Howdy, Stranger!

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

The 100 days offensive – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    geoffw said:

    Nigelb said:

    geoffw said:

    Nigelb said:

    geoffw said:

    Is there any gain of function research on avian influenza going on at Wuhan?

    No, but there is in European mink farms.
    Which are BSL0 facilities.
    So approved by European authorities? And the mink farms are treated like metaphorical petri dishes?

    No, they're just farms.
    But open to possible infection from wild birds, as happened recently.

    At that point, thousands of mink, housed in close proximity, provide an ideal environment for the non mammalian virus to develop a mutation which enables better mammal to mammal transmission.
    More from that 2019 paper, op cit:
    "In 2011, Fouchier and Kawaoka alarmed the world by revealing they had separately modified the deadly avian H5N1 influenza virus so that it spread between ferrets. Advocates of such gain of function (GOF) studies say they can help public health experts better understand how viruses might spread and plan for pandemics. But by enabling the bird virus to more easily spread among mammals, the experiments also raised fears that the pathogen could jump to humans. And critics of the work worried that such a souped-up virus could spark a pandemic if it escaped from a lab or was intentionally released by a bioterrorist. "

    Yes, this is all well trodden ground.
    Read the more recent article I posted upthread; things have tightened up somewhat.

    The point is, though, that these sort of experiments are effectively happening in the wild all the time. The recent example of bird flu in a mink farm is effectively replicating that experiment with no safety measures at all.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    edited February 2023

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,901
    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    HYUFD said:

    The fact just 12% of 2019 Conservative voters are now voting Labour suggests the result of the next general election could be much better than the current polling suggests for Sunak. However he would need to win back DKs and RefUK voters

    That makes sense. What we don't know (Or do we? is there any polling?) is whether those DKs are floating or now firmly anti Tory and just don't know whether to abstain, vote Lab, or LD. Anecdotally quite a few on here seem to be anti Tory at present.

    Anyone any ideas?
  • algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

    Yeah. Not being brazenly corrupt and grossly incompetent will be huge selling points. Which I assume is why the Tories are all in on painting Labour as in the pockets of those union barons who aren't actually affiliated to Labour. Don't look at our spiv friends whom we gave billions of your money to in corrupt PPE transactions! Look at Starmer! That Mick Lynch is his boss!!!
  • sbjme19sbjme19 Posts: 194
    Don't know if picked up already on PB but Hunt chicken running to the better for him he thinks part of his carved-up seat...Godalming and Ash. Only Times diary and local press, although he is Chancellor
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    sbjme19 said:

    Don't know if picked up already on PB but Hunt chicken running to the better for him he thinks part of his carved-up seat...Godalming and Ash. Only Times diary and local press, although he is Chancellor

    If it's part of his current seat then surely it's not a chicken run.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited February 2023
    geoffw said:

    Is there any gain of function research on avian influenza going on at Wuhan?

    No, but there was EXTREMELY dodgy gain of function research done on "ferrets + Avian Flu" by one Ron Fouchier, about ten years ago. This stuff was so mad even virologists said Fuck off, don't do it. Guess who defended it? Antony Fauci

    "This infamous gain-of-function study produced airborne H5N1 in ferrets via serial passaging.

    The mink farm outbreak in Spain would have been an uncontrolled serial passaging experiment."

    "Fouchier study reveals changes enabling airborne spread of H5N1"


    https://twitter.com/danwalker9999/status/1619381171288412161?s=20&t=UMPWFzgvBc9E60Wfs6VZLQ

    And guess who was the scientist who really pressed, in early 2020, for the lab leak hypothesis to be suppressed, as it might "damage science" and "hurt relations with China", and anyway the chances of this coming out of a lab were once in 33 billion years.

    Go on have a guess. Yes. Ron Fouchier

    "What are your thoughts on the Proximal Origin [the Nature paper arguing against lab leak] being largely based on Ron Fouchier's arguments? Ron Fouchier is the same person who argued that the chances of lab leak are once in 33 billion years."


    https://twitter.com/abhishek_s_1/status/1597787892780523520?s=20&t=JvFoaXcLv3UrCo1549MSKw

    And more:

    "5/3. Nope, I am mistaken. The anti lab leak view views are in here, too. It's a mix..---this from Ron Fouchier. 0% lab."


    https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1481056682490970114?s=20&t=JvFoaXcLv3UrCo1549MSKw

  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    edited February 2023
    When I'm Prime Minister I'm going to make it illegal for webforms to have a field labelled as "Date of Birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*" and require you to enter the month from a drop-down list in words not numbers. Grrrrrr...

    Edit: and to disable pasting into the "confirm email address" field. Double grrrrrrr...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    edited February 2023
    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Nigelb said:

    geoffw said:

    Nigelb said:

    geoffw said:

    Is there any gain of function research on avian influenza going on at Wuhan?

    No, but there is in European mink farms.
    Which are BSL0 facilities.
    So approved by European authorities? And the mink farms are treated like metaphorical petri dishes?

    No, they're just farms.
    But open to possible infection from wild birds, as happened recently.

    At that point, thousands of mink, housed in close proximity, provide an ideal environment for the non mammalian virus to develop a mutation which enables better mammal to mammal transmission.
    This is exactly right
  • Mr. Driver, the American dating system is one that gets me.

    The Chinese approach of large to small and the British approach of small to large both make intrinsic sense.

    The US style of month, day, year is just daft.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Outside of covid response (and even within that) this government from 2019 onwards has been so obsessed with optics over substance that we lack strategies on all manner of important stuff. Beyond issues of personal conduct regardless of political position, it's about actual competence in governing. I would not be surprised if hindsight pinpoints the Johnson-Truss-Sunak government as possibly the worst in modern history.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,942
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
  • DJ41aDJ41a Posts: 174
    edited February 2023
    One thing the Tories won't do is go into the election without a chairman.

    The chairman's throne remains vacant. We're into the 5th day now.

    Presumably whatever unresolved divisions lie behind the prolongation of the vacancy ... remain unresolved. I can't see any reason why Sunak or whoever holds his strings would make the decision and then wait. It's not a huge news item.

    Unless Boris.

    As for the divisions themselves, if I had to speculate I'd say leading Tories are briefing against each other calling each other crooks.

