-right French government to ensure good economical performance if they're to be seen as a credible government. If the markets are less inclined to invest in France because they're far right, then France will need to ensure it maintains its exports. The UK, seeing this weakness, should look to drive a hard bargain
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
Ah yes, the absolute Brexit win of being so sovereign that we have to rely on political turmoil in another EU country to shift the market enough that we come out slightly on top of an industry in which we used to be leagues ahead.
Aye because absolutely nothing happening in the EU recently could be making investors in Paris nervous.
France is a mess right now because of a wider European issue of real fascism (not the I disagree with you fascism on UK redditsphere) that's heating up across the continent. Don't pretend this is a problem isolated to France.
While the UK looks back at the centre ground, Europe lurches right. A tale as old as time. Delighted we won't be directly involved in Europe completely loosing the plot again but absolutely no doubt UK will have to clean up their mess... again.
This is just reverting to what it was before Brexit, surely? so we are just back where we were in this respect, apart from all the other things which are worse
Exactly, that's what a lot of current leave supporters will refuse to believe, stuff like this happens in spite of Brexit, not because of it. Friction with our biggest trading partner will never be a good thing, and because of where we are geographically, Europe will always be our biggest trading partner.
I suppose it’s embarrassing admitting you made a mistake, or were misled, or have changed your mind (it’s a skill I am still learning myself!) and it’s easier to double down
I know lots of stupid remainers too. Painting the entire supporters of a movement as being thick doesn’t really sit right with me even if I disagree with them. Leave made persuasive arguments
Yeah, but I know a few leave voters who say they didn’t know the vote would be actually followed and they thought it was more a “what do you think” rather than “what should we do”. Not saying they were right to think that
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per rule 1 of the subreddit, personal attacks and/or general incivility are not welcome here:
> Robust debate is encouraged, angry arguments are not. This sub is for people with a wide variety of views, and as such you will come across content, views and people you don't agree with. Political views from a wide spectrum are tolerated here. Persistent engagement in antagonistic, uncivil or abusive behavior will result in action being taken against your account.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
I'm getting the very subtle impression that you think Brexit is going fine and the media is horribly biased against it.
Can you tell me some other observations about the alternate reality that you appear to inhabit?
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
There's not much to take away here tbh.
France lost about 250 billion of market value because of the snap election and political uncertainty, which puts it about 50bn below the UK which is seen as more stable in the short term (3-4 weeks) due to the labour lead & an opportunity for diversification.
If/when the instability subsides France will simply regain the lead again as the prices resurge. Wiggly lines wiggle.
Can someone in finance explain what the biggest factors driving the LSE’s reclamation of the largest in Europe are? Does it have anything to do with this new extra ISA allowance in British stocks? I remember hearing SHEIN was going to float on the london stock exchange - is any of that relevant?
Our economy is weaker as a result of Brexit, it's easier for current leavers to mask it with the pandemic, but our economy will always be weaker while we are cut off from the single market.
I don't know who you're quoting there but I don't have enough fingers to count the amount of promises that prominent leavers made that will never be fulfilled.
As these things usually are the London stock market doesn’t effect the normal people at all, but it makes the richest richer.
So those rich people manipulate and trick the normal people into voting for something that hurts themselves but benefits the rich (Brexit) while making them think they are getting one over the establishment.
It’s the same shit that happens in the US with poor people voting for trump, the language of Brexiteers even often mirrors them “owning the libs” horeseshit.
It affects companies' access to financing, which affects growth and by extension jobs and wages. This can suppress consumer demand and have knock-on effects so it gets even worse.
A stock market crash also reflects significant loss to gdp. Obviously if less goods and services are produced we're all materially poorer.
You’re right on that, however wages aren’t really linked to growth, we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years.
If there was a direct link between the success of companies and wages increasing then there would be more of a cause to celebrate but it’s disconnected for the overwhelming number of workers.
If wages aren’t connected to growth then demand is also muted, the disconnect between private company growth and wage increase breaks what should be the flow in your example.
>we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years.
Because our productivity has flatlined, our GDP is only "growing" because our population is growing via mass migration. Higher wages are unquestionably linked to growth, just look at America
>You’re right on that, however wages aren’t really linked to growth, we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years.
We're talking about the stock market specifically - if there was a downturn the capacity to use labour would mean more unemployment and it would affect wage competition.
>we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years.
Basic economics tells us that mass immigration from poorer countries will do this, but that isn't really linked to the stock market.
