Howdy, Stranger!

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

The polls are definitely tightening – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,218
edited April 2023 in General
imageThe polls are definitely tightening – politicalbetting.com

I always like looking at voting polls in a group and the above table from Wikipedia shows what’s happened over the last few weeks or so.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,640
    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    Probably not.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,569
    As the chart shows, the shift happened some time back, and as Mike says it's undoubtedly linked to the change of leader. However, nothing much seems to have changed over the month - the leads are with one exception all in the 15-21 range.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    They're still a long way ahead, but equally there's zero room for complacency.

    Labour are going to need to articulate a coherent vision, even if a lot of the finer details have to wait until the manifesto, to give voters something positive to support. Not being the Tories won't be enough.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    Just the good old boys…

    No One Should Be That Shocked by What’s Happening in Tennessee
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/08/tennessee-descent-statehouse-mag-00091090
    The world of politics experienced a collective shock this week as Tennessee Republicans expelled two young, Black, Democratic House members for protesting gun laws on the chamber floor after a deadly school shooting in Nashville.

    But for those who have closely watched the chamber in recent years, the events were of little surprise. The place has been defined by partisan vitriol, pique, scandal, racism and Olympic-level pettiness for years.

    The protest and subsequent expulsion over decorum rules took place in a chamber where a GOP member, for years, rang a cowbell every day of session as a raucous, attention-grabbing substitute for applause.

    When I covered the Tennessee Capitol from 2018 to 2021, the family-values espousing Republican House speaker had to explain why his text message trail included discussions of pole-dancing women and his chief of staff’s sexual encounters in the bathroom of a hot chicken restaurant.

    After a Republican lawmaker was accused of sexually assaulting 15- and 16-year-old girls he had taught and coached, he was made chairman of the House education committee…


  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929

    As the chart shows, the shift happened some time back, and as Mike says it's undoubtedly linked to the change of leader. However, nothing much seems to have changed over the month - the leads are with one exception all in the 15-21 range.

    Though as you yourself have said it seems a bit soft. I still think the economy might surprise on the upside but taking into account the situation in Scotland, Labour ought to be easily the largest party.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    British Firms avoiding sanctions to help Russia's genocidal war in Ukraine:

    https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/04/07/british-firm-ships-12bln-of-electronics-to-russia-despite-sanctions-ft-a80753

    These owners need to be thrown in prison.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Judging by PB, it's the TORIES who are getting (even more) nervous.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,640

    As the chart shows, the shift happened some time back, and as Mike says it's undoubtedly linked to the change of leader. However, nothing much seems to have changed over the month - the leads are with one exception all in the 15-21 range.

    Though as you yourself have said it seems a bit soft. I still think the economy might surprise on the upside but taking into account the situation in Scotland, Labour ought to be easily the largest party.
    Scotland will indeed be the big bonus for LAB. They will get lots of extra seats in Scotland that they weren't expecting a few months ago.

    LAB still big favourites and can still get an overall majority but it is likely to be small at best and they need to come out with some real ideas.

    People are not at all happy with the current government but there is still no real enthusiasm for Starmer or LAB.

    CON with a real chance of ending up with 250+ maybe more, something which looked quite unlikely a few months ago.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    Nigelb said:

    Just the good old boys…

    No One Should Be That Shocked by What’s Happening in Tennessee
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/08/tennessee-descent-statehouse-mag-00091090
    The world of politics experienced a collective shock this week as Tennessee Republicans expelled two young, Black, Democratic House members for protesting gun laws on the chamber floor after a deadly school shooting in Nashville.

    But for those who have closely watched the chamber in recent years, the events were of little surprise. The place has been defined by partisan vitriol, pique, scandal, racism and Olympic-level pettiness for years.

    The protest and subsequent expulsion over decorum rules took place in a chamber where a GOP member, for years, rang a cowbell every day of session as a raucous, attention-grabbing substitute for applause.

    When I covered the Tennessee Capitol from 2018 to 2021, the family-values espousing Republican House speaker had to explain why his text message trail included discussions of pole-dancing women and his chief of staff’s sexual encounters in the bathroom of a hot chicken restaurant.

    After a Republican lawmaker was accused of sexually assaulting 15- and 16-year-old girls he had taught and coached, he was made chairman of the House education committee…


    Not just Tennessee either. Jim Jordan's record of looking the other way when sexual abuse was going on is horrific. He is now in the Republican leadership in the House. The last Republican president is being charged with financial fraud and his approval ratings go up. And Clarence Thomas has been having his vacations paid for by a billionaire lobbyist for years without declaring it. Republicans don't believe in the rule of law as long as someone is in their in group.