    This is probably NOT a case of disagreement over which of several wonderful election superplans to choose between, but more a case of "OMFG - we could be below 15% by the end of next week, and have to choose yet another prime minister, if we choose that person and you-know-what all comes out."
  • Driver said:

    When I'm Prime Minister I'm going to make it illegal for webforms to have a field labelled as "Date of Birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*" and require you to enter the month from a drop-down list in words not numbers. Grrrrrr...

    Edit: and to disable pasting into the "confirm email address" field. Double grrrrrrr...

    I would go further. Only firms either FSA (or similar) registered or selling age restricted items should be allowed to require your birthdate for sign up in the first place. Similarly questions such as mothers maiden name should be restricted to FSA registered firms.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,109

    Selebian said:

    On topic: Is it time for 'Rishi is Crap Is PM'?

    Certainly for the next 20 months.
    Only if he is really lucky. The bastards are agitating for another change...
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029

    Driver said:

    When I'm Prime Minister I'm going to make it illegal for webforms to have a field labelled as "Date of Birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*" and require you to enter the month from a drop-down list in words not numbers. Grrrrrr...

    Edit: and to disable pasting into the "confirm email address" field. Double grrrrrrr...

    I would go further. Only firms either FSA (or similar) registered or selling age restricted items should be allowed to require your birthdate for sign up in the first place. Similarly questions such as mothers maiden name should be restricted to FSA registered firms.
    I can see that. In this case, though, DOB is definitely a legit thing for them to ask for. But if you say "dd/mm/yyyy" I expect to be able to use the numpad and tab key...
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 778
    edited February 2023
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,204

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    edited February 2023
    While I'm on my personal hobby-horses, I'd also ban food labelling where the cooking instructions aren't visible on the outside, especially the two-layer labels that very often are impossible to separate.

    "You can look up the cooking instructions on our website", they said when I complained. Yes, I know I can do that, the point is that I shouldn't have to!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,204
    Scott_xP said:

    Selebian said:

    On topic: Is it time for 'Rishi is Crap Is PM'?

    Certainly for the next 20 months.
    Only if he is really lucky. The bastards are agitating for another change...
    A proposal.

    When a new party is elected to government, the job of PM is given, in rotation, to each of the MPs of that party. So they all get a go.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    BTW Good Luck to OGH in hozzie
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,733
    edited February 2023
    Carnyx said:

    O/T but some good news for a change.

    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/feb/03/thornborough-henges-north-yorkshire-gifted-england-heritage

    "The circular earthworks are thought to be part of a “ritual landscape”, comparable to Salisbury Plain, home to Stonehenge.

    There are three henges running north to south over a mile long. Two have been given to the nation by the construction company Tarmac. Lightwater Holdings, a local company, has given parts of the wider monument."

    As that's on the edge of the Flatlands I have of course been there.

    The earthworks are still pretty large - the best preserved being the one now covered in woodland - but the whole site was in serious need of looking after and was being eroded by rabbits and people (although it isn't exactly busy).

    The problem is that half the surrounding landscape is being quarried away for sand by Tarmac et al, so the context is being lost. One old quarry (now a nature reserve) is within a few yards of the site. Of course they couldn't quarry the site itself - so I'm not entirely surprised they have handed it over.

    The three circles aren't in a straight line - there was some speculation that this was because they were a mirror for Orion's Belt, but who knows.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    Will prices fall? Aren't house prices mostly determined by what mortgage lenders will allow people to borrow?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
  • DJ41aDJ41a Posts: 174
    edited February 2023
    IanB2 said:

    The striking thing is how it took a single short event like Truss to cut through to those voters who had stuck with the Tories despite all the shambles and scandals of the Johnson years. Things seemed bad enough for the Tories through Partygate and the rest, but there were still people who needed the shock of Truss for the scales to fall from their eyes.

    For many years the current king when he was the crown prince had a media strategy of helping lots of sh*t be thrown at all the other members of his family (except his current wife), because if it stuck to them it wouldn't stick to him. Which isn't to say he was clean, but he appeared cleaner.

    Just thinking about what the path is for Boris to return to number 10.

    EDIT: Sunak appointed Zahawi as chairman. That could turn out to look extremely bad for Sunak...
  • Hi all,

    Wondered if anyone might know what I've got.

    Woke up yesterday with quite a bad migraine and last night I started shivering and hallucinating, today I'm feeling achy and my head hurts when I move my eyes.

    I actually feel sort of fine, I don't really want to do anything but I don't feel like I've got the flu.

    Does anyone know what this might be?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,091
    Driver said:

    When I'm Prime Minister I'm going to make it illegal for webforms to have a field labelled as "Date of Birth (dd/mm/yyyy)*" and require you to enter the month from a drop-down list in words not numbers. Grrrrrr...

    Edit: and to disable pasting into the "confirm email address" field. Double grrrrrrr...

    There is such a form I fill out every week. Recently, someone updated it so that if the date you are entering is, say, 3rd of Feb 2023, you can simply tab to the right field then type '03 [tab] F [tab] 2023' - no need for mouse intervention. I was disproportionately delighted.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,552
    edited February 2023
    algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

    Some people will think the Conservatives are sons of bitches, but at least they are our sons of bitches. That’s why I’d expect them to get 33-35% of the vote, and 220-250 seats.

  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Agree. I can only assume because lots of people are stupid. I thought he expressed it brilliantly.
  • tlg86 said:

    By the way, does Lucy Powell not understand what's meant by insolvent or do I not know?

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/feb/03/premier-league-and-efl-financial-settlement-is-urgent-insists-labour

    With over half of EFL clubs already insolvent, how many more could go bust or face the brink before then?

    Does she simply mean running at a loss? Insolvent means you're in the brown stuff doesn't it?

    She's presumably referring to balance sheet insolvency, which is where liabilities exceed assets such that you'd be unable to pay your debts IF they fell due immediately. It's rather a crucial "if".

    Companies can, and often do, continue to trade whilst balance sheet insolvent. It tips into wrongful trading only if directors continue to trade despite knowing there is no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation. But balance sheet insolvency - whilst a warning sign - doesn't necessarily imply that. You could quite easily have sufficient cash flow to pay bills as they fall due, and you trade to generate cash to pay bills falling due later.

    A parallel for individuals is negative equity. Your liabilities (mortgage) exceed assets (house) but, whilst not a great position to be in, your bank can't and won't repossess unless you stop paying the monthly mortgage bill - and your 20 year mortgage isn't, in fact, going to fall due immediately so as long as you have a job and don't want to move you're not in particular danger.