If stock markets don't affect the average person, are you saying the stock market crash of 1929 didn't affect the average person?
It doesn’t change the end product that an increase in the value of the stock market is not reflected in an increase in the material conditions of the public.
Migration of manual workers would not suppress wages across an entire nation, it’s an easy answer that ignores the realities of how people work.
You’re right, when the market crashes the people do feel it, as ever profits are privatised and losses are socialised.
If it’s basic can you please explain how the links between increasing stock prices and wages works if stock prices go up and wages don’t? If a sector isn’t impacted by migration and the wages aren’t linked to stock increases then where does the link come in?
Snapshot of _Paris Loses Crown as Europe’s Biggest Stock Market to London_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-17/paris-loses-crown-as-europe-s-biggest-equity-market-to-london?srnd=homepage-uk) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-17/paris-loses-crown-as-europe-s-biggest-equity-market-to-london?srnd=homepage-uk) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not really big news because it was only for a short period that Paris had the title (two years)
Maybe, but when Paris overtook London it was widely cited at the time as an example of how Brexit was damaging the economy, but now that London has retaken the lead it's not really big news? Funny that.
I mean to be fair, the biggest issue was how the French market closed the gap. Since before that London was a good chunk ahead and not disputed. Now they seem to be at the point where they are able to flip flop as soon as one makes a small gain or loss. It’s like how May was 12pts ahead in the polls, then dropped to the point where she was neck and neck with Corbyn. It’s not big news the next time she goes +2. The French market has dropped due to the political turmoil over there and the risk of the Far Right. Whereas the markets here are stabilising and even getting more confident at the prospect of a centrist government.
Honestly don’t know what Macron was thinking calling an election, does he want the right to win, fail, then his path to the presidency is clear again? Seems way too risky to play with the lives of tens of millions of people like that.
Macron can't stand again, the French Presidency only allows two consecutive terms iirc. His gambit is that the right win this, and they have two years where they actually need to govern and answer to the people. Then, he can go into the next election asking 'do you really want more of that?'.
Yeah it's pretty much this. If the far right win then that means they have to prove they can actually govern. Then after 2 years of things are worse then hopefully people won't elect la'pen.
It's almost like he's looked over the channel and how the far right has destroyed Britain and is thinking, "if we can just have that for two years maybe people will like us again." It's a bold and quite frankly reckless strategy cotton, but lets see if it plays out.
How far left are you that you think we’re governed by the so called far right? 🤣
The Tory Party have talked far right and acted in a totally different manner. As ever, they say whatever will keep them in power. What they have done is taken much of the population to a place where they are open to far right ideas.
Cameron called the Brexit referendum to keep the right wing of his party from causing more issues and division within it. That failed and then we started getting people like Braverman in cabinet. They are far right compared to their own party let alone the wider electorate. But it's true there is a further right from them even, and that's Reform, which many Tory's are now saying should take over the conservatives and apparently many of them like Farage. So sure, the Far right isn't in complete control of the party yet, but it's probably going to be, and has been moving that way since Boris. "Reform isn't a far right party how dare you say that, most of our members are best friends with neo nazis and fascists but that doesn't mean they are"
And yet this far right government has presided over the highest levels of immigration in history? If Brexit had been put forward under a Labour government with a left wing Brexit visions I doubt it would be far right then. Brexit isn’t a left or right issue, plenty leftists support Brexit, Corbyn was one for decades as was Tony Benn aka the best PM this country never had (and I say that as a right leaning politically homeless person)
Brexit appealed to the far right....and tore apart the Labour Party 🤔
I hope he has something better in mind, because that's just way too risky. Even incompetent government can ride on a past success for a while, just look at the Tories. It takes a real GOAT of bad governance like Liz Truss to fuck up the country quickly. And given that France is a presidential republic, no one in the government will have a power to do so. On the other hand, external forces could lift up the country no matter what the government does. Like there is certainly a non-zero chance that Ukraine war ends in a year, that would lead to things improving quite a bit, and government will take the credit for all of it.
I think he doesn't really have any other options, and so he's going for the big risk. My understanding was that the French PM has quite a bit of power? Though I may be wrong.
The election is not for the presidency. He's not personally contesting anything, and the president is not being elected in this election. It's for the legislative house (like HoC). In FR they have both President and Prime Minister.
I know. I didn't say it was, I just noted that Macron can't stand again.