    Meanwhile people have a moral panic about "woke". Any decent American needs to vote Democrat.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    WillG said:

    pigeon said:

    Nice soundbite. Will be interesting to see if any answers are forthcoming, come manifesto time, to the following questions:

    1. Government isn't responsible for day-to-day operational decisions by the police. Therefore, what confidence can we have that extra officers won't be assigned to sitting in front of computers looking to catch people who say reprehensible things on Facebook, rather than doing the donkey work of investigating the wide variety of crimes (virtually everything apart from writing nasty things and murder) in which they appear to show precious little interest?
    2. Who is going to pay for the extra police via additional taxation? Will it be (a) rich old farts or (b) the working poor?
    The thing about Labour is that they are all about measuring inputs rather than outputs. They say the statistic is damning. Well what do they commit to get it down to?
    Unfortunately that criticism is usually answered by setting targets, such that meeting the target becomes the priority even if it leads to perverse incentives.
    Sure, but journalists and the other parties should absolutely bring this up after Labour have been power five years.

    If they spend all this extra money and they don't increase the theft conviction rate, this should be thrown in their face.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    WillG said:

    British Firms avoiding sanctions to help Russia's genocidal war in Ukraine:

    https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/04/07/british-firm-ships-12bln-of-electronics-to-russia-despite-sanctions-ft-a80753

    These owners need to be thrown in prison.

    I couldn't see the original FT story behind the payroll. The business is registered to a terraced house in north London. What is the regulation around business addresses? Any chance of regulators popping around for a cup of tea. Who are the directors?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,640

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Judging by PB, it's the TORIES who are getting (even more) nervous.
    I am calm and relaxed. I still expect LAB to win (probably) 👍
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,478
    Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,039
    edited April 2023
    FPT: It's good to see a black man getting reparations -- and without costing the American taxpayers any money. But some people just don't like to see poor folks from places like Pin Point, Georgia getting their due.

    (OK, I am mostly joking. Mostly.

    But I would not automatically reject the argument that there was some rough justice in those gifts.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    pigeon said:

    Nice soundbite. Will be interesting to see if any answers are forthcoming, come manifesto time, to the following questions:

    1. Government isn't responsible for day-to-day operational decisions by the police. Therefore, what confidence can we have that extra officers won't be assigned to sitting in front of computers looking to catch people who say reprehensible things on Facebook, rather than doing the donkey work of investigating the wide variety of crimes (virtually everything apart from writing nasty things and murder) in which they appear to show precious little interest?
    2. Who is going to pay for the extra police via additional taxation? Will it be (a) rich old farts or (b) the working poor?
    The thing about Labour is that they are all about measuring inputs rather than outputs. They say the statistic is damning. Well what do they commit to get it down to?
    Unfortunately that criticism is usually answered by setting targets, such that meeting the target becomes the priority even if it leads to perverse incentives.
    Sure, but journalists and the other parties should absolutely bring this up after Labour have been power five years.

    If they spend all this extra money and they don't increase the theft conviction rate, this should be thrown in their face.
    I’d hope they ask question of a new Labour government before five years are up. But it’s quite hard to imagine that a government prepared to spend more money and along with a determination to reform policing, would make as bad a job as the Home Office of the last decade.

    Though not impossible, of course.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Judging by PB, it's the TORIES who are getting (even more) nervous.
    It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand.

    Brian Stimpson, Clockwise
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    WillG said:

    Nigelb said:

    Just the good old boys…

    No One Should Be That Shocked by What’s Happening in Tennessee
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/08/tennessee-descent-statehouse-mag-00091090
    The world of politics experienced a collective shock this week as Tennessee Republicans expelled two young, Black, Democratic House members for protesting gun laws on the chamber floor after a deadly school shooting in Nashville.

    But for those who have closely watched the chamber in recent years, the events were of little surprise. The place has been defined by partisan vitriol, pique, scandal, racism and Olympic-level pettiness for years.

    The protest and subsequent expulsion over decorum rules took place in a chamber where a GOP member, for years, rang a cowbell every day of session as a raucous, attention-grabbing substitute for applause.

    When I covered the Tennessee Capitol from 2018 to 2021, the family-values espousing Republican House speaker had to explain why his text message trail included discussions of pole-dancing women and his chief of staff’s sexual encounters in the bathroom of a hot chicken restaurant.