    As has been mentioned, a lot of football debts are also to related persons. There are some fairly dodgy aspects to this in terms of tax etc, but one reason the Chairman might be confident in ability to trade through is that the liabilities are to a significant extent debts owed to him personally, which he could restructure if necessary.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,048
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
    OK, as you say though could go either way
  • Mr. Battery, hope you feel better soon. Afraid I don't know what the problem(s) might be.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
    OK, as you say though could go either way
    My head tells me I have just lost £5.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312

    Scott_xP said:

    Selebian said:

    On topic: Is it time for 'Rishi is Crap Is PM'?

    Certainly for the next 20 months.
    Only if he is really lucky. The bastards are agitating for another change...
    A proposal.

    When a new party is elected to government, the job of PM is given, in rotation, to each of the MPs of that party. So they all get a go.
    A reductio ad absurdam seems quite unnecessary, as far as the current government is concerned.
  • Driver said:

    While I'm on my personal hobby-horses, I'd also ban food labelling where the cooking instructions aren't visible on the outside, especially the two-layer labels that very often are impossible to separate.

    "You can look up the cooking instructions on our website", they said when I complained. Yes, I know I can do that, the point is that I shouldn't have to!

    Difficult to legislate that products must display cook instructions when so many do not have any as they are ready to eat etc etc.

    I take your point and sympathise, but its hard enough making the existing regulations on ingredients / allergens / contact details work. There are a multitude of different approaches to things like nutritional values (traffic lights etc) that make it as confusing as possible for punters.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Presumably because of his demonstrable failure in managing risk ?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,204
    Driver said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    Will prices fall? Aren't house prices mostly determined by what mortgage lenders will allow people to borrow?
    The current housing market, in many areas, is undersupplied. So prices rise to the point that is the highest at which the market clears, subject to what people can borrow/find/steal.

    When the market has *spare capacity*, the prices will fall. Because a bigger mortgage is not the dream anyone dreams of.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,943

    tlg86 said:

    By the way, does Lucy Powell not understand what's meant by insolvent or do I not know?

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/feb/03/premier-league-and-efl-financial-settlement-is-urgent-insists-labour

    With over half of EFL clubs already insolvent, how many more could go bust or face the brink before then?

    Does she simply mean running at a loss? Insolvent means you're in the brown stuff doesn't it?

    With football clubs it is a bit more complicated.

    A lot of clubs are technically insolvent as the majority of the debts they owe their owner/related companies

    https://www.begbies-traynorgroup.com/news/business-health-statistics/october-2022-football-distress-survey-trouble-ahead-for-english-clubs-as-cost-of-living-crisis-double-whammy-stifles-revenues-and-ramps-up-costs
    West Brom are a case in point. There is much nervousness amongst fans at the tangled web of debt and contra-debt in the shop window for
    all to see. Loans to Jeremy Peace, loans to and from Lai. The future ownership status of the Hawthorns, broken transfer fund promises.

    Failure to return to the Premiership this season could see us as the biggest start up in the Midlands Combination.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312

    Hi all,

    Wondered if anyone might know what I've got.

    Woke up yesterday with quite a bad migraine and last night I started shivering and hallucinating, today I'm feeling achy and my head hurts when I move my eyes.

    I actually feel sort of fine, I don't really want to do anything but I don't feel like I've got the flu.

    Does anyone know what this might be?

    Sounds a bit similar to something my wife had a couple of weeks back (though without the hallucinations), which was some kind of virus.
    Though those symptoms might be a number of things.

    Any other symptoms ?

    If in doubt, call 111 ?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,091

    Driver said:

    While I'm on my personal hobby-horses, I'd also ban food labelling where the cooking instructions aren't visible on the outside, especially the two-layer labels that very often are impossible to separate.

    "You can look up the cooking instructions on our website", they said when I complained. Yes, I know I can do that, the point is that I shouldn't have to!

    Difficult to legislate that products must display cook instructions when so many do not have any as they are ready to eat etc etc.

    I take your point and sympathise, but its hard enough making the existing regulations on ingredients / allergens / contact details work. There are a multitude of different approaches to things like nutritional values (traffic lights etc) that make it as confusing as possible for punters.
    I think our theme here is articulating minor pointless irritations, rather than looking for better legislation.

    On which subject, I have recently received my Tesco shop. Tesco appear to have stopped supplying carex handwash in the normal dispenser bottles, and instead supply you with refills. Which would be fine - I'm all for using plastic more efficiently - except for the fact that the refill appears to contain exactly the same amount of handwash and possibly more plastic than the dispenser it has replaced.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,176
    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    Except there isn't really such a thing as too early. From those policies which have started to dribble out (see the racist funding of businesses yesterday) I am starting to get the impression it's because they know that the things they really want to do are either irrelevant to or actively off-putting for swing voters.
    But there is, both because going too early gives the government more time to pinch or neutralise your better ideas and actually implement them, or promise to do so, before its own election programme firms up, and because as the election approaches it's harder to get media coverage for old ideas than new ones. Plus for proposals that have potential downsides or opponents (as almost all do), you provide more time for active campaigns against your proposals to get going.

    On the other hand an opposition needs to be feeding ideas out during at least the year ahead of an election - otherwise it will have nothing to say in the media and look foolish not being able to answer the "what would you do instead?" questions. Plus it takes time and a lot of repetition to make a generally disinterested public to notice, and understand, what you are proposing.

    For the LibDems it's even more difficult since they have far less opportunities for media exposure and because finding distinctive third positions on many issues is difficult.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    Interesting that Norway opts for the Leopard over the Korean K2, after all.

    Norway to buy 54 Leopard 2A7s, with an option for further 18.

    The Government is also working on other measures to strengthen the ground forces, incl long range precision fires.

    https://twitter.com/The_Lookout_N/status/1621446257385283586
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,204
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Presumably because of his demonstrable failure in managing risk ?
    He actually got mocked about the quote before the failure became evident.