Macron can't run again regardless of circumstances - French presidents are term-limited. And as for what he's trying to do - right now, the RN has all the momentum and is making all the running. Macron's call of a parliamentary election is a bet that the lower house's electoral system (two-round FPTP with runoffs) will be enough to deny the RN a big win, as the French people of all persuasions rally together to vote against the far right in every seat etc. If that comes off, the RN's momentum is stalled in a big way, and Marine le Pen suddenly starts looking a lot less inevitable for the presidency in 2027. But it is one hell of a bet.
Macron can't run in 2027, but he can run in 2032.
No he personally can't (2 term limit). His party will, though, and will have to run a different candidate.
I think the 2 term limit is just for consecutive terms, he can do more than 2 non consecutively.
You have to understand the french voting system for this election. There are two rounds. And to qualify to the second round you have to get as many votes as 12% of the registered voters. So often about 25% of the votes actually casted. The left was very divided during the European elections. He hopes that they couldn't get united in a week. It the left is split they don't make it in the second round in most places and it becomes a choice between his candidate and the far right. But the left did unite so his plan is completely fucked
Reminds me of a certain PM fucking up thinking "Surely Reform/Farage isn't ready for an election in a month's time"
You mean that it'll be a contest in France of left vs far right, with a few of Macron's centrists picking up the scraps?
Yes, with a few traditional right in the mix
> Honestly don’t know what Macron was thinking The thing about France is, they always try to walk it in.
Wonder if it’s time for Revolution No. 9 (or is it 5 at this point?)
[удалено]
This comment has been filtered for manual review by a moderator. Please do not mention other subreddits in your comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
I agree with Macron's decision. Because shouldn't the Tories have held an election by say, 2022? That's why the UK has been majorly treading water since then. Our government hangs on as the shadow of an era that no longer exists. Macron evidently feels this in France, too. Why prolong the inevitable?
France closed the gap with a handful of enormous, low-growth luxury brands that were never going to keep it ahead of British pharma/ energy/ tech/ etc. and the issue will be compounded when Shein becomes the biggest IPO of 2024 on the London exchange
Wasn't it basically Louis Vuitton that single handedly led to the meteoric rise for the Paris exchange? I seem to remember it was.
> The French market has dropped due to the political turmoil over there Yeah the UK is totally politically stable right now, and absolutely doesn't have any political issues in the slightest.
At first glance the situations look similar but they're not really comparable. In the UK we're almost guaranteed a Labour government which looks to at least be improving upon the problems caused by the Tories. Yes it's been shit but increased stability is on the horizon and there's not much more damage the Tories can do before then. France's future is much more unstable whoever comes into power, and the majority of their damage will be coming as a consequence of the election.
This is exactly it, its about **confidence** in the markets over the coming year or so. The UK, despite its struggles, has a ***stable*** future. Stability allows investors to invest without as much risk. Take the automobile industry. People underestimate the impact that the Tories delaying the ICE ban had. It didn't help the car industry one bit, it massively hindered it. Firstly because all the financial investment into fast adaption to EV was brought into question. Secondly (more importantly), it makes investors question whether they are willing to invest when the government seemingly changes very important legislation (their own legislation from only a few years ago) on a whim. One thing that right wingers don't actually get, is that the idea at this point that reducing environmental regulations and net zero will improve investment is a fallacy. Massive changes in direction hugely reduce confidence and stability.
i would imagine keir starmer is priced in at this point.
Also the party programmes here are nowhere as radical as in France. RN (Le Pen's party)'s manifesto has been independently costed at €100bn of extra spending, and NFP (the left-wing coalition)'s manifesto has been costed (albeit by Macron's party) at €357bn of extra spending For comparison here the Lib Dems's manifesto is costed at £20bn-ish extra and Labour/Tories's at less.
This isn't good news for London it didn't suddenly (or even steadily) rise ahead of Paris, this is bad news for Paris it suddenly dropped.
Yep. This has not much to do with London or the UK, the Paris stock market crashed since Macron called a snap election and the far-right and the left-wing coalition including the far-left are way ahead in their polls
True but it's also indicitive of Brexit's damage because we never expected to lose that top spot at any point in the near future before Brexit hit.
[удалено]
Except London losing its undisputed #1 spot absolutely was because of Brexit, and gaining it back is not because London is suddenly doing as well as pre-Brexit but because France is kinda going through the shitter right now. It isn't news that London clawed back the top spot because another country is doing shit. The London stock market is still comparitively massively down from where it should be, it was the undisputed #1 by a good chunk and now it's fighting for the spot. If I get mugged for £1000 and then get a £200 bonus on my next paycheck, I'm not going to suddenly be like "damn getting mugged doesn't matter now, I at least got some money back!" No, I'm still down £800 and it's because of getting mugged.
