A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The Conservative Party could attempt to carry on as a minority government but it could be forced out by a confidence vote in the Commons if all the other parties voted against it. Likewise Labour.
ETA note that there are arrangements short of a formal coalition that could sustain a minority government. There could be a "confidence and supply" deal, whereby one or more other parties agree to support the minority government in confidence votes and supply votes (ie the budget); or there could be no agreement but support on a case by case basis.
Never really got why a right to bear arms, even if it did mean you can pretty much buy what you like, extended to things like open carry or to bear them anywhere you please, which some extend it to as a related issue.
The Second Amendment is brief and its purpose is clear, as the quote above illustrates.
It does NOT mean anybody can arm themselves anywhere and anyhow they like. You cannot park a tank on your front lawn or install a thermonuclear device in your garden shed because the State reserves the right to designate what access you have to weaponry.
The US State allows a remarkably wide and free access and one consequence is repeated massacres of the kind we saw recently in Texas. But it's their country, not ours. If they choose to endure that kind of thing rather than impose some sensible gun-control measures it's their business, not ours. If we don't like it, we just stay away.
The state - and individual states - placed significant and varied constraints on the right to bear arms. They have been steadily dismantled by the Supreme Court in a manner which owes everything to ideology, and very little indeed to jurisprudence.
Yes, you allude to another peculiarly feature of the US legal system, the political nature of the Supreme Court. It's always struck me as a bad idea but again, not my country.
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
So even after the Gray report Labour fails to post a lead of 10% or more and the poll was taken before the extra funds announced to help households with energy bills today
Wasn't 31% the circa 1997 Con number? Remind me, was that a good number?
RefUK still polling 3%, most of that will go back to the Conservatives and in some final polls like Mori the Tories polled under 31% in 1997.
Blair was up to 20 points ahead in many pre 1997 polls eg Gallup, not just 9 points ahead even after a dreadful few days for the PM and party. I expect the extra funds for households to help with energy bills announced after this poll will also make a difference.
At the 2010 general election Labour only got 29% 13 years into government, the Tories are now already 12 years into government
Under FPTP your raw Party score isn't the most important metric. 1997 Tories 31%. Labour majority of 179. 2010 Labour 29%. Hung Parliament. I'm amazed you can't see that.
Labour still polling about 3% less than 1997 and after boundary changes still not getting a majority alone a landslide.
Don't forget 1997 only happened after Major won a general election after more than 10 years of his party in power, the only PM in the last 100 years to do so.
The odds were always Labour would win the next general election after the Tories 2019 win, however they are still far from sealing it
Since when were Labour favourites to win the next GE?
Since the day after the Tories won a 4th consecutive general election in 2019 on historical precedence
That isn't how it works.
It is, no governing party has won a 5th consecutive general election since universal suffrage in 1918
To be pedantic, we didn't have universal suffrage in 1918.
We did for men and middle class women but if you want to only go from the time all women had the vote it applies even more
We didn't have universal suffrage for men. Conscientious objectors were disbarred from voting for five years under the Representation of the Peoples Act.
The first election where we had universal manhood suffrage was 1923.
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
Yes I get that but under your scenario the Next Government market (Smarkets) would settle as "CP Minority" - even though this would be short-lived. But how likely is this? I'm trying to make sense of the Smarkets market which has LP Minority and Conservative Minority heading the market with a combined probability of almost 70%.
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
Yes I get that but under your scenario the Next Government market (Smarkets) would settle as "CP Minority" - even though this would be short-lived. But how likely is this? I'm trying to make sense of the Smarkets market which has LP Minority and Conservative Minority heading the market with a combined probability of almost 70%.
It’s a gray area if Boris tries to carry on, he would not go to see HM. I guess the obvious milestone would either be a Queens speech or first PMQs.
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
Yes I get that but under your scenario the Next Government market (Smarkets) would settle as "CP Minority" - even though this would be short-lived. But how likely is this? I'm trying to make sense of the Smarkets market which has LP Minority and Conservative Minority heading the market with a combined probability of almost 70%.
It’s a gray area if Boris tries to carry on, he would not go to see HM. I guess the obvious milestone would either be a Queens speech or first PMQs.
Baldwin in 1924, which would be the nearest parallel, was voted out when the Opposition passed an amendment to the King's Speech.
Robert Reich @RBReich · 1h Republicans don’t actually care about saving lives and protecting our children. As long as they can keep the NRA campaign cash flowing, they can’t be bothered.
I really like the Grade Filter on 538. It served us well during the Presidentials when some dodgy pro-GOP pollsters were basically cooking the books to suit their narrative.
I would love Mike or the powers at, say, Britain Elects or Politico, to do something similar over here: Grade the pollsters on the same kind of criteria that 538 use.
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
Yes I get that but under your scenario the Next Government market (Smarkets) would settle as "CP Minority" - even though this would be short-lived. But how likely is this? I'm trying to make sense of the Smarkets market which has LP Minority and Conservative Minority heading the market with a combined probability of almost 70%.
It’s a gray area if Boris tries to carry on, he would not go to see HM. I guess the obvious milestone would either be a Queens speech or first PMQs.
It would be useful if Smarkets could clarify what constitutes a government. NOC does look quite a likely outcome.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
"Neither a French president, a German intellectual, nor an award-winning American newspaper are exempt from being wrong."