    By the usual suspects in the press. Who failed to realise it is actually not new. And further failed to ask “what Known items has he failed to account for? What possible Unknowns are hiding out there?”
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,176
    algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

    Which was the Blair playbook in 1997, to a large extent - a pledge card with itemised promises that gave the impression that they had concrete, specific proposals whilst being things that no-one could really object to, worded carefully enough to provide some wriggle room later.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    The US is poised to announce a new $2.2 billion military aid package for Ukraine today. It's expected to include ground-launched small-diameter bombs with a range of 94 miles, doubling Ukraine’s current strike range, reports @felschwartz.
    https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1621398572670279680
  • Raab's response to Gina Miller's claim that he spoke to her in an abusive and demeaning way has been to dismiss them using exactly the same kind of abusive and demeaning language, which only makes the claims sound more plausible. He's really a bit thick, like a lot of bullies I suppose.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/feb/03/dominic-raab-abusive-anti-brexit-campaigner-gina-miller-train-strikes-aslef-uk-politics-live#maincontent
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,204
    Cookie said:

    Driver said:

    While I'm on my personal hobby-horses, I'd also ban food labelling where the cooking instructions aren't visible on the outside, especially the two-layer labels that very often are impossible to separate.

    "You can look up the cooking instructions on our website", they said when I complained. Yes, I know I can do that, the point is that I shouldn't have to!

    Difficult to legislate that products must display cook instructions when so many do not have any as they are ready to eat etc etc.

    I take your point and sympathise, but its hard enough making the existing regulations on ingredients / allergens / contact details work. There are a multitude of different approaches to things like nutritional values (traffic lights etc) that make it as confusing as possible for punters.
    I think our theme here is articulating minor pointless irritations, rather than looking for better legislation.

    On which subject, I have recently received my Tesco shop. Tesco appear to have stopped supplying carex handwash in the normal dispenser bottles, and instead supply you with refills. Which would be fine - I'm all for using plastic more efficiently - except for the fact that the refill appears to contain exactly the same amount of handwash and possibly more plastic than the dispenser it has replaced.
    They sell Carex in 1ltr recyclable pouches - in a number of places. Keep it under the sink and refill as required.
  • Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Singapore have an interesting in between ownership and social housing state of fixed 99 year leases and a govt quango as freeholder. I wonder if that could work for building new housing here too.
  • Hi all,

    Wondered if anyone might know what I've got.

    Woke up yesterday with quite a bad migraine and last night I started shivering and hallucinating, today I'm feeling achy and my head hurts when I move my eyes.

    I actually feel sort of fine, I don't really want to do anything but I don't feel like I've got the flu.

    Does anyone know what this might be?

    Hopefully you aren't bird flu patient zero! Drink lots of tea and take paracetamol. Stay in bed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Presumably because of his demonstrable failure in managing risk ?
    He actually got mocked about the quote before the failure became evident.

    By the usual suspects in the press. Who failed to realise it is actually not new. And further failed to ask “what Known items has he failed to account for? What possible Unknowns are hiding out there?”
    Perhaps.
    He was still an arrogant fool.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    Since "Chinese Spy Balloon" is trending: In 1945, the crew of USS New York spotted a sphere that they thought might be a Japanese balloon weapon. The captain ordered it shot down but none of the guns could score a hit. Finally, a navigator realized they were attacking Venus.
    https://twitter.com/NavalInstitute/status/1621310952489590785
  • Raab's response to Gina Miller's claim that he spoke to her in an abusive and demeaning way has been to dismiss them using exactly the same kind of abusive and demeaning language, which only makes the claims sound more plausible. He's really a bit thick, like a lot of bullies I suppose.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/feb/03/dominic-raab-abusive-anti-brexit-campaigner-gina-miller-train-strikes-aslef-uk-politics-live#maincontent

    Politicians are often promoted for being abusive and demeaning to their opponents in the Commons. Hardly a surprise they continue with it in other roles.
  • kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
    A warning to you both that the outcome of this bet will take a hell of a lot of working out for the local elections.

    Reports don't normally show it - they show net change, and no net change on a particular Council, for example, could quite easily mean two Lib Dem gains from Labour, two Labour gains from Tory, and two Tory gains from Lib Dem. Also boundary changes in some council areas means it is unclear whether a win is a gain.

    You'll really struggle to settle this one unless the net result is so clear that going into the detail on Lib Dem/Tory switches is unnecessary.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,419
    Rachel Reeves reckons the latest hike is adding £7490 to an average Finchley mortgage. I mean I know housing in London is expensive but that sounds.... high off the back of a 0.5% rise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
    A warning to you both that the outcome of this bet will take a hell of a lot of working out for the local elections.

    Reports don't normally show it - they show net change, and no net change on a particular Council, for example, could quite easily mean two Lib Dem gains from Labour, two Labour gains from Tory, and two Tory gains from Lib Dem. Also boundary changes in some council areas means it is unclear whether a win is a gain.

    You'll really struggle to settle this one unless the net result is so clear that going into the detail on Lib Dem/Tory switches is unnecessary.
    On the plus side, if it's close, it will provide weeks of entertainment as HYUFD explains why he has won.

    And we realise we're unable to rebut his arguments...
  • Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 48% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-2)
    LDM: 9% (-1)
    GRN: 6% (-1)
    RFM: 6% (=)

    Via @YouGov, 31 Jan - 1 Feb.
    Changes w/ 24-25 Jan.

    Why won't Keir resign?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,109
    @BloombergUK: The UK is yet to see any positive economic benefits from Brexit, Bank of England Chief Economist Huw Pill suggests https://t.co/ru7oT66uHi
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,176

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 48% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-2)
    LDM: 9% (-1)
    GRN: 6% (-1)
    RFM: 6% (=)

    Via @YouGov, 31 Jan - 1 Feb.
    Changes w/ 24-25 Jan.

    Why won't Keir resign?

    How low can they go.....??
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,674
    edited February 2023
    Nigelb said:

    The US is poised to announce a new $2.2 billion military aid package for Ukraine today. It's expected to include ground-launched small-diameter bombs with a range of 94 miles, doubling Ukraine’s current strike range, reports @felschwartz.
    https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1621398572670279680

    This was floating around yesterday. When you look at the maps (and providing they have enough of the weapons to make it count), it *just* allows them to attack any Russian concentration points (including the choke points from Crimea into the rest of Ukraine). That would seem to be significant.

    I can also understand why the US haven't sent it before - it would have just been "another weapon" until the front settled into this kind of position.
  • 24 point lead is a disaster for the Tories.

    I know MoonRabbit is convinced the polls are narrowing again, just like they were convinced they were narrowing a week ago, then two weeks ago, then three weeks ago...