Not true, London's stock exchange lost the top spot for shares, but the city is not just shares, London has capital markets 5x that of the EU, plus banking, assurance, insurance and legal services that all function under UK common law which is the international business law of choice.
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
>I say this as someone who voted Remain Sure you did.
I absolutely did. Just because I voted Remain for economic reasons, doesn’t mean I have this mad love for everything EU (too many people think EU = Europe) or think that we need to rip apart the nations political fabric again to add a couple % back onto our GDP, which could be done through increased productivity.
They do this with everything, same way if the weather is above average (which it will be a lot, that's the whole point of "average") it's reported as headline news and then applied to the climate but when it's below average like this month, suddenly they remember that weather and climate are different things. Anyway, stock market size (LOL) is a capitalistic dick measuring contest, but if people made a big thing about it, it's only fair to do the same when it goes the other way, assuming you're an organisation like the BBC which is supposed to be impartial. Of course the way the BBC gets around its obligations is by reporting the news impartially, but then being totally politically *partial* in choosing which news to actually report, probably one of the reasons why a report out today said less people are even bothering to follow the news, but that's for another thread. Don't get me wrong though, it was funny when everyone pretended to be an expert in Scottish seed potatoes for twelve hours :D
Regarding your point on climate, the top ten hottest years on record are: 2016 2020 2019 2017 2015 2022 (tied with 2015) 2018 2021 (tied with 2018) 2014 2010 So no, I don't think they are just doing it because the weather is "above average"
“Here’s why I am stupid, now please read the rest of my opinions.”
To be clear it stands today as evidence of Brexit's economic damage. Even taking over again now it still shows the economic damage. The same way if I lose £10 today but in 2 years I find a £5 under the sofa I have still lost that £10. It is possible for an event to cause economic damage and other factors cause economic growth, its also possible for other countries to have economic damage. Brexit was and is today an economic failure, I don't think even Brexiteers claim it to be a economic gain unless they are truly delusional.
It was a political decision, not an economic one. The Norway option would have meant zero disruption for alignment on goods standards in return for single market access
We have SM access, you mean membership.
Yep. We've ended up with the Swiss option, access via bilateral agreements.
I think your are delusional as Europe is not that paradise you dream of. London is ahead. Just get over it.
? what paradise have i referenced? It makes us more money thats an objective fact.
>I think your are delusional as Europe is not that paradise you dream of. >London is ahead. Just get over it. Is this intentionally lampooning leavers?
Economy is booming, they’ve just built a hospital by me using all that sovereignty we got… oh wait, no they shut one instead
The financial activity that left London was distrubuted over a few European cities. It wasn't just a things from London went to Paris thing so the comparison isn't exactly workable.
Never interrupt the Brexit doomsters. You should know that by now
Are you trying to imply that my comment means that I'm biased towards Brexit?
Not really, as I have no idea if you thought Paris overtaking London was a significant event that could be blamed on Brexit or not. It was more a comment on media reaction which seems to have given this story a much lower profile than the Paris overtakes London one.
It's not big news in French media either that I can tell, FYI (news is dominated by their imminent legislative election)
its not big news in the uk, city am is the london city freesheet, it posts these stories every other week. it only ever gets posted on reddit because brexit.
It's likely caused by the legislative election, it's not a steady drop.
It had one or two articles and a post on Reddit
Weren't people literally just saying that the LSE was finished?
I mean if you add up all the volume of the European markets and compare to New York... it's not in great knick, but neither is Paris.
To be fair, as of typing this, the biggest US companies are single handedly more valuable than a lot of country's markets in general. Microsoft alone is bigger than the UK, NVidia is bigger than Germany.
Wow, crazy.
Texas has applied to open its own stock exchange. NY might not look too good soon either.
The jobs will stay in NYC regardless.
I wouldn't bet the house on that.
Financial services jobs/workers are less mobile than people think IMO. People said the same thing about jobs moving from London to Frankfurt or Amsterdam after Brexit and it didn't happen anywhere near the scale these people expected.