    After a Republican lawmaker was accused of sexually assaulting 15- and 16-year-old girls he had taught and coached, he was made chairman of the House education committee…


    Not just Tennessee either. Jim Jordan's record of looking the other way when sexual abuse was going on is horrific. He is now in the Republican leadership in the House. The last Republican president is being charged with financial fraud and his approval ratings go up. And Clarence Thomas has been having his vacations paid for by a billionaire lobbyist for years without declaring it. Republicans don't believe in the rule of law as long as someone is in their in group.

    Meanwhile people have a moral panic about "woke". Any decent American needs to vote Democrat.
    A Republican senators speaks out…
    The left is furious it lost control of the Supreme Court*, and it wants it back by whatever means possible. The latest effort is a smear on Justice Thomas.

    *Note the last time there was a majority of justices on the court nominated by Democratic presidents was around 1969.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840

    Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    The Conservative Party doesn't need a vision. It doesn't need to promote change - quite the reverse. It's concerned primarily with defending the interests of the winners under the existing socio-economic model, of whom there are many.

    Labour alone needs a vision of change, because if it offers continuity under different management then the Tories' existing supporters will see no reason to vote for pretend Tories over real ones, and many of the losers under the existing model won't bother to turn out through resignation and despair.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,888
    Nigelb said:

    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...

    FWIW I don't think the distinction between 'illegal in most' and 'legal in most' can be formulated without going into a lot of detail. My own very centrist view could be described as both of these, depending on what counts as a case.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,657
    edited April 2023

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Judging by PB, it's the TORIES who are getting (even more) nervous.
    This conservative is not the least nervous as it is clear Starmer is the favourite and has been for sometime

    However Sunak is a change for the better and as this weekend Labour lost the high moral ground I expect he will mitigate the result
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...

    FWIW I don't think the distinction between 'illegal in most' and 'legal in most' can be formulated without going into a lot of detail. My own very centrist view could be described as both of these, depending on what counts as a case.
    Of course there are further nuances.
    But the state of the political battle lines in the US is far from nuanced.
  • Joanna Cherry, a prominent SNP MP, condemned the “menacing atmosphere” of the party’s ruling council which she claimed was being “secretive and evasive” about national finances just weeks before a police investigation into missing campaign funds was launched.

    In her resignation letter from the National Executive Committee (NEC) in May 2021 — leaked to The Sunday Times — Cherry said that it was “impossible” to fulfil her promise to members to “deliver better scrutiny and transparency”.

    Her resignation, addressed to the party’s business convenor, Kirsten Oswald MP, came just days after the departure of Douglas Chapman, also an MP, as party treasurer saying that he “had not received the support or financial information (from the party hierarchy) required to carry out the fiduciary duties”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/joanna-cherry-quit-snp-ruling-council-over-menacing-attitude-gvjk8krhh
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177
    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...

    FWIW I don't think the distinction between 'illegal in most' and 'legal in most' can be formulated without going into a lot of detail. My own very centrist view could be described as both of these, depending on what counts as a case.
    From talking with actual Americans

    Illegal in most - “Stop with the hypotheticals. I don’t like abortion. And we don’t really need it in most cases”

    Legal in most - “That hypothetical I’ll give you. But I feel that abortion should a last resort. So apart from…..”
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    Joanna Cherry, a prominent SNP MP, condemned the “menacing atmosphere” of the party’s ruling council which she claimed was being “secretive and evasive” about national finances just weeks before a police investigation into missing campaign funds was launched.

    In her resignation letter from the National Executive Committee (NEC) in May 2021 — leaked to The Sunday Times — Cherry said that it was “impossible” to fulfil her promise to members to “deliver better scrutiny and transparency”.

    Her resignation, addressed to the party’s business convenor, Kirsten Oswald MP, came just days after the departure of Douglas Chapman, also an MP, as party treasurer saying that he “had not received the support or financial information (from the party hierarchy) required to carry out the fiduciary duties”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/joanna-cherry-quit-snp-ruling-council-over-menacing-attitude-gvjk8krhh

    I have no idea how other parties manage their finances (other than that the Tories essentially promise a knighthood to the co-chair in exchange for their fundraising efforts), but I really hope they are not as opaque to senior party officials and representatives even.
  • kle4 said:

    Joanna Cherry, a prominent SNP MP, condemned the “menacing atmosphere” of the party’s ruling council which she claimed was being “secretive and evasive” about national finances just weeks before a police investigation into missing campaign funds was launched.

