Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Muddying the Waters on BoJo’s £130k legal bill – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,507
    kle4 said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    New Statesman article that may not be popular with many of its readers.

    "Liberals should lament the breakdown of the family
    It’s not conservative to want better outcomes for your children.
    Frank Young" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/09/liberals-breakdown-of-the-family

    It's a little bit of a strawman, no?

    Are liberals *actually* in favour of the breakdown of the family?

    Indeed, are liberals more likely that conservatives to have affairs, get divorced, etc?

    (I'm reminded of the great gag by Mitt Romney in a debate back in 2008, where he said "the only man here with only one marriage is the Mormon".)
    Indeed it is the very opposite. As I pointed out the other day, it is middle class liberals who have stable marriages and families. Rates of break up, both married and cohabitation increase massively down the SE scale.

    It is a great paradox that liberal professionals are both more likely to be married and to be religious. We are the true "social conservatives" who value order and compassion in society.

    More religious? I haven't seen the evidence for that.
    "London is the most religious area of the country, mainly because of its large Muslim and migrant communities. The least religious areas are the south-east of England, Scotland and Wales. People identifying as non-religious are typically young, white and male – and increasingly working class."

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/13/uk-losing-faith-religion-young-reject-parents-beliefs

    There are very few working class churchgoers now. Obviously age is a big predictor of active attendance, but evangelical churches tend to have active thriving congregations of younger middle class people.

    There is a chicken and egg phenomenon in that the culture of self improvement that churches encourage turns people middle class over time.
    Nothing there tells me that the middle class or liberals are more religious than average. And whilst churchgoing may be middle class a lot of the religious are obviously staying at home.
    Well clearly it depends on what you mean by "religious" but if you consider active attendance at communal places of worship, then amongst Britons it is clearly a minority interest. Particularly concentrated amongst various ethnic groups, but also amongst the middle classes.

    As I pointed out there is a strong chicken and egg phenomenon too, as active religiosity is a powerful predictor of upward social mobility. Even more so compounded over generations.
    I have an American friend who is a conservative evangelical Christian (7th day adventist). He says that among his community (working class Southern whites) religion helps to regulate behaviour and prevent poor choices over things like drink, drugs, sex and gambling. Basically, it is an external substitute, or perhaps prop, for self control.
    I think a lot of successful middle class people brought up in a stable environment where they learn to make good choices and defer gratification don't need that kind of support - I certainly don't. But religion clearly helps some people to lead a better, more disciplined and productive life.
    The problems come when they try to force it on other people.
    There are many positives to religion. I'm sure I'd live a better and more productive life if I lived it thinking some higher authority watching and judging me. But the whole lot just seems improbable beyond belief and I can't make myself believe something even if it would improve my life to do so.
    Also, 95% of hymns are shit, and of the 5% which are good, at least half are hard to sing.
    It always struck me when forced to sing hymns at school that if any higher power really was listening to this he'd have to be a very twisted one to he impressed by this sort of fawning.
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    New Statesman article that may not be popular with many of its readers.

    "Liberals should lament the breakdown of the family
    It’s not conservative to want better outcomes for your children.
    Frank Young" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/09/liberals-breakdown-of-the-family

    It's a little bit of a strawman, no?

    Are liberals *actually* in favour of the breakdown of the family?

    Indeed, are liberals more likely that conservatives to have affairs, get divorced, etc?

    (I'm reminded of the great gag by Mitt Romney in a debate back in 2008, where he said "the only man here with only one marriage is the Mormon".)
    Indeed it is the very opposite. As I pointed out the other day, it is middle class liberals who have stable marriages and families. Rates of break up, both married and cohabitation increase massively down the SE scale.

    It is a great paradox that liberal professionals are both more likely to be married and to be religious. We are the true "social conservatives" who value order and compassion in society.

    More religious? I haven't seen the evidence for that.
    "London is the most religious area of the country, mainly because of its large Muslim and migrant communities. The least religious areas are the south-east of England, Scotland and Wales. People identifying as non-religious are typically young, white and male – and increasingly working class."

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/13/uk-losing-faith-religion-young-reject-parents-beliefs

    There are very few working class churchgoers now. Obviously age is a big predictor of active attendance, but evangelical churches tend to have active thriving congregations of younger middle class people.