Spiky.
The U.S. must understand the futility and stop “taunting” Russia, the editorial says. Meaning: Ukraine will lose anyway, stop helping it so it’s over faster.
A common view, presented as realism, which would not be entirely unreasonable were it not usually presented without consideration of whether Ukraine might prefer some losses more than others.
It's typical short-termism: we'd like cheaper energy, and that "easiest" way to that is through the defeat of a democracy at the hands of a tyranny.
The reality, though, is that (a) it's morally wrong to abandon the Ukrainians for a slightly lower electricity bill, and (b) appeasing invaders is not a long-term successful strategy.
Does beg the question what we do if Putin wins his war. Not an easy question to answer.
Putin cannot win the war. He can occupy a couple of Eastern areas, but the rest of the Ukrainian state survives and funds an endless guerilla regime. It will be the French resistance on steroids. If the Russians are bled out, they don't have the economic strength to last 20 years like the US in Afghanistan.
Putin will take the eastern part of Ukraine, subsume it into Russia, then say that anybody supplying weapons to Ukraine to take the Donbas is declaring war on Russia. And hope that Germany, France, Italy will cease weapons shipments.
So it all comes down to the USA holding its nerve, even if the unity of the current alliance fractures, given how much they provide.
Athwal, Jas Labour Party 2349 Elected Khan, Tanweer Akhtar Labour Party 2148 Elected Solanki, Vanisha Surendra Labour Party 2125 Elected ............................................................................................................................ Corbin, Carol Conservative Party Candidate 525 Begum, Maria Conservative Party Candidate 470 Khushi Pasha, Masood Conservative Party Candidate 360 Khanam, Sufia Liberal Democrats 229 Hussain, Majad Independent Network 218
Election in solid Labour Ward, nothing to see here, show me a marginal.
Cons lost a seat they were defending in North Kesteven last night: since May 5th, the Cons have defended five and lost all five. Something is starting to smell like 1997...
"Neither a French president, a German intellectual, nor an award-winning American newspaper are exempt from being wrong."
Spiky.
The U.S. must understand the futility and stop “taunting” Russia, the editorial says. Meaning: Ukraine will lose anyway, stop helping it so it’s over faster.
A common view, presented as realism, which would not be entirely unreasonable were it not usually presented without consideration of whether Ukraine might prefer some losses more than others.
It's typical short-termism: we'd like cheaper energy, and that "easiest" way to that is through the defeat of a democracy at the hands of a tyranny.
The reality, though, is that (a) it's morally wrong to abandon the Ukrainians for a slightly lower electricity bill, and (b) appeasing invaders is not a long-term successful strategy.
Does beg the question what we do if Putin wins his war. Not an easy question to answer.
Putin cannot win the war. He can occupy a couple of Eastern areas, but the rest of the Ukrainian state survives and funds an endless guerilla regime. It will be the French resistance on steroids. If the Russians are bled out, they don't have the economic strength to last 20 years like the US in Afghanistan.
Putin will take the eastern part of Ukraine, subsume it into Russia, then say that anybody supplying weapons to Ukraine to take the Donbas is declaring war on Russia. And hope that Germany, France, Italy will cease weapons shipments.
Even if the coward alliance buckles, you still have the US, UK and Poland shipping in weapons. And Putin is going to try to hold the land bridge to Crimea too. That will be too many Ukrainians to pacify.
You are spot on Aslan, taking it one thing, holding it another. That Putin take Donbas isn’t certain the slow speed it going and the expense involved, but even if did, they are sitting ducks at pheasant shoot to chaos Ukraine counter offensive has coming at them.
Taking it back won't be easy. Modern warfare seeems to have evolved to favour the defender once more, and the supply lines will be more robust than outside Kyiv. Establishing Ukranian air supremacy and offensive capability is not a short term possibility.
Yes, without a collapse of Russian morale (and despite reports no matter how dispirited they might be they still follow orders enough at present) they could make it very tough no doubt.
Surely, if the Conservatives had lost enough seats to only be 'able' to form a Minority Government, it's quite likely that the current PM would have lost his own.
The Portillo moment of all Portillo moments!
And yes I know no sitting PM has ever lost their set in UK, but there's always a first time!
A questions about the next GE. Is a minority government feasible? Even in the short term?
Let's say CP wins most seats but no majority and no CP partnership with other parties is possible. Can CP decide to govern on a minority basis or would the fact that the LP COULD form a majority with other parties take precedent?
Secondly, I know that a minority government is unsustainable but if no party could get a coalition or other partnership with other parties could the CP say there must be another GE in three months and we will govern on minority basis until then?
This has significance for betting purposes.
The incumbent has first dibs at forming a government, but under your scenario would not be able to pass bills. If they tried it would fail and then have to recommend the LoO try to form a government. If they can agree confidence and supply with other parties, they will proceed. If not , if no other government is possible we go back to the polls.
Yes I get that but under your scenario the Next Government market (Smarkets) would settle as "CP Minority" - even though this would be short-lived. But how likely is this? I'm trying to make sense of the Smarkets market which has LP Minority and Conservative Minority heading the market with a combined probability of almost 70%.
It’s a gray area if Boris tries to carry on, he would not go to see HM. I guess the obvious milestone would either be a Queens speech or first PMQs.