    In her resignation letter from the National Executive Committee (NEC) in May 2021 — leaked to The Sunday Times — Cherry said that it was “impossible” to fulfil her promise to members to “deliver better scrutiny and transparency”.

    Her resignation, addressed to the party’s business convenor, Kirsten Oswald MP, came just days after the departure of Douglas Chapman, also an MP, as party treasurer saying that he “had not received the support or financial information (from the party hierarchy) required to carry out the fiduciary duties”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/joanna-cherry-quit-snp-ruling-council-over-menacing-attitude-gvjk8krhh

    I have no idea how other parties manage their finances (other than that the Tories essentially promise a knighthood to the co-chair in exchange for their fundraising efforts), but I really hope they are not as opaque to senior party officials and representatives even.
    Usually they are but the loan Boris Johnson received from the Tory Party showed other parties can be opaque.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...

    FWIW I don't think the distinction between 'illegal in most' and 'legal in most' can be formulated without going into a lot of detail. My own very centrist view could be described as both of these, depending on what counts as a case.
    From talking with actual Americans

    Illegal in most - “Stop with the hypotheticals. I don’t like abortion. And we don’t really need it in most cases”

    Legal in most - “That hypothetical I’ll give you. But I feel that abortion should a last resort. So apart from…..”
    From my American wife - "it's no business of politicians to tell woman what they should do".
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Judging by PB, it's the TORIES who are getting (even more) nervous.
    I am calm and relaxed. I still expect LAB to win (probably) 👍
    Labour will be nervous with such an uncharismatic leader... but Major won...........
  • Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    I'll have a try at this. Most of the electorate is tired after what has been a very hectic 5-6 years - Brexit and its aftermath, straight into Covid and the lockdowns, followed by a major war in Europe and inflation not seen for 40+ years. They don't won't big ideas necessarily, they want things to be stable and for the Government to step in and protect them when they face major difficulties.

    FWIW, I think that suits 'Sunak-ism' quite well. He's not one for the Thatcherite bold moves but - to many - he's decent enough and seems competent. That's enough for many.

    Labour's problem - and SKS' in particular - is that he has never formulated where Labour will genuinely help people whose main obstacle is trying to deal with a society where the rules seem rigged in favour of big interests and people are resigned to their lives.
  • WillG said:

    Nigelb said:

    Just the good old boys…

    No One Should Be That Shocked by What’s Happening in Tennessee
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/08/tennessee-descent-statehouse-mag-00091090
    The world of politics experienced a collective shock this week as Tennessee Republicans expelled two young, Black, Democratic House members for protesting gun laws on the chamber floor after a deadly school shooting in Nashville.

    But for those who have closely watched the chamber in recent years, the events were of little surprise. The place has been defined by partisan vitriol, pique, scandal, racism and Olympic-level pettiness for years.

    The protest and subsequent expulsion over decorum rules took place in a chamber where a GOP member, for years, rang a cowbell every day of session as a raucous, attention-grabbing substitute for applause.

    When I covered the Tennessee Capitol from 2018 to 2021, the family-values espousing Republican House speaker had to explain why his text message trail included discussions of pole-dancing women and his chief of staff’s sexual encounters in the bathroom of a hot chicken restaurant.

    After a Republican lawmaker was accused of sexually assaulting 15- and 16-year-old girls he had taught and coached, he was made chairman of the House education committee…


    Not just Tennessee either. Jim Jordan's record of looking the other way when sexual abuse was going on is horrific. He is now in the Republican leadership in the House. The last Republican president is being charged with financial fraud and his approval ratings go up. And Clarence Thomas has been having his vacations paid for by a billionaire lobbyist for years without declaring it. Republicans don't believe in the rule of law as long as someone is in their in group.

    Meanwhile people have a moral panic about "woke". Any decent American needs to vote Democrat.
    Together with a Democrat ex-House Leader who took a rather blasé view of insider trading, a Democrat President who has been accused by his ex-business partner of taking bribes from Chinese and Ukrainian interests, a former ex-Democrat President and his ex-Presidential candidate wife where various allegations are still ongoing and a series of DAs funded by billionaire self-interest groups who take a rather relaxed view of crime that affects ordinary people but can spare up the time and energy to charge a political opponent with paying hush money that even normally sympathetic legal commentators say will be hard to prove.