    There is a chicken and egg phenomenon in that the culture of self improvement that churches encourage turns people middle class over time.
    Nothing there tells me that the middle class or liberals are more religious than average. And whilst churchgoing may be middle class a lot of the religious are obviously staying at home.
    Well clearly it depends on what you mean by "religious" but if you consider active attendance at communal places of worship, then amongst Britons it is clearly a minority interest. Particularly concentrated amongst various ethnic groups, but also amongst the middle classes.

    As I pointed out there is a strong chicken and egg phenomenon too, as active religiosity is a powerful predictor of upward social mobility. Even more so compounded over generations.
    I have an American friend who is a conservative evangelical Christian (7th day adventist). He says that among his community (working class Southern whites) religion helps to regulate behaviour and prevent poor choices over things like drink, drugs, sex and gambling. Basically, it is an external substitute, or perhaps prop, for self control.
    I think a lot of successful middle class people brought up in a stable environment where they learn to make good choices and defer gratification don't need that kind of support - I certainly don't. But religion clearly helps some people to lead a better, more disciplined and productive life.
    The problems come when they try to force it on other people.
    There are many positives to religion. I'm sure I'd live a better and more productive life if I lived it thinking some higher authority watching and judging me. But the whole lot just seems improbable beyond belief and I can't make myself believe something even if it would improve my life to do so.
    Also, 95% of hymns are shit, and of the 5% which are good, at least half are hard to sing.
    It always struck me when forced to sing hymns at school that if any higher power really was listening to this he'd have to be a very twisted one to he impressed by this sort of fawning.
    I could never really square the idea of omnipotence, and compassion, with an obsession over tiny details like eating the right foods, having sex the right way, and performing banal rituals in the correct way, along with the need for constant praise or you're screwed forever. That seems like a holdover from gods who had far smaller and more limited concerns who needed placating or bribing to make the rain fall or something, not a master of all cosmos.

    At least it makes more sense than when some are supposedly born damned or saved.
    I tend to regard myself as an atheist but the discussions re science and agnosticism are interesting. The universe is a complex place but resorting to god or gods doesn’t work for me. If you need god to create the universe who created god? See also the Big Bang.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,779
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    New Statesman article that may not be popular with many of its readers.

    "Liberals should lament the breakdown of the family
    It’s not conservative to want better outcomes for your children.
    Frank Young" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/09/liberals-breakdown-of-the-family

    It's a little bit of a strawman, no?

    Are liberals *actually* in favour of the breakdown of the family?

    Indeed, are liberals more likely that conservatives to have affairs, get divorced, etc?

    (I'm reminded of the great gag by Mitt Romney in a debate back in 2008, where he said "the only man here with only one marriage is the Mormon".)
    Indeed it is the very opposite. As I pointed out the other day, it is middle class liberals who have stable marriages and families. Rates of break up, both married and cohabitation increase massively down the SE scale.

    It is a great paradox that liberal professionals are both more likely to be married and to be religious. We are the true "social conservatives" who value order and compassion in society.

    More religious? I haven't seen the evidence for that.
    "London is the most religious area of the country, mainly because of its large Muslim and migrant communities. The least religious areas are the south-east of England, Scotland and Wales. People identifying as non-religious are typically young, white and male – and increasingly working class."

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/13/uk-losing-faith-religion-young-reject-parents-beliefs

    There are very few working class churchgoers now. Obviously age is a big predictor of active attendance, but evangelical churches tend to have active thriving congregations of younger middle class people.

    There is a chicken and egg phenomenon in that the culture of self improvement that churches encourage turns people middle class over time.
    The young are now more likely to pray than over 55s. Perhaps in part because there are more ethnic minorities amongst the young and ethnic minorities tend to be more religious

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58681075
    I'm not surprised, given the position in which the Tory Pensioners' Party has dumped them.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Our problem is not a lack of nationalised energy companies, but a lack of energy. For presiding over this catastrophe, the Tories deserve to be out of power for a generation. Instead, it’s the country that’s running out of power while the Tories prepare for their fourth leader. She won’t have long to fix the mess before she too runs out of road.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/02/lefts-reckless-drive-nationalise-energy-companies-will-not-solve/

    Scotland has plenty of energy.
    I'm surprised Sturgeon is not making more of Scotland's energy advantage. The hypothecated gain completely reverses Barnett next year and going forward Scotland has sufficient watts for its population unlike England. You can't of course print watts
    Ahem.