It would be useful if Smarkets could clarify what constitutes a government. NOC does look quite a likely outcome.
Rules say: "the first new government formed after the next GE. Settlement will be based on the make-up of the new cabinet and refers to full cabinet ministers (not "also attending" or similar)".
No @MrEd Beto is not a sick son of a bitch to make a school shooting a political issue, school shootings are a political issue.
The sick sons of bitches are those politicians who are prepared to stand by while school after school is the venue of a mass murder and politicians fail to do their damned job and tackle the issue.
The safety of the public is the number one role of the state to ensure, if politicians can't even take school shootings seriously enough to realise it is a political issue, then what is the point of them?
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Not going to deny it, that isn't what I would have expected.
Never really got why a right to bear arms, even if it did mean you can pretty much buy what you like, extended to things like open carry or to bear them anywhere you please, which some extend it to as a related issue.
The Second Amendment is brief and its purpose is clear, as the quote above illustrates.
It does NOT mean anybody can arm themselves anywhere and anyhow they like. You cannot park a tank on your front lawn or install a thermonuclear device in your garden shed because the State reserves the right to designate what access you have to weaponry.
The US State allows a remarkably wide and free access and one consequence is repeated massacres of the kind we saw recently in Texas. But it's their country, not ours. If they choose to endure that kind of thing rather than impose some sensible gun-control measures it's their business, not ours. If we don't like it, we just stay away.
Thats a silly comment. I said some extend it as a 'related issue' for a start, as it comes from the 2nd amendment fans.
And your last point is baffling. People cannot comment on the policies and cultures of other countries now as it's not our business? What a waste, theres many good things we can learn from others or bad things to avoid, you cannot do either without commenting on them even though its 'not our business'
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
Being in a bigger market where we can import or export goods is not distorted, no.
Being in a 'single market' where we can import people who are only able to get £1 per hour at home so will take any job here even at minimum wage suppressing terms and conditions in this country as a result . . . plenty of "rational" people consider that to be an abnormal distortion.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
“The person running our country lies, he is reckless and he’s incompetent... our country deserves better and we will not get better until Boris Johnson is gone”
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Well, I'm over 82 and I've just tested negative again, although I've other problems. And I've had Covid.
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
Towards the end of the furlough scheme almost everyone on it was over 50, or even 60. People used it as retirement, then took their pensions when they would have had to go back to work. So there has been a lot of deferred retirements.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
The problem is that it would also negatively impact labour mobility, as people can't move to new areas if they are stuck with negative equity.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
That very much depends on your perspective. If you are trying to get a wage increase a labour market that substantially exceeded the "normal" market for the country was severely disadvantageous. Of course if you were an employer it was great, low wages, no need to train up staff, what's not to like?
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Not going to deny it, that isn't what I would have expected.
As a matter of interest, what version of unexpected? "This cannot be", or "Oh- that's what's going on"?
From a post-Covid perspective, it kind of makes sense that a cohort near the end of their careers found not working (or not commuting) during lockdowntide rather agreeable, and that their household budget balanced quite nicely thank you, because their mortgage is paid off.
With hindsight, it's not that shocking if some have just kind of wandered away from the workforce, even if they didn't get to have a leaving party.
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
The problem is that it would also negatively impact labour mobility, as people can't move to new areas if they are stuck with negative equity.
For a couple of years, for a minority of people, yes. But the problem of that is absolutely dwarfed by the problems that an ever-rising house price and unaffordable homes presents.
The risk of negative equity has to exist or else there will only ever be a one-way ratchet on prices.
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Well, I'm over 82 and I've just tested negative again, although I've other problems. And I've had Covid.
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
My wife is 82, was a member of the conservative party, and has not had covid thankfully
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
That very much depends on your perspective. If you are trying to get a wage increase a labour market that substantially exceeded the "normal" market for the country was severely disadvantageous. Of course if you were an employer it was great, low wages, no need to train up staff, what's not to like?
There are winners and losers in a bigger or smaller single market of course.
Neither is more natural or normal than the other, they are just different arrangements of borders and rules.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
Hard to say. It may be the proportion where the immigrants were most likely to be minded to head home. They would still have strong connections there unlike some of their younger compatriots.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
That very much depends on your perspective. If you are trying to get a wage increase a labour market that substantially exceeded the "normal" market for the country was severely disadvantageous. Of course if you were an employer it was great, low wages, no need to train up staff, what's not to like?
There are winners and losers in a bigger or smaller single market of course.
Neither is more natural or normal than the other, they are just different arrangements of borders and rules.
Its more natural to trade goods than people, at least since the end of the triangular trade.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Distorted and normalised are interesting choices of words.
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
That very much depends on your perspective. If you are trying to get a wage increase a labour market that substantially exceeded the "normal" market for the country was severely disadvantageous. Of course if you were an employer it was great, low wages, no need to train up staff, what's not to like?
There are winners and losers in a bigger or smaller single market of course.
Neither is more natural or normal than the other, they are just different arrangements of borders and rules.
Its more natural to trade goods than people, at least since the end of the triangular trade.
Err, people are not traded when they move from Poland to the UK any more than they are when they move from Leeds to Reading. They are just people moving.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
The problem is that it would also negatively impact labour mobility, as people can't move to new areas if they are stuck with negative equity.