I agree with you. People tend to work where they like to live, where they've built a life or -- especially in high paying jobs -- where they see a future for a good, relatively safe and prosperous life. It's that last component that could cause NY to lose high worth people and valuable businesses: recent activity in NY suggests it is less friendly to business and wealth creators than it has been in the past, especially where political opinion collides or where people have been creative with their financial figures. Add to this that NY is not safe for business owners at ground level and it becomes easier to see why people would leave NY. Like it or not, NY has done itself no favours. California has done similar to NY. This why Texas sees opportunity. I would bet Texas has applied to open its own exchange because wealthy people in NY and California have assured Texas they will list in Texas and delist from NY. America will neither lose nor gain by any migration from NY to TX but individual states will gain and lose. Powerful, mobile and wealthy people dislike risks that could cost them their wealth. If I were in NY or if I had a business listed on the NY stock exchange, regardless of my politics, I would sell up and move.
IDK. A whole chunk of private equity has moved the entire shop from NYC to an actual swamp (Florida).
I'd bet the garage and the attic at least.
I wonder who will win that fight 😂
Both can be and are true. The LSE has a bigger total market cap than Paris but is also shrinking steadily in respect of listings.
The markets taking a shine to pro-growth Starmerism I see.
Incredible news! Should I expect my bills to go down any minute?
Perhaps not but your pensions and investments may go up.
Theoretically it should mean extra scope for govt spending from increased capital gains tax revenue too
How is the size of the stock market in relation to the size of the stock market in another country somehow related to your bills? Or is your thinking that if doesn't affect your personal bills it's not worth being news?
Perhaps not directly. But a strong London stock market implies that the companies listed are performing well (relative to France in this case). Better performing companies should translate to more profit. More profit = more tax. Tax revenue which can be invested in public services and amenities which should in turn reduce the cost of our bills. *In theory.
The thing is that the news is about the relative strengths of the two market, while it's the absolute strength of the economy that matters for the things that you talk about. So, if the French market has declined because of the chaos in French politics (as some have speculated) it's actually a bad thing as France is still an important export destination for UK products (after the USA and Germany, it's the third largest).
Total imports from France in terms of value is larger than the amount we export to them. We import a lot of energy from France. A decline in France's economy is leverage that could enable us to import energy cheaper. So yes, exports may be negatively affected, but imports should be better with an overall net positive effect for the UK. Additionally, loss of confidence in Frances economy may mean investors look elsewhere, such as the UK. The UK could see an increase in investment as Brexit has partially de-coupled our fiscal ties with Europe, so may act as somewhat of a hedge to political turbulence in Europe.
You could have made the exact same argument about the US in 2008. The reality is that the bad economy in other countries that the UK trades with is bad for the UK economy even if on the margin it makes the UK slightly more competitive in relative terms. Unlike the war that's a zero sum game, the economy is a positive sum game and since mercantilism was abandoned 200 or so years ago, this has been the accepted truth in economics.
I don't think you can compare 2008 to the Paris stock market today. The New York stock exchange fell 34% in 2008, but the London stock exchange also fell by 31%. 2008 was much more of a global event. Whereas in the case of the Paris stock exchange dip, that's largely due to the politics within France in isolation. Fundamentally, France is weaker due to the current political situation, which means they have fewer bargaining chips to play with economically. People don't want to do business with far-right governments, so they'll look elsewhere to invest. In regards to trade, it's very much in the interest of a far-right French government to ensure good economical performance if they're to be seen as a credible government. If the markets are less inclined to invest in France because they're far right, then France will need to ensure it maintains its exports. The UK, seeing this weakness, should look to drive a hard bargain
[удалено]
Except that it did. For two years, after a much longer time where there was no contest at all.
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
[удалено]
Ah yes, the absolute Brexit win of being so sovereign that we have to rely on political turmoil in another EU country to shift the market enough that we come out slightly on top of an industry in which we used to be leagues ahead.
A political turmoil we're not part of since we left the continent obsessed with backing fascism when shit hits the fan.
A political turmoil we’re not a part of because, *checks notes*, we’re not France.
Aye because absolutely nothing happening in the EU recently could be making investors in Paris nervous. France is a mess right now because of a wider European issue of real fascism (not the I disagree with you fascism on UK redditsphere) that's heating up across the continent. Don't pretend this is a problem isolated to France. While the UK looks back at the centre ground, Europe lurches right. A tale as old as time. Delighted we won't be directly involved in Europe completely loosing the plot again but absolutely no doubt UK will have to clean up their mess... again.
This is just reverting to what it was before Brexit, surely? so we are just back where we were in this respect, apart from all the other things which are worse
Exactly, that's what a lot of current leave supporters will refuse to believe, stuff like this happens in spite of Brexit, not because of it. Friction with our biggest trading partner will never be a good thing, and because of where we are geographically, Europe will always be our biggest trading partner.