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,147

    kle4 said:

    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    New Statesman article that may not be popular with many of its readers.

    "Liberals should lament the breakdown of the family
    It’s not conservative to want better outcomes for your children.
    Frank Young" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/09/liberals-breakdown-of-the-family

    It's a little bit of a strawman, no?

    Are liberals *actually* in favour of the breakdown of the family?

    Indeed, are liberals more likely that conservatives to have affairs, get divorced, etc?

    (I'm reminded of the great gag by Mitt Romney in a debate back in 2008, where he said "the only man here with only one marriage is the Mormon".)
    Indeed it is the very opposite. As I pointed out the other day, it is middle class liberals who have stable marriages and families. Rates of break up, both married and cohabitation increase massively down the SE scale.

    It is a great paradox that liberal professionals are both more likely to be married and to be religious. We are the true "social conservatives" who value order and compassion in society.

    More religious? I haven't seen the evidence for that.
    "London is the most religious area of the country, mainly because of its large Muslim and migrant communities. The least religious areas are the south-east of England, Scotland and Wales. People identifying as non-religious are typically young, white and male – and increasingly working class."

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/13/uk-losing-faith-religion-young-reject-parents-beliefs

    There are very few working class churchgoers now. Obviously age is a big predictor of active attendance, but evangelical churches tend to have active thriving congregations of younger middle class people.

    There is a chicken and egg phenomenon in that the culture of self improvement that churches encourage turns people middle class over time.
    Nothing there tells me that the middle class or liberals are more religious than average. And whilst churchgoing may be middle class a lot of the religious are obviously staying at home.
    Well clearly it depends on what you mean by "religious" but if you consider active attendance at communal places of worship, then amongst Britons it is clearly a minority interest. Particularly concentrated amongst various ethnic groups, but also amongst the middle classes.

    As I pointed out there is a strong chicken and egg phenomenon too, as active religiosity is a powerful predictor of upward social mobility. Even more so compounded over generations.
    I have an American friend who is a conservative evangelical Christian (7th day adventist). He says that among his community (working class Southern whites) religion helps to regulate behaviour and prevent poor choices over things like drink, drugs, sex and gambling. Basically, it is an external substitute, or perhaps prop, for self control.
    I think a lot of successful middle class people brought up in a stable environment where they learn to make good choices and defer gratification don't need that kind of support - I certainly don't. But religion clearly helps some people to lead a better, more disciplined and productive life.
    The problems come when they try to force it on other people.
    There are many positives to religion. I'm sure I'd live a better and more productive life if I lived it thinking some higher authority watching and judging me. But the whole lot just seems improbable beyond belief and I can't make myself believe something even if it would improve my life to do so.
    Also, 95% of hymns are shit, and of the 5% which are good, at least half are hard to sing.
    It always struck me when forced to sing hymns at school that if any higher power really was listening to this he'd have to be a very twisted one to he impressed by this sort of fawning.
    Cookie said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    New Statesman article that may not be popular with many of its readers.

    "Liberals should lament the breakdown of the family
    It’s not conservative to want better outcomes for your children.
    Frank Young" (£)

    https://www.newstatesman.com/quickfire/2022/09/liberals-breakdown-of-the-family

    It's a little bit of a strawman, no?

    Are liberals *actually* in favour of the breakdown of the family?

    Indeed, are liberals more likely that conservatives to have affairs, get divorced, etc?

    (I'm reminded of the great gag by Mitt Romney in a debate back in 2008, where he said "the only man here with only one marriage is the Mormon".)
    Indeed it is the very opposite. As I pointed out the other day, it is middle class liberals who have stable marriages and families. Rates of break up, both married and cohabitation increase massively down the SE scale.

    It is a great paradox that liberal professionals are both more likely to be married and to be religious. We are the true "social conservatives" who value order and compassion in society.

    More religious? I haven't seen the evidence for that.
    "London is the most religious area of the country, mainly because of its large Muslim and migrant communities. The least religious areas are the south-east of England, Scotland and Wales. People identifying as non-religious are typically young, white and male – and increasingly working class."

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/13/uk-losing-faith-religion-young-reject-parents-beliefs

    There are very few working class churchgoers now. Obviously age is a big predictor of active attendance, but evangelical churches tend to have active thriving congregations of younger middle class people.