Possibly not true. When house prices crashed in Ireland and Northern Ireland back in 2008, by 2010 the banks had created a mortgage that allowed people to move carrying their negative equity with them.
Where there is a problem a significantly big market will find a solution if there is money in it.
And there's a problem in the US. Many Republicans are concerned that any kind of regulation is the thin end of the wedge that ends with the repeal of the Second Amendment. That's understandable.
But it also leads to a situation where even the most modest of proposals is blocked.
It's not understandable. It is the same delusional paranoia that had 17th Century New England convinced the British government was, at any moment, going to rejoin with the Papacy are enforce Catholicism as the state religion.
17th century? There is one person on PB who argued this year something rather like that, in justification for keeping the C of E as the privileged State Church (as if England was a state, but never mind).
Well that was why it was created in the first place, to replace the Pope as head of the English Church with the English monarch
I couldn't care a baboon's bum whiskers what the reason was in 1530 whe we are discussing what the reason for keeping the Establishment of the C of E might be right now, in 2022. You know, maintaining the UK as a primitive barely-out-of-mediaeval theocracy, that sort of stuff.
You are a Scottish Nationalist, what business is it of yours whether the Church of England remains the English established church? The same reasoning applies now as in 1530.
I note that in Scotland where there is no established church 16% are now Roman Catholic compared to 9% in England
Every bit of business while we are in the UK and we have C of E bishops imposed on us as part of the ruling system, without any attempt at all to provide for the three other nations. Even if you want to retain the primitive system of keeping the dominance of a minority sect.
Except that you have just conceded the opposite. That anything Scottish, on your logic, is no business of yours at all: above all, voting for parties to have independence referenda should now be respected without you poking your nose in.
Also: the percentage of RCs self-identifying has dropped massively in Scotland. So your justification is nonsense, as well as sounding like wanting to rerun the Gordon Riots.
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
That £300 isn’t really voter intent - I can see the argument that goes we need to identify need - but that costs money and time best so we will use Aggie as a proxy for that identification.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Not going to deny it, that isn't what I would have expected.
As a matter of interest, what version of unexpected? "This cannot be", or "Oh- that's what's going on"?
From a post-Covid perspective, it kind of makes sense that a cohort near the end of their careers found not working (or not commuting) during lockdowntide rather agreeable, and that their household budget balanced quite nicely thank you, because their mortgage is paid off.
With hindsight, it's not that shocking if some have just kind of wandered away from the workforce, even if they didn't get to have a leaving party.
Would this not in part also be a reflection of how close we are to full employment before and after Covid? If we were close to full employment before Covid hit then it will be much harder to replace those workers who used the intervening period as a suitable point to retire or who realised they could survive without working.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
The problem is that it would also negatively impact labour mobility, as people can't move to new areas if they are stuck with negative equity.
It is the opposite - the extreme high house prices, backed by state props, have already created big drops in labour mobility.
No @MrEd Beto is not a sick son of a bitch to make a school shooting a political issue, school shootings are a political issue.
The sick sons of bitches are those politicians who are prepared to stand by while school after school is the venue of a mass murder and politicians fail to do their damned job and tackle the issue.
The safety of the public is the number one role of the state to ensure, if politicians can't even take school shootings seriously enough to realise it is a political issue, then what is the point of them?
Whilst the latest massacre of children makes me angry and upset, its long long past being a political issue. Because you get what youy vote for, and someone upthread put it beautifully - people value their guns more than they value their children.
America can't be fixed because America wants to be broken. We may find it appalling but they don't - and its their society. The civilised world should be welcoming to sane Americans who want to flee Gilead, but I can't see how there is any political solution when the people voting are so emotionally backwards.
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
That £300 isn’t really voter intent - I can see the argument that goes we need to identify need - but that costs money and time best so we will use Aggie as a proxy for that identification.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
Pensioners are the richest cohort. How on earth is selecting that group a proxy for need?
Never really got why a right to bear arms, even if it did mean you can pretty much buy what you like, extended to things like open carry or to bear them anywhere you please, which some extend it to as a related issue.
There weren't firearms you could easily conceal in 1792 or whenever
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Well, I'm over 82 and I've just tested negative again, although I've other problems. And I've had Covid.
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
Towards the end of the furlough scheme almost everyone on it was over 50, or even 60. People used it as retirement, then took their pensions when they would have had to go back to work. So there has been a lot of deferred retirements.
The UK workforce has dropped by 607k according to the government's own statistics. So when Bonzo bangs on about unemployment and employment levels remember that a stack of well experienced people have voluntarily removed themselves from the Labour pool. Stick 607k people on the unemployment figures - as we all expected they would end up - and things look less rosy.
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Well, I'm over 82 and I've just tested negative again, although I've other problems. And I've had Covid.
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
My wife is 82, was a member of the conservative party, and has not had covid thankfully
To be more precise, you don't know that she hasn't had it asymptomatically, do you? But it's great to hear either way.
Ridiculous anyway, we're all so fat from decadence we can last ages before we starve enough to go that route.
Tell me about. After spending two years living like a student again, but this time with a bit of money and a slower metabolism, I've probably made myself very tasty.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Boris might be fortunate the Privileges Committee will investigate his false claims only about partygate. As the Mirror reported a fortnight ago:-
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
That £300 isn’t really voter intent - I can see the argument that goes we need to identify need - but that costs money and time best so we will use Aggie as a proxy for that identification.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
Pensioners are the richest cohort. How on earth is selecting that group a proxy for need?