    But everything I can see, it's a 20 point lead and has been for some time
  • Nigelb said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%. The LDs gained control of 10 councils from the Tories and were largest party in others which went NOC. So the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Would you like a £5 charity bet on the net Tory/LD gains. That is I am willing to bet the LDs win more seats off the Tories and you the Tories win more seats off the LDs. Ignoring any losses and gains to and from other parties.

    You have the stats on your side. All I have is an unreliable gut feeling. When this was discussed last time I looked at a few Surrey Boroughs and I must admit although I could find some potential LD gains I found a lot that could go the other way so I am far from confident (hence only £5).
    A warning to you both that the outcome of this bet will take a hell of a lot of working out for the local elections.

    Reports don't normally show it - they show net change, and no net change on a particular Council, for example, could quite easily mean two Lib Dem gains from Labour, two Labour gains from Tory, and two Tory gains from Lib Dem. Also boundary changes in some council areas means it is unclear whether a win is a gain.

    You'll really struggle to settle this one unless the net result is so clear that going into the detail on Lib Dem/Tory switches is unnecessary.
    On the plus side, if it's close, it will provide weeks of entertainment as HYUFD explains why he has won.

    And we realise we're unable to rebut his arguments...
    I suspect we'll be treated to that even if it isn't close.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,247
    edited February 2023

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Presumably because of his demonstrable failure in managing risk ?
    He actually got mocked about the quote before the failure became evident.

    By the usual suspects in the press. Who failed to realise it is actually not new. And further failed to ask “what Known items has he failed to account for? What possible Unknowns are hiding out there?”
    Rightly mocked for his patronising bullshit. This was in response to the challenge that there was no evidence of a connection between Saddam's regime and the terrorists carrying out the 9/11 attacks. At most it was a "known unknown" and if you are going to be evidence-led, as you always should be and as Donald Rumsfeld absolutely was not, it was a "known known". ie the evidence indicated no link (Saddam was a sworn enemy of Islamists)
  • Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 46% (-4)
    CON: 22% (+1)
    LDM: 9% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (+2)
    RFM: 7% (=)
    SNP: 5% (-1)

    Via @PeoplePolling, 1 Feb.
    Changes w/ 24 Jan.

    Two polls with a 24 point lead
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    My local Surgery which has been harder to get in than Fort Knox over the last 3 years, is actually advertising on Facebook that they have lots of routine appointments available today. I never thought I would see that.
  • Chris Giles has a piece in the FT arguing against taxing Boomer wealth to fix intergenerational inequality... Might be an interesting read given the debates on the issue on here (not linking because of pay wall).
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    Except there isn't really such a thing as too early. From those policies which have started to dribble out (see the racist funding of businesses yesterday) I am starting to get the impression it's because they know that the things they really want to do are either irrelevant to or actively off-putting for swing voters.
    But there is, both because going too early gives the government more time to pinch or neutralise your better ideas and actually implement them, or promise to do so, before its own election programme firms up, and because as the election approaches it's harder to get media coverage for old ideas than new ones. Plus for proposals that have potential downsides or opponents (as almost all do), you provide more time for active campaigns against your proposals to get going.

    On the other hand an opposition needs to be feeding ideas out during at least the year ahead of an election - otherwise it will have nothing to say in the media and look foolish not being able to answer the "what would you do instead?" questions. Plus it takes time and a lot of repetition to make a generally disinterested public to notice, and understand, what you are proposing.

    For the LibDems it's even more difficult since they have far less opportunities for media exposure and because finding distinctive third positions on many issues is difficult.
    The government nicking an opposition policy is a win for the opposition, not a loss.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    Pulpstar said:

    Rachel Reeves reckons the latest hike is adding £7490 to an average Finchley mortgage. I mean I know housing in London is expensive but that sounds.... high off the back of a 0.5% rise.

    Over 25 years, perhaps?
  • Labour leads the Conservatives on EVERY issue.

    Which party do voters trust the most on...? (Labour | the Conservatives)

    NHS (47% | 17%)
    Education (45% | 19%)
    Housing (42% | 18%)
    The economy (37% | 29%)
    Immigration (34% | 23%)
    Ukraine (32% | 30%)
    The environment (28% | 14%)

    These are not the numbers of a Government that will be re-elected
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,942
    edited February 2023

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441
    edited February 2023

    Carnyx said:

    O/T but some good news for a change.

    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/feb/03/thornborough-henges-north-yorkshire-gifted-england-heritage

    "The circular earthworks are thought to be part of a “ritual landscape”, comparable to Salisbury Plain, home to Stonehenge.

    There are three henges running north to south over a mile long. Two have been given to the nation by the construction company Tarmac. Lightwater Holdings, a local company, has given parts of the wider monument."

    As that's on the edge of the Flatlands I have of course been there.

    The earthworks are still pretty large - the best preserved being the one now covered in woodland - but the whole site was in serious need of looking after and was being eroded by rabbits and people (although it isn't exactly busy).

    The problem is that half the surrounding landscape is being quarried away for sand by Tarmac et al, so the context is being lost. One old quarry (now a nature reserve) is within a few yards of the site. Of course they couldn't quarry the site itself - so I'm not entirely surprised they have handed it over.

    The three circles aren't in a straight line - there was some speculation that this was because they were a mirror for Orion's Belt, but who knows.
    Mm, thanks, sounds like Priddy Circles on Mendip (apart from my not being sure of their curent state), but with added quarries alas ...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    Presumably because of his demonstrable failure in managing risk ?
    He actually got mocked about the quote before the failure became evident.

    By the usual suspects in the press. Who failed to realise it is actually not new. And further failed to ask “what Known items has he failed to account for? What possible Unknowns are hiding out there?”
    Rightly mocked for his patronising bullshit. This was in response to the challenge that there was no evidence of a connection between Saddam's regime and the terrorists carrying out the 9/11 attacks. At most it was a "known unknown" and if you are going to be evidence-led, as you always should be and as Donald Rumsfeld absolutely was not, it was a "known known". ie the evidence indicated no link (Saddam was a sworn enemy of Islamists)
    Malmesbury does have a point, though, that journalists present might have put that precise point to him.
    For what was effectively a statement of the bleeding obvious, it was a successful piece of distraction.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950

    My local Surgery which has been harder to get in than Fort Knox over the last 3 years, is actually advertising on Facebook that they have lots of routine appointments available today. I never thought I would see that.