    There is a chicken and egg phenomenon in that the culture of self improvement that churches encourage turns people middle class over time.
    Nothing there tells me that the middle class or liberals are more religious than average. And whilst churchgoing may be middle class a lot of the religious are obviously staying at home.
    Well clearly it depends on what you mean by "religious" but if you consider active attendance at communal places of worship, then amongst Britons it is clearly a minority interest. Particularly concentrated amongst various ethnic groups, but also amongst the middle classes.

    As I pointed out there is a strong chicken and egg phenomenon too, as active religiosity is a powerful predictor of upward social mobility. Even more so compounded over generations.
    I have an American friend who is a conservative evangelical Christian (7th day adventist). He says that among his community (working class Southern whites) religion helps to regulate behaviour and prevent poor choices over things like drink, drugs, sex and gambling. Basically, it is an external substitute, or perhaps prop, for self control.
    I think a lot of successful middle class people brought up in a stable environment where they learn to make good choices and defer gratification don't need that kind of support - I certainly don't. But religion clearly helps some people to lead a better, more disciplined and productive life.
    The problems come when they try to force it on other people.
    There are many positives to religion. I'm sure I'd live a better and more productive life if I lived it thinking some higher authority watching and judging me. But the whole lot just seems improbable beyond belief and I can't make myself believe something even if it would improve my life to do so.
    Also, 95% of hymns are shit, and of the 5% which are good, at least half are hard to sing.
    It always struck me when forced to sing hymns at school that if any higher power really was listening to this he'd have to be a very twisted one to he impressed by this sort of fawning.
    I could never really square the idea of omnipotence, and compassion, with an obsession over tiny details like eating the right foods, having sex the right way, and performing banal rituals in the correct way, along with the need for constant praise or you're screwed forever. That seems like a holdover from gods who had far smaller and more limited concerns who needed placating or bribing to make the rain fall or something, not a master of all cosmos.

    At least it makes more sense than when some are supposedly born damned or saved.
    I tend to regard myself as an atheist but the discussions re science and agnosticism are interesting. The universe is a complex place but resorting to god or gods doesn’t work for me. If you need god to create the universe who created god? See also the Big Bang.
    God is all eternal
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,914
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Why Labour must never win


    "Marking the victory of the regime that cast Iran into a theocratic abyss and sentenced Salman Rushdie to death is a "happy time" for Yasmine Dar.

    She has just retained her seat on Labour's NEC.

    The party remains a joke. A very bad one."

    https://twitter.com/habibi_uk/status/1565650256884375552?s=20&t=cC5DbxaAVdxLC23gk30lKA

    Yet Jacob Rees-Mogg, despite being warned, spoke at a 2018 dinner given by ‘Traditional Britain’, hosted by a man who advocates the repatriation of "non-indigenous" Britons, but the Tories remain the better choice for government? Okay then.
    And he's a cabinet minister.
  • Reminder: at some point, inside information about the count may be leaked.

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.04 Liz Truss 96%
    20 Rishi Sunak 5%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.05 Liz Truss 95%
    20 Rishi Sunak 5%

    A slight move towards Rishi, if anything.

    Reminder: at some point, inside information about the count may be leaked.

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.05 Liz Truss 95%
    18.5 Rishi Sunak 5%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.05 Liz Truss 95%
    18 Rishi Sunak 6%
    Reminder: at some point, inside information about the count may be leaked.

    Rishi is not very liquid; the price on Liz Truss is a more reliable signal, and she is in from 1.05 to 1.04 this morning.

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.04 Liz Truss 96%
    21 Rishi Sunak 5%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.04 Liz Truss 96%
    23 Rishi Sunak 4%
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,799

    HYUFD said:

    Interesting article in the Times about Truss' family background. Her father is apparently 'so horrified by his daughter’s politics — “I think he’s extremely saddened about it and sometimes furious” — that he can barely bring himself to speak about it. Colleagues at Leeds University are said to have been sent an email by the university warning them not to speak publicly about his daughter.'
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/liz-truss-profile-parents-family-school-kcxznq2wb

    No one has told him yet then that his daughter is a deep sleeper Liberal agent?
    Come on they haven't even told her yet. She needs her "miles to go before I sleep message"
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 1,460
    I have just had a little bet with Ladbrokes on Truss getting 70%+ at 8/1, combined with a cover-my-arse bet of 65-70% at 2/1.

    If you really think she will under-perform, 50-55% is available at 11/1...
This discussion has been closed.