Within that cohort they are 2 million pensioners living in relative poverty who will be very grateful for the £400 grant, £650 grant and unto £600 winter fuel allowance
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
That being said... the biggest drop in the workforce has been in the 50+ group, which is also probably the section with the fewest immigrants.
If your house consistently earns more for you than your job, then don't be surprised when the 50+ buy more houses and quit their jobs.
A housing market crash would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, as well as provide some intergenerational fairness.
The problem is that it would also negatively impact labour mobility, as people can't move to new areas if they are stuck with negative equity.
I don't think Barty really appreciates the costs of economic disruptions. Hence his serial enthusiasms for Brexit; a dose of high inflation; a housing price crash... etc.
Occasionally they are both necessary and unavoidable, but constant disruption is bad for most of us.
Ridiculous anyway, we're all so fat from decadence we can last ages before we starve enough to go that route.
Tell me about. After spending two years living like a student again, but this time with a bit of money and a slower metabolism, I've probably made myself very tasty.
Let's try and be logical here.
Russians, according to the Russian state press, are a superior breed. You might say, a Master Race. So obviously....
Further, the basic rule is to try not to eat animals that eat other animals.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Though that isn't the entire story. According to the latest figures the percentage economically inactive is up, and stil 1.1% higher than pre-pandemic:
Labour has bought up all the advertising on the Conservative Home website - the Tory members’ online bible - over the next few days and this is what readers will see…
Not that it will make any difference. The average member of the Conservative Party is now about 82 years old and would back Count Dracula for leader if he guaranteed high house price inflation and low inheritance taxes.
If they are all 82 are they not also dead of Covid? (Average age of death from Covid is 82...)
Well, I'm over 82 and I've just tested negative again, although I've other problems. And I've had Covid.
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
My wife is 82, was a member of the conservative party, and has not had covid thankfully
To be more precise, you don't know that she hasn't had it asymptomatically, do you? But it's great to hear either way.
Absolutely no indication either of us have had covid, but then we have had 4 jabs and tend to keep ourselves to ourselves apart from our family
I think yesterday played very very well for Sunak:
1. The timing was hilarious. Naomi Long skewered it on QT and the Tory minister ended up rowing with the audience when they laughed at his spin lines. Timing isn't set by the Chancellor. Makes Bonzo and the shills who defend the indefensible look like even bigger idiots.
2. The U-turn is hilarious. Sunak isn't the minister who has been saying no in increasingly shrill terms, he left the door open. Whipping Tory MPs to vote against this last week not his doing.
3. This is a wallet vs theory issue. The Redwood division of the Tories hates this, but Sunak simply points to the voters those MPs need to get re-elected. Chucking cash at a massive problem was the only option and its something he is very good at.
4. Need to reverse the "he's a toff, he doesn't know how we think" attack of a month ago? Throw cash at it.
I still think Sunak is the Tories best asset. And unlike so many of the ministers in the clown car he isn't a mouth-foaming zealot. He may not know how a chip and pin machine works but he does know that when people are in the shit they need a ladder - and he keeps producing ladders. As opposed to the "blame the poor, aren't they stupid" mentality of so many of today's Tory tits.
Never really got why a right to bear arms, even if it did mean you can pretty much buy what you like, extended to things like open carry or to bear them anywhere you please, which some extend it to as a related issue.
There weren't firearms you could easily conceal in 1792 or whenever
"A pistol said to have been presented by Congress to John Paul Jones (1747-1792), a newly appointed captain in the Continental Navy, on October 10, 1776."
Speaking to me on #r4today @PJTheEconomist of @TheIFS said: “Rishi Sunak is increasing taxes really quite substantially over the next 2-3 years.There’s a big increase in NI & income tax this year & another big increase in income tax next year & a huge increase in corporation tax”
He added: “He ended both his Spring Statement and yesterday’s statement by saying he has a plan to reduce taxes… I think it’s not entirely fronting up to say at the end of two speeches on the trot that he’s cutting taxes when, in fact, he’s raising them.” #r4today
Boris Johnson, his wife & 5 special advisers were issued with questionnaires by Scotland Yard over alleged ‘Abba party’ in his flat on night Dominic Cummings left No 10
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
That £300 isn’t really voter intent - I can see the argument that goes we need to identify need - but that costs money and time best so we will use Aggie as a proxy for that identification.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
Pensioners are the richest cohort. How on earth is selecting that group a proxy for need?
Within that cohort they are 2 million pensioners living in relative poverty who will be very grateful for the £400 grant, £650 grant and unto £600 winter fuel allowance
That includes me. Since being made redundant during the pandemic, I have effectively withdrawn from the labour market, even if I am thinking vaguely about having another go. The trouble is rules around pension contributions do not help, and a lot of employers are still reluctant to take on oldies. It is a shame many were let go despite the government's furlough scheme.
No @MrEd Beto is not a sick son of a bitch to make a school shooting a political issue, school shootings are a political issue.
The sick sons of bitches are those politicians who are prepared to stand by while school after school is the venue of a mass murder and politicians fail to do their damned job and tackle the issue.
The safety of the public is the number one role of the state to ensure, if politicians can't even take school shootings seriously enough to realise it is a political issue, then what is the point of them?