    It must be something about the 3/2 because my surgery, which is ok to get an appointment for but is still usually busy, was empty today. In the waiting area there was me and 3 receptionists. That was it. And I got an appointment with just a one week wait to have my trigger finger op (if you can call that an op).
  • IanB2 said:

    algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

    Which was the Blair playbook in 1997, to a large extent - a pledge card with itemised promises that gave the impression that they had concrete, specific proposals whilst being things that no-one could really object to, worded carefully enough to provide some wriggle room later.
    It's the playbook of most election winners, isn't it? Cameron 2010 was more vibes than detail, and Thatcher's 1979 manifesto wasn't a full guide to the revolution to come.

    Coming up with all the policies is mostly for losers who know, deep down, that the manifesto is the nearest their ambitions will get to reality. The alternative is when it's being done by revolutionaries who have been drawing up plans since they should have been revising for their A Levels. It rarely ends well (see Poll Tax).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    Scott_xP said:

    @BloombergUK: The UK is yet to see any positive economic benefits from Brexit, Bank of England Chief Economist Huw Pill suggests https://t.co/ru7oT66uHi

    We did increase our trade with North Korea by over 100% last year.

    To $127m.
  • Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,787

    Labour leads the Conservatives on EVERY issue.

    Which party do voters trust the most on...? (Labour | the Conservatives)

    NHS (47% | 17%)
    Education (45% | 19%)
    Housing (42% | 18%)
    The economy (37% | 29%)
    Immigration (34% | 23%)
    Ukraine (32% | 30%)
    The environment (28% | 14%)

    These are not the numbers of a Government that will be re-elected

    The Ukraine numbers are impressive because that's the type of shit that the tories kid themselves they own.

    Has SKS even done the umrah to Kiev yet?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,176
    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    Except there isn't really such a thing as too early. From those policies which have started to dribble out (see the racist funding of businesses yesterday) I am starting to get the impression it's because they know that the things they really want to do are either irrelevant to or actively off-putting for swing voters.
    But there is, both because going too early gives the government more time to pinch or neutralise your better ideas and actually implement them, or promise to do so, before its own election programme firms up, and because as the election approaches it's harder to get media coverage for old ideas than new ones. Plus for proposals that have potential downsides or opponents (as almost all do), you provide more time for active campaigns against your proposals to get going.

    On the other hand an opposition needs to be feeding ideas out during at least the year ahead of an election - otherwise it will have nothing to say in the media and look foolish not being able to answer the "what would you do instead?" questions. Plus it takes time and a lot of repetition to make a generally disinterested public to notice, and understand, what you are proposing.

    For the LibDems it's even more difficult since they have far less opportunities for media exposure and because finding distinctive third positions on many issues is difficult.
    The government nicking an opposition policy is a win for the opposition, not a loss.
    Not in an election it isn't
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,176
    edited February 2023

    IanB2 said:

    algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    My feeling is that Labour won't set out a stall in any real way. Their manifesto and run up to it will consist of: Pious hope and moderated unicorns over Brexit, debt and deficit; pious and unconvincing hope on the NHS; distance from unions in which we see both sides; incomprehensible stuff on regionalism; tax those richer than you without alienating support from the richer Guardian readers.

    The winning formula will be much simpler: Time for a Change; We are non socialist centrist Social democrats; here are some populist retail offers we have just thought up; look at the other lot.

    Which was the Blair playbook in 1997, to a large extent - a pledge card with itemised promises that gave the impression that they had concrete, specific proposals whilst being things that no-one could really object to, worded carefully enough to provide some wriggle room later.
    It's the playbook of most election winners, isn't it? Cameron 2010 was more vibes than detail, and Thatcher's 1979 manifesto wasn't a full guide to the revolution to come.

    Coming up with all the policies is mostly for losers who know, deep down, that the manifesto is the nearest their ambitions will get to reality. The alternative is when it's being done by revolutionaries who have been drawing up plans since they should have been revising for their A Levels. It rarely ends well (see Poll Tax).
    Yes, cf. the huge amount of time the LibDems spend poring over the wording of a whole shelf of policy documents, covering the detail of almost everything, yet leaving them with hardly anything exciting enough to campaign on or catchy enough that the public will ever remember. People say that the LibDems have no policies but the truth is the reverse.

    Still, it did make it easy for the canny Conservatives to know what to offer in the coalition negotiations, because Oliver Letwin had taken the trouble to go read all the LibDem policy documents!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,441
    edited February 2023

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
    Personal finance? I don't disagree with you at all. But to extend the thought - consider which party's funders benefit most from public ignorance of when one is being ripped off.

    Grammar schools and Latin are more important, allegedly.

    PS Though the unis are better - for instance, much more on how to present written and spoken material. Vastly improved over the 1970s!

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Labour leads the Conservatives on EVERY issue.

    Which party do voters trust the most on...? (Labour | the Conservatives)

    NHS (47% | 17%)
    Education (45% | 19%)
    Housing (42% | 18%)
    The economy (37% | 29%)
    Immigration (34% | 23%)
    Ukraine (32% | 30%)
    The environment (28% | 14%)

    These are not the numbers of a Government that will be re-elected

    The real worry for the Tories must be the fact that nothing seems to move the polls, any more

    They did move, and now they have stopped. And they show a consistent and extraordinary Labour lead of ~25 points
  • Chris Giles has a piece in the FT arguing against taxing Boomer wealth to fix intergenerational inequality... Might be an interesting read given the debates on the issue on here (not linking because of pay wall).

    The wonderful 12ft Ladder website - https://12ft.io/ - is your friend here. It finds non-paywalled versions that are uploaded so search engines can find them - something technical to do with caches, or something. Anyway, how it works is beyond the capacity of my tiny mind - I suspect witchcraft really - but it'll get you past a lot of paywalls.

    Unpaywalled version is here: https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://www.ft.com/content/5c482689-76a7-4a62-b042-acd4b4aaecf4
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,029
    IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    Except there isn't really such a thing as too early. From those policies which have started to dribble out (see the racist funding of businesses yesterday) I am starting to get the impression it's because they know that the things they really want to do are either irrelevant to or actively off-putting for swing voters.
    But there is, both because going too early gives the government more time to pinch or neutralise your better ideas and actually implement them, or promise to do so, before its own election programme firms up, and because as the election approaches it's harder to get media coverage for old ideas than new ones. Plus for proposals that have potential downsides or opponents (as almost all do), you provide more time for active campaigns against your proposals to get going.