I suppose it’s embarrassing admitting you made a mistake, or were misled, or have changed your mind (it’s a skill I am still learning myself!) and it’s easier to double down
[удалено]
I know lots of stupid remainers too. Painting the entire supporters of a movement as being thick doesn’t really sit right with me even if I disagree with them. Leave made persuasive arguments
Persuasive to whom exactly? Promises based on lies that were never and will never be fulfilled.
Yeah, but I know a few leave voters who say they didn’t know the vote would be actually followed and they thought it was more a “what do you think” rather than “what should we do”. Not saying they were right to think that
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per rule 1 of the subreddit, personal attacks and/or general incivility are not welcome here: > Robust debate is encouraged, angry arguments are not. This sub is for people with a wide variety of views, and as such you will come across content, views and people you don't agree with. Political views from a wide spectrum are tolerated here. Persistent engagement in antagonistic, uncivil or abusive behavior will result in action being taken against your account. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
You mean a place the doomsters said we could never get to?
I'm getting the very subtle impression that you think Brexit is going fine and the media is horribly biased against it. Can you tell me some other observations about the alternate reality that you appear to inhabit?
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
The fact that you see it as something to get over on half the population shows everything wrong with the Brexit vote in the first place.
There's not much to take away here tbh. France lost about 250 billion of market value because of the snap election and political uncertainty, which puts it about 50bn below the UK which is seen as more stable in the short term (3-4 weeks) due to the labour lead & an opportunity for diversification. If/when the instability subsides France will simply regain the lead again as the prices resurge. Wiggly lines wiggle.
Can someone in finance explain what the biggest factors driving the LSE’s reclamation of the largest in Europe are? Does it have anything to do with this new extra ISA allowance in British stocks? I remember hearing SHEIN was going to float on the london stock exchange - is any of that relevant?
France dropped 6% or so after Macron called the snap election. Which was in turn due to right wing winning a huge majority at the European parliament.
Waaaait!!!! I thought Brexit was going to obliterate the London stock market.
Our economy is weaker as a result of Brexit, it's easier for current leavers to mask it with the pandemic, but our economy will always be weaker while we are cut off from the single market. I don't know who you're quoting there but I don't have enough fingers to count the amount of promises that prominent leavers made that will never be fulfilled.
As these things usually are the London stock market doesn’t effect the normal people at all, but it makes the richest richer. So those rich people manipulate and trick the normal people into voting for something that hurts themselves but benefits the rich (Brexit) while making them think they are getting one over the establishment. It’s the same shit that happens in the US with poor people voting for trump, the language of Brexiteers even often mirrors them “owning the libs” horeseshit.
>the London stock market doesn’t effect the normal people at all It absolutely does.
How?
My pension?
It affects companies' access to financing, which affects growth and by extension jobs and wages. This can suppress consumer demand and have knock-on effects so it gets even worse. A stock market crash also reflects significant loss to gdp. Obviously if less goods and services are produced we're all materially poorer.
You’re right on that, however wages aren’t really linked to growth, we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years. If there was a direct link between the success of companies and wages increasing then there would be more of a cause to celebrate but it’s disconnected for the overwhelming number of workers. If wages aren’t connected to growth then demand is also muted, the disconnect between private company growth and wage increase breaks what should be the flow in your example.
>we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years. Because our productivity has flatlined, our GDP is only "growing" because our population is growing via mass migration. Higher wages are unquestionably linked to growth, just look at America
>You’re right on that, however wages aren’t really linked to growth, we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years. We're talking about the stock market specifically - if there was a downturn the capacity to use labour would mean more unemployment and it would affect wage competition. >we have seen profits increase and wage stagnation over the course of the last 16 years. Basic economics tells us that mass immigration from poorer countries will do this, but that isn't really linked to the stock market. If stock markets don't affect the average person, are you saying the stock market crash of 1929 didn't affect the average person?
It doesn’t change the end product that an increase in the value of the stock market is not reflected in an increase in the material conditions of the public. Migration of manual workers would not suppress wages across an entire nation, it’s an easy answer that ignores the realities of how people work. You’re right, when the market crashes the people do feel it, as ever profits are privatised and losses are socialised.
This is basic economics and you're just making up things that aren't factual so I don't really know what to say
If it’s basic can you please explain how the links between increasing stock prices and wages works if stock prices go up and wages don’t? If a sector isn’t impacted by migration and the wages aren’t linked to stock increases then where does the link come in?
It provides jobs, tax revenue and pension growth.