    I think what most Americans realise - which we don't - is that this is not a Black v White
    Good v Evil situation but one where both sides have their faults.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,039
    Off topic, but I like to share good news: "In a rare joint statement, Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Friday demanded the immediate release of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who has been detained in Russia since he was arrested during a reporting trip last month."
    source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/07/schumer-mcconnell-gershkovich-wsj-russia/

    (Yes, I know that these two canny leaders recognize that doing the right thing can sometimes be good politics, as it is in this example. But it is still good news, whatever the mix of motives.)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,303
    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,388

    CON ahead soon? Are LAB getting nervous??

    😈😈

    Con Gain Bootle soon :D
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
  • WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    I disagree.
    We played the game with thugs throughout the Cold War. While China isn't supplying Russia directly with arms we should continue with the diplomatic charade.
    It leaves open options which shouldn't be closed off without good reason.
  • OldBasingOldBasing Posts: 173
    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871

    Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    I'll have a try at this. Most of the electorate is tired after what has been a very hectic 5-6 years - Brexit and its aftermath, straight into Covid and the lockdowns, followed by a major war in Europe and inflation not seen for 40+ years. They don't won't big ideas necessarily, they want things to be stable and for the Government to step in and protect them when they face major difficulties.

    FWIW, I think that suits 'Sunak-ism' quite well. He's not one for the Thatcherite bold moves but - to many - he's decent enough and seems competent. That's enough for many.

    Labour's problem - and SKS' in particular - is that he has never formulated where Labour will genuinely help people whose main obstacle is trying to deal with a society where the rules seem rigged in favour of big interests and people are resigned to their lives.
    You have touched on it a little, but a far simpler explanation is that the poor Tory polling is about the sustained attack on living standards, which the Tories are doing very little about, and that the failure of Labour to seal the deal is that if anything they're worse on COL than the Tories.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,774

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    A variation on beggar-my-neighbour. Interesting

  • Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    I'll have a try at this. Most of the electorate is tired after what has been a very hectic 5-6 years - Brexit and its aftermath, straight into Covid and the lockdowns, followed by a major war in Europe and inflation not seen for 40+ years. They don't won't big ideas necessarily, they want things to be stable and for the Government to step in and protect them when they face major difficulties.

    FWIW, I think that suits 'Sunak-ism' quite well. He's not one for the Thatcherite bold moves but - to many - he's decent enough and seems competent. That's enough for many.

    Labour's problem - and SKS' in particular - is that he has never formulated where Labour will genuinely help people whose main obstacle is trying to deal with a society where the rules seem rigged in favour of big interests and people are resigned to their lives.
    You have touched on it a little, but a far simpler explanation is that the poor Tory polling is about the sustained attack on living standards, which the Tories are doing very little about, and that the failure of Labour to seal the deal is that if anything they're worse on COL than the Tories.
    I think it's more than that. Johnson in the latter part and Truss epitomised disorder and chaos. COL added to that sense and, as you say, the Tories struggled. However, now the narrative has become Labour will win next year, attention has shifted to their plans - and, as you say, the public don't seem convinced
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It’s about the etiquette of Jaw-Jaw vs War-War.

    If Xi is having a dialogue with Zelensky, it would make him look like a prat to be selling arms to Russia at full scale at the same time. He would have to turn it down a bit - no heavy missiles while talking or something.

    So pointless talks with Ukraine would actually help Ukraine. A bit.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Meanwhile Labour jitters over its own ballot performance will be increased by the latest Opinium poll for the Observer which shows that the party’s lead has dropped by four points to 11% since last weekend, while Sunak’s approval rating has improved from -15% to -6%. The poll was conducted before news of the row over the poster broke on social media.


    - guardian
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843
    OldBasing said:

    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.

    It won't be that on polling day
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,662

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156

    OldBasing said:

    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.

    It won't be that on polling day
    We shall see...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,662

    FPT: It's good to see a black man getting reparations -- and without costing the American taxpayers any money. But some people just don't like to see poor folks from places like Pin Point, Georgia getting their due.

    (OK, I am mostly joking. Mostly.

    But I would not automatically reject the argument that there was some rough justice in those gifts.)

    There's a line here.

    Justice Thomas is allowed to have whatever friends he chooses. He is also allowed to enjoy their hospitality.

    But at a certain point, it's not hospitality to a friend.

    So, going on vacation with billionaire pals, including private jets and yachts: fine, but probably should have been declared.

    Having access to billionaire pal's private jet and using it for one's own personal purposes, without sad pal; well, that looks awfully like a very valuable gift to me.