    On the other hand an opposition needs to be feeding ideas out during at least the year ahead of an election - otherwise it will have nothing to say in the media and look foolish not being able to answer the "what would you do instead?" questions. Plus it takes time and a lot of repetition to make a generally disinterested public to notice, and understand, what you are proposing.

    For the LibDems it's even more difficult since they have far less opportunities for media exposure and because finding distinctive third positions on many issues is difficult.
    The government nicking an opposition policy is a win for the opposition, not a loss.
    Not in an election it isn't
    It is if they play it correctly.
  • Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
    Personal finance? I don't disagree with you at all. But to extend the thought - consider which party's funders benefit most from public ignorance of when one is being ripped off.

    Grammar schools and Latin are more important, allegedly.

    PS Though the unis are better - for instance, much more on how to present written and spoken material. Vastly improved over the 1970s!

    I am as cynical as anyone but this one isnt happening because of nefarious interests, simply inertia and an unwillingness to contemplate radical change compared to our own educations.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,950
    Dura_Ace said:

    Labour leads the Conservatives on EVERY issue.

    Which party do voters trust the most on...? (Labour | the Conservatives)

    NHS (47% | 17%)
    Education (45% | 19%)
    Housing (42% | 18%)
    The economy (37% | 29%)
    Immigration (34% | 23%)
    Ukraine (32% | 30%)
    The environment (28% | 14%)

    These are not the numbers of a Government that will be re-elected

    The Ukraine numbers are impressive because that's the type of shit that the tories kid themselves they own.

    Has SKS even done the umrah to Kiev yet?
    The Tories should own it. I don't know why they don't. It doesn't make sense unless it is just people who are so anti the Tories they are going to rubbish them regardless of the topic.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,091

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
    Well this raises rather more questions over what is education actually for, not least in 'what do I trust the state to teach my children'. I'm quite happy for the state to teach my children maths, for example. I'd be very wary about letting the state teach my children relationships or parenting.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    kjh said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Labour leads the Conservatives on EVERY issue.

    Which party do voters trust the most on...? (Labour | the Conservatives)

    NHS (47% | 17%)
    Education (45% | 19%)
    Housing (42% | 18%)
    The economy (37% | 29%)
    Immigration (34% | 23%)
    Ukraine (32% | 30%)
    The environment (28% | 14%)

    These are not the numbers of a Government that will be re-elected

    The Ukraine numbers are impressive because that's the type of shit that the tories kid themselves they own.

    Has SKS even done the umrah to Kiev yet?
    The Tories should own it. I don't know why they don't. It doesn't make sense unless it is just people who are so anti the Tories they are going to rubbish them regardless of the topic.
    Because no one seriously doubts that Labour would continue the policy of supporting Ukraine - and it's just possible they might run things slightly more effectively.
  • Mr. Driver, the American dating system is one that gets me.

    The Chinese approach of large to small and the British approach of small to large both make intrinsic sense.

    The US style of month, day, year is just daft.

    YYYYMMDD is easier for a computer to sort.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,312
    These people, if not actually insane, have clearly and determinedly abandoned reason.

    ‘The Party May Have to Die to Be Reborn’
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/03/arizona-republican-party-election-denialism-lae-00080615

    ...Yet if it’s hard to hold your own elections when election denialism is your thing, DeWit was such a consensus choice that his victory was never really in doubt. It’s the elections Democrats won that the assembled Republicans assembled still have problems with. The party rejected a proposal to accept the results of the 2020 election and “not belabor or try to overturn old elections, but work to win upcoming ones.” It rejected a proposal to honor John McCain for being a “dedicated Arizona statesman and a lifelong Republican who embraced bipartisanship.” And it voted by a large margin to censure Republican elected officials in Maricopa County, including Stephen Richer, the county recorder, and Supervisor Bill Gates, for their part in overseeing previous elections.

    Distinct from procedural disputes about voting ID or mail voting, majorities of Republicans in poll after poll still adhere to Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was rigged. In the more than two years since Trump lost, as allegations of fraud have repeatedly been shown to be unfounded and nonfactual, it persists as an article of faith—– more an assertion of a belief that Democrats could not possibly have beaten them, even if they did.

    In the courtyard, Sally Kizer, who, with her husband, Carl, started a tea party group in Yuma County, told me Lake “was robbed.”

    The election “stinks,” said M.J. Coking, a state committeewoman from Chandler.

    “Throw out the election and run it again,” said Chad Moreland, a Republican in an American flag blazer.

    There were things Republicans could do better, they were sure. They could raise more money or run more sophisticated turnout operations than they had last year. A candidate like Lake could learn to “pivot” more effectively for a general election audience, one strategist told me.

    But these were tactical concerns. There was no reason for a more wholesale overhaul if — as nearly everyone I came across maintained — Republicans didn’t really lose.

    Trump, Coking told me, is “the only one who can fix anything.”..
  • IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Driver said:

    IanB2 said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    IMHO the swingback occurs less because people start to give the government a more sympathetic hearing, but because as the election approaches attention from the media and commentariat starts to focus on what the opposition do, and the narrative changes from "this lot are shit so I am voting for the other lot" to "which of these is better?". Inevitably some voters, when they start to contemplate voting for the other lot, will find things they don't like and change their minds.

    So the question is when Labour will start to set out its stall - they won't want to do it too early but on the other hand can't afford to leave starting on it too late?
    Except there isn't really such a thing as too early. From those policies which have started to dribble out (see the racist funding of businesses yesterday) I am starting to get the impression it's because they know that the things they really want to do are either irrelevant to or actively off-putting for swing voters.
    But there is, both because going too early gives the government more time to pinch or neutralise your better ideas and actually implement them, or promise to do so, before its own election programme firms up, and because as the election approaches it's harder to get media coverage for old ideas than new ones. Plus for proposals that have potential downsides or opponents (as almost all do), you provide more time for active campaigns against your proposals to get going.

    On the other hand an opposition needs to be feeding ideas out during at least the year ahead of an election - otherwise it will have nothing to say in the media and look foolish not being able to answer the "what would you do instead?" questions. Plus it takes time and a lot of repetition to make a generally disinterested public to notice, and understand, what you are proposing.