Whilst the latest massacre of children makes me angry and upset, its long long past being a political issue. Because you get what youy vote for, and someone upthread put it beautifully - people value their guns more than they value their children.
America can't be fixed because America wants to be broken. We may find it appalling but they don't - and its their society. The civilised world should be welcoming to sane Americans who want to flee Gilead, but I can't see how there is any political solution when the people voting are so emotionally backwards.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Lots have taken early retirement, or moved to part time work in old age. Many foreign citizens returned home during ther pandemic and haven’t returned, especially among the low paid.
I think that the latter factor is the most significant. Our labour market was highly distorted before Covid by an unknown number of people here under freedom of movement. That feature is reduced despite the massive number who sought and obtained leave to remain (that figure alone was significantly higher than we thought the total was). The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
Though that isn't the entire story. According to the latest figures the percentage economically inactive is up, and stil 1.1% higher than pre-pandemic:
FFS, the Tory party is now the party of LIDL shoppers?
We should be the party of Fortnum & Mason shoppers and at worst the party of Waitrose shoppers.
Shocking.
They should be the party of Aldi, not Lidl. Just coming to the end of a couple of cases of a very decent Cru Bourgeois (now sadly out of stock) from them at a very reasonable price indeed.
Just about the whole of the Aldi wine range is worth investigating. You can't buy their £14 champagne any more for love nor, er, money. I still have a case or two of it and it more than stands up to the grands marques.
Rishi shortened two points to 14 in Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and four points into 10 for next Conservative leader.
He is value at those odds. The support package is about right (bar the £300 extra to even millionaire pensioners, based on age - really voting intention - rather than need) as is the windfall tax. When something does actually need to be done Sunak is reasonable at doing it. Just a shame the Tory party can't get ahead of things like this but rather spends six months criticising such ideas as radical communism, then flip flops to they are brilliant.
That £300 isn’t really voter intent - I can see the argument that goes we need to identify need - but that costs money and time best so we will use Aggie as a proxy for that identification.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
Pensioners are the richest cohort. How on earth is selecting that group a proxy for need?
Within that cohort they are 2 million pensioners living in relative poverty who will be very grateful for the £400 grant, £650 grant and unto £600 winter fuel allowance
Yes, of course there are poor pensioners as there are poor non pensioners.
The extra money on top of the £400 for every household should have gone to those in relative poverty, regardless of age.
Why should millionaire pensioners get money they will never even spend when others will be starving and freezing this winter?
Because
(a) saves money on admin: no obvious way to do it otherwise without excluding a target group (b) in my experience even elderly with some money tend not to spend it on themselves but worry about saving it for their grandchildren, often rather foolishly - and risk hypothermia and so on.
There seem to be two completely different narratives emerging about the Battle of the Donbas, one on the micro level and one from the larger perspective, and its fascinating to see the differences. Thought I would try and summarize.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Not going to deny it, that isn't what I would have expected.
As a matter of interest, what version of unexpected? "This cannot be", or "Oh- that's what's going on"?
From a post-Covid perspective, it kind of makes sense that a cohort near the end of their careers found not working (or not commuting) during lockdowntide rather agreeable, and that their household budget balanced quite nicely thank you, because their mortgage is paid off.
With hindsight, it's not that shocking if some have just kind of wandered away from the workforce, even if they didn't get to have a leaving party.
Would this not in part also be a reflection of how close we are to full employment before and after Covid? If we were close to full employment before Covid hit then it will be much harder to replace those workers who used the intervening period as a suitable point to retire or who realised they could survive without working.
We have areas of the country and sectors of the economy where there are no employees to be hired. And there are areas of the country and sectors of society where unemployment and squalor and want are still in charge.
These structural problem in the economy were getting wider before Covid - lets remove skilled jobs and training and instead focus on Deliveroo is not a sane long-term strategy. We then saw 10 years of societal change in 10 months, with all the potential that technology brings to transform these structural issues.
Instead of having to build a DeLorean factory next to the unemployed, we can create jobs where they can work where they live. We don't have to solve the expensive and difficult things like cheap and available transport or childcare, we just need an internet connection.
Sadly this government is too much in thrall of property developers who are horrified at the impact of this on office prices. So lets try and dismantle hybrid working quick, get those who can back into those lovely offices and make our patrons and owners happy. Huzzah! The economy? They don't care about that.
Kwasi looking at the votes on the right of the party for the next leadership election ?
Mogg just the usual meaningless guff.
Don't you think there is a risk that energy bailouts allied with high energy prices becomes normalised?
Why would companies reduce prices when the good old taxpayer subsidises them making them more affordable for consumers?
In the energy market because the regulator sets a price cap and the wider market is global so whatever the UK does is a smallish drop in the ocean, plus competition of course.
I think yesterday played very very well for Sunak:
1. The timing was hilarious. Naomi Long skewered it on QT and the Tory minister ended up rowing with the audience when they laughed at his spin lines. Timing isn't set by the Chancellor. Makes Bonzo and the shills who defend the indefensible look like even bigger idiots.
2. The U-turn is hilarious. Sunak isn't the minister who has been saying no in increasingly shrill terms, he left the door open. Whipping Tory MPs to vote against this last week not his doing.