    For the LibDems it's even more difficult since they have far less opportunities for media exposure and because finding distinctive third positions on many issues is difficult.
    The government nicking an opposition policy is a win for the opposition, not a loss.
    Not in an election it isn't
    Not just that- there's also the "the Otherlot Party will do it but incompetently, discrediting what should be a good idea". It's an interesting question- how much do we vote for a set of policies, and how much for the character of candidates? What would be the optimal mix for a well-running happy democracy?

    Tangentally, David Davis seems to be in the news again;

    "Whitehall did a really crap job of negotiation. I mean, really crap."

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/ministers-reflect/david-davis
  • Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
    Well this raises rather more questions over what is education actually for, not least in 'what do I trust the state to teach my children'. I'm quite happy for the state to teach my children maths, for example. I'd be very wary about letting the state teach my children relationships or parenting.
    Hence we end up with generations of underclass where good parenting is insufficiently shown or modelled and makes it very hard for some groups of kids, and their kids, and so on, to ever catch up. Whilst the rest of society pay for them. Most inefficient imo.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,901

    Chris Giles has a piece in the FT arguing against taxing Boomer wealth to fix intergenerational inequality... Might be an interesting read given the debates on the issue on here (not linking because of pay wall).

    Available via google. Headline "OK Boomer"
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375
    kjh said:

    My local Surgery which has been harder to get in than Fort Knox over the last 3 years, is actually advertising on Facebook that they have lots of routine appointments available today. I never thought I would see that.

    It must be something about the 3/2 because my surgery, which is ok to get an appointment for but is still usually busy, was empty today. In the waiting area there was me and 3 receptionists. That was it. And I got an appointment with just a one week wait to have my trigger finger op (if you can call that an op).
    For that Surgery to advertise must mean that they have got an empty day today. They normally do everything possible to avoid seeing people. Everybody must be well.
  • DJ41aDJ41a Posts: 174
    edited February 2023
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Idle enquiry - when do PBers feel that "mid-term" is over and any substantial swingback should start to appear? My sense is May, after the local elections. IIRC Major started to recover at the corresponding time in 1992-97.

    My gut view is that the May elections will be critical and will be a big blow for the Tories and see a boost for the LDs in the polling which could be critical for the GE.

    However this is just a gut feeling and when I have said this before @HYUFD has pointed out the results from the equivalent previous elections where the LDs did very well against the Tories and he is correct, so I do fear my gut feeling may just be wishful thinking.
    Indeed, the LDs got 19% in the 2019 local elections and the Tories just 28%, so the Tories may even pick up some LD seats where LD controlled councils are unpopular.

    However I do expect Labour gains from the Tories given Labour also got 28% NEV in the 2019 locals, now Starmer has replaced Corbyn
    Can we do a Rumsfeld analysis?

    Known Knowns - Money going into NHS, strikes, disunited conservative party, Charles's coronation
    Knowns Unknowns - Economy improving? Ukraine war resolution?
    Unknown Unknowns - ? Events dear boy?
    I don’t know why Rumsfeld was mocked for it. It explains risk management perfectly.
    About as much as you can explain the distribution of height by saying you can divide people into short and tall.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,091

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    The interview on the Today program around 6.50 is worth a listen for those interested.

    “If we don’t have a semiconductor strategy, we’re walking away from one of the biggest industries in the world” Simon Thomas from
    @Paragraf_Gr told @amolrajan

    https://mobile.twitter.com/kprescott/status/1621423826771873793

    Yup.

    Again, simple. X per chip class (processor, GP etc) actually produced at scale. X scaled to UK added value.

    The advatanges of such schemes, are

    1) that the risk is kept private.
    2) politically, you are spending a future governments money. You won't be minister when the subsidy payments are actually required. Since building the factory will take a decade.
    It's more than just subsidies.

    It's about planning rules which allow facilities to be built without spending years in planning; attracting tech talent to the UK (multiple factors affect that, of course); even having adequate infrastructure (chip plants use a LOT of power) etc

    We're just not really doing any of this stuff.
    The other issue that I think is really important is that, for one reason or another, a lot of investment and savings capital has been poured into houses, and essentially the land that the houses sit on, and not enough private capital has gone into productive investment.

    This should be something the government can influence with changes to the tax system, to make one type of investment more attractive than the other. There might be other regulatory changes that would help too, as would more direct government intervention in the housing market by building houses for social rent.
    Housing is simple. Build more houses.

    Prices will fall
    More people can move out long HMOs
    Less theoretical wealth in bricks and mortar.
    People have said that for a long time and it hasn't happened. I think you need to reduce the amount of investment income going into but-to-let housing too, and have the state build houses directly so that the big housebuilders can't restrict supply, but have to compete on quality and price.

    And there also need to be changes to make other investments more attractive. We should aim for a situation where, when two people who both own homes move in together, it makes most financial sense for them to sell one and invest the proceeds elsewhere, rather than to become amateur landlords.
    It probably does already but people don't understand investments.

    Teaching personal financial education is really important and there is a huge disconnect between what we teach at schools and universities and what would benefit us most in 21st century life. Fitness, health, relationships, parenting and personal finance should be central in our education not add ons to squeeze in.
    Well this raises rather more questions over what is education actually for, not least in 'what do I trust the state to teach my children'. I'm quite happy for the state to teach my children maths, for example. I'd be very wary about letting the state teach my children relationships or parenting.
    Hence we end up with generations of underclass where good parenting is insufficiently shown or modelled and makes it very hard for some groups of kids, and their kids, and so on, to ever catch up. Whilst the rest of society pay for them. Most inefficient imo.
    I'm not saying that there aren't some bad parents (though I have never met a parent who I'd say isn't doing a decent enough job, considering). I'm saying I don't have any faith in the state's ability to pass on messages on such subjects which are in any way useful. I mean they might do. But they might equally well spout useless bullshit.
  • algarkirk said:

    Chris Giles has a piece in the FT arguing against taxing Boomer wealth to fix intergenerational inequality... Might be an interesting read given the debates on the issue on here (not linking because of pay wall).

    Available via google. Headline "OK Boomer"
    So basically saying younger generations should be split into

    those grateful for inheritance and bank of mum and dad
    those who have to suck it up

    I wonder which category the Cambridge educated economics editor of the FT is in.....
This discussion has been closed.