3. This is a wallet vs theory issue. The Redwood division of the Tories hates this, but Sunak simply points to the voters those MPs need to get re-elected. Chucking cash at a massive problem was the only option and its something he is very good at.
4. Need to reverse the "he's a toff, he doesn't know how we think" attack of a month ago? Throw cash at it.
I still think Sunak is the Tories best asset. And unlike so many of the ministers in the clown car he isn't a mouth-foaming zealot. He may not know how a chip and pin machine works but he does know that when people are in the shit they need a ladder - and he keeps producing ladders. As opposed to the "blame the poor, aren't they stupid" mentality of so many of today's Tory tits.
He is certainly the most articulate of the cabinet but some will say that is not difficult
I have commented a few times recently that he may be a good bet for next PM as unlikely as it may seem
Surely, if the Conservatives had lost enough seats to only be 'able' to form a Minority Government, it's quite likely that the current PM would have lost his own.
The Portillo moment of all Portillo moments!
And yes I know no sitting PM has ever lost their set in UK, but there's always a first time!
My guess remains that Boris will retire before the next election, especially if (as now) he looks like losing. That said, I am less certain than I used to be, but if Boris does want to get rich enough to afford his own wallpaper, he cannot leave it too late.
Comments
ETA note that there are arrangements short of a formal coalition that could sustain a minority government. There could be a "confidence and supply" deal, whereby one or more other parties agree to support the minority government in confidence votes and supply votes (ie the budget); or there could be no agreement but support on a case by case basis.
Fears for takeaways shops as Government announces intention to hit Moscow's whitefish exports, including cod and haddock, with trade tariffs
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/05/26/fish-chips-take-battering-latest-round-russian-sanctions/ (£££)
The first election where we had universal manhood suffrage was 1923.
I would love Mike or the powers at, say, Britain Elects or Politico, to do something similar over here: Grade the pollsters on the same kind of criteria that 538 use.
Intetesting chart on UK employment from the FT yesterday. We have 500 000 fewer workers than pre-pandemic. The article cites women on the sick, and 50+ professional men as no longer seeking employment.
Surely, if the Conservatives had lost enough seats to only be 'able' to form a Minority Government, it's quite likely that the current PM would have lost his own.
The Portillo moment of all Portillo moments!
And yes I know no sitting PM has ever lost their set in UK, but there's always a first time!
Britain isn't working
Why?
Some can't get out of bed
Some can't be arsed
Some can't work here because Brexit
None of this bodes well
My column
https://www.ft.com/content/a91ed719-a95a-45ee-aa5a-db8ecb550561
The sick sons of bitches are those politicians who are prepared to stand by while school after school is the venue of a mass murder and politicians fail to do their damned job and tackle the issue.
The safety of the public is the number one role of the state to ensure, if politicians can't even take school shootings seriously enough to realise it is a political issue, then what is the point of them?
And your last point is baffling. People cannot comment on the policies and cultures of other countries now as it's not our business? What a waste, theres many good things we can learn from others or bad things to avoid, you cannot do either without commenting on them even though its 'not our business'
The result is that our workforce is more normalised in terms of activity levels compared with what we had before.
https://twitter.com/bmay/status/1530071739975213056?s=21
Being in a bigger single market is not distorted or abnormal to anyone rational, just different.
Being in a 'single market' where we can import people who are only able to get £1 per hour at home so will take any job here even at minimum wage suppressing terms and conditions in this country as a result . . . plenty of "rational" people consider that to be an abnormal distortion.
Labour’s @peterkyle calls for the prime minister to resign in the wake of the Sue Grey report. #bbcqt https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1529953642891075592/video/1
Of course I'm not, and have never been, a member of the Conservative party, so that might have e conferred some immunity!
* Kwasi Kwarteng remains opposed to windfall tax
* Rees-Mogg thinks money should be raised elsewhere
* Cab ministers fear Tories won’t get credit & there will be demands for more spending
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ebe3f2e8-dd38-11ec-8de3-573a6521e09e?shareToken=093ce00be2047e05639ccc29c7e883bd
One Tory MP tells me that colleagues slagging off today's bailout package are "ideological nut jobs living in a fantasy world".
Adds: "They should spend less time at the Adam Smith Institute and more time down at Lidl."
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1529880745166118912
Cab minister 2 fears major intervention will soon be forgotten: ‘It won’t be long before the calls will start again, a matter of weeks. We have to make sure that we get credit’
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1530081817675673600
From a post-Covid perspective, it kind of makes sense that a cohort near the end of their careers found not working (or not commuting) during lockdowntide rather agreeable, and that their household budget balanced quite nicely thank you, because their mortgage is paid off.
With hindsight, it's not that shocking if some have just kind of wandered away from the workforce, even if they didn't get to have a leaving party.
The risk of negative equity has to exist or else there will only ever be a one-way ratchet on prices.
Neither is more natural or normal than the other, they are just different arrangements of borders and rules.
If these so called conservative insurgents want to do something productive they should send in their letters to remove Boris
Where there is a problem a significantly big market will find a solution if there is money in it.
Except that you have just conceded the opposite. That anything Scottish, on your logic, is no business of yours at all: above all, voting for parties to have independence referenda should now be respected without you poking your nose in.
Also: the percentage of RCs self-identifying has dropped massively in Scotland. So your justification is nonsense, as well as sounding like wanting to rerun the Gordon Riots.
Then again I’ve seen how much it costs to identify needy people especially when HMRC still won’t combine their systems with DWP (for multiple reasons, some policy some just security).
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2019/06/Moving-Matters.pdf
America can't be fixed because America wants to be broken. We may find it appalling but they don't - and its their society. The civilised world should be welcoming to sane Americans who want to flee Gilead, but I can't see how there is any political solution when the people voting are so emotionally backwards.
We should be the party of Fortnum & Mason shoppers and at worst the party of Waitrose shoppers.
Mogg just the usual meaningless guff.
Boris Johnson issued with THIRD warning from stats watchdog over making false claims
Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrongly stated that there were "500,000 more people in paid employment now than there were before the pandemic began"
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-issued-third-warning-26938959
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/mar/17/number-of-pensioners-in-relative-poverty-in-uk-up-200000-in-a-year?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Hence his serial enthusiasms for Brexit; a dose of high inflation; a housing price crash... etc.
Occasionally they are both necessary and unavoidable, but constant disruption is bad for most of us.
Russians, according to the Russian state press, are a superior breed. You might say, a Master Race. So obviously....
Further, the basic rule is to try not to eat animals that eat other animals.
So Vegan Russians, first.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2022
Why would companies reduce prices when the good old taxpayer subsidises them making them more affordable for consumers?
Here's one for @Leon - patriotic robot painting for the Jubilee.
1. The timing was hilarious. Naomi Long skewered it on QT and the Tory minister ended up rowing with the audience when they laughed at his spin lines. Timing isn't set by the Chancellor. Makes Bonzo and the shills who defend the indefensible look like even bigger idiots.
2. The U-turn is hilarious. Sunak isn't the minister who has been saying no in increasingly shrill terms, he left the door open. Whipping Tory MPs to vote against this last week not his doing.
3. This is a wallet vs theory issue. The Redwood division of the Tories hates this, but Sunak simply points to the voters those MPs need to get re-elected. Chucking cash at a massive problem was the only option and its something he is very good at.
4. Need to reverse the "he's a toff, he doesn't know how we think" attack of a month ago? Throw cash at it.
I still think Sunak is the Tories best asset. And unlike so many of the ministers in the clown car he isn't a mouth-foaming zealot. He may not know how a chip and pin machine works but he does know that when people are in the shit they need a ladder - and he keeps producing ladders. As opposed to the "blame the poor, aren't they stupid" mentality of so many of today's Tory tits.
https://www.masshist.org/database/viewer.php?item_id=2510&pid=38
"A pistol said to have been presented by Congress to John Paul Jones (1747-1792), a newly appointed captain in the Continental Navy, on October 10, 1776."
He added: “He ended both his Spring Statement and yesterday’s statement by saying he has a plan to reduce taxes… I think it’s not entirely fronting up to say at the end of two speeches on the trot that he’s cutting taxes when, in fact, he’s raising them.” #r4today
https://twitter.com/FelicityHannah/status/1530088007537242112
Boris Johnson, his wife & 5 special advisers were issued with questionnaires by Scotland Yard over alleged ‘Abba party’ in his flat on night Dominic Cummings left No 10
None of them were fined
PM claimed he was working on building new team
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/490aff36-dcdd-11ec-8de3-573a6521e09e?shareToken=825b730c122fea19153b0b77ed14b08c
The extra money on top of the £400 for every household should have gone to those in relative poverty, regardless of age.
Why should millionaire pensioners get money they will never even spend when others will be starving and freezing this winter?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/05/25/most-voters-want-congress-to-pass-stricter-gun-laws-poll-finds/amp/
They should be the party of Aldi, not Lidl. Just coming to the end of a couple of cases of a very decent Cru Bourgeois (now sadly out of stock) from them at a very reasonable price indeed.
Just about the whole of the Aldi wine range is worth investigating. You can't buy their £14 champagne any more for love nor, er, money. I still have a case or two of it and it more than stands up to the grands marques.
Eventually a government that prioritises the economy needs to correct this. https://twitter.com/TheScepticIsle/status/1530084859284279297/photo/1
(a) saves money on admin: no obvious way to do it otherwise without excluding a target group
(b) in my experience even elderly with some money tend not to spend it on themselves but worry about saving it for their grandchildren, often rather foolishly - and risk hypothermia and so on.
There seem to be two completely different narratives emerging about the Battle of the Donbas, one on the micro level and one from the larger perspective, and its fascinating to see the differences. Thought I would try and summarize.
https://twitter.com/phillipspobrien/status/1530077202670407682
These structural problem in the economy were getting wider before Covid - lets remove skilled jobs and training and instead focus on Deliveroo is not a sane long-term strategy. We then saw 10 years of societal change in 10 months, with all the potential that technology brings to transform these structural issues.
Instead of having to build a DeLorean factory next to the unemployed, we can create jobs where they can work where they live. We don't have to solve the expensive and difficult things like cheap and available transport or childcare, we just need an internet connection.
Sadly this government is too much in thrall of property developers who are horrified at the impact of this on office prices. So lets try and dismantle hybrid working quick, get those who can back into those lovely offices and make our patrons and owners happy. Huzzah! The economy? They don't care about that.
I have commented a few times recently that he may be a good bet for next PM as unlikely as it may seem