    And if said pal is a political activist, who gives dearly to causes close to their heart (and which causes might happen to come in front of the Supreme Court), then at the very least a judge (any judge) should avoid any merest hint of impropriety.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953

    What happened to you, Dmitry? You used to be trusted enough to be a real no.2 puppet, now you're just the one who mouths off on twitter.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited April 2023

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Sunak is seeing a surge in approval however. Too early to say if it is a trend

    But he does seem competent and quite likeable. And not quite as boring as Starmer

    That grotesque ad will not have helped Labour
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,662

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    I'll have a try at this. Most of the electorate is tired after what has been a very hectic 5-6 years - Brexit and its aftermath, straight into Covid and the lockdowns, followed by a major war in Europe and inflation not seen for 40+ years. They don't won't big ideas necessarily, they want things to be stable and for the Government to step in and protect them when they face major difficulties.

    FWIW, I think that suits 'Sunak-ism' quite well. He's not one for the Thatcherite bold moves but - to many - he's decent enough and seems competent. That's enough for many.

    Labour's problem - and SKS' in particular - is that he has never formulated where Labour will genuinely help people whose main obstacle is trying to deal with a society where the rules seem rigged in favour of big interests and people are resigned to their lives.
    You have touched on it a little, but a far simpler explanation is that the poor Tory polling is about the sustained attack on living standards, which the Tories are doing very little about, and that the failure of Labour to seal the deal is that if anything they're worse on COL than the Tories.
    I don't know if it is because they are worse, but there may still be some skepticism they have any ideas about it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,937

    Along with 'Starmer is no Blair', it has become commonplace for posters of all stripes to say that if Labour is to seal the deal, Starmer et al need to come up with some big ideas, and have a 'vision' to sell. That's fair enough, and I agree.

    However, I'm struggling even more to see the Tories' big ideas, or their 'vision'. What is modern Toryism about, other than 'small boats' type populism? Why should I vote for them? What's Sunak's 'big idea'? I really don't have a clue. I reckon if there's a vacuum in Labour's policy offer, there's at least as large a one in the Tories'.

    I suspect that Sunak's little idea may be the same as John Major's little idea in 1997, and I don't think it will suffice.

    Are Reform UK voters the Tory hope?
  • rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,961
    edited April 2023
    "Labour is on 41% (-3), the Conservatives 30% (+1), the Lib Dems 10% (+1), Reform 7% (unchanged) and the Greens are also unchanged on 5%."

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    The US (and the other central banks pulled along in its wake) have had an incredibly expansionary monetary policy, and that has led to global inflation.

    Its subsequent swerve into tightening has not cancelled out the previous inflationary pressures (things like prices of building materials), because the decline those sorts of demand takes a long time to filter through, whilst it probably throws some additional inflationary pressures the way of non-dollar economies in the way Kitchen Cabinet describes.

    The point of responsible stewardship of the world economy is that you don't conduct monetary policy like a pissed up drunk driver lurching this way and that.

  • OldBasingOldBasing Posts: 173

    OldBasing said:

    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.

    It won't be that on polling day
    Maybe, maybe not, but bar a couple of outliers in either direction, there isn't yet much evidence of significant poll tightening beyond a 15-20% average range. Looking at the averages more useful than looking at margin of error swings in individual polls that everyone gets excited over.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843

    OldBasing said:

    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.

    It won't be that on polling day
    We shall see...
    See Leon's post.
    BTW I sent you something via a pb third party re trains. Did you receive it?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT: It's good to see a black man getting reparations -- and without costing the American taxpayers any money. But some people just don't like to see poor folks from places like Pin Point, Georgia getting their due.

    (OK, I am mostly joking. Mostly.

    But I would not automatically reject the argument that there was some rough justice in those gifts.)

    There's a line here.

    Justice Thomas is allowed to have whatever friends he chooses. He is also allowed to enjoy their hospitality.

    But at a certain point, it's not hospitality to a friend.

    So, going on vacation with billionaire pals, including private jets and yachts: fine, but probably should have been declared.

    Having access to billionaire pal's private jet and using it for one's own personal purposes, without sad pal; well, that looks awfully like a very valuable gift to me.

    And if said pal is a political activist, who gives dearly to causes close to their heart (and which causes might happen to come in front of the Supreme Court), then at the very least a judge (any judge) should avoid any merest hint of impropriety.
    Around $500k per annum, estimated value.
    Thomas is taking the piss.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,424
    Um, I'm happy to accept that the lead is contracting but the info given in the picture only slightly supports that. Only five pollsters appear twice or more and they are:

    Pollster Mar Apr Delta
    Deltapoll 15 21 +6
    Omnisis 23 20 -3
    R&W 19 17 -2
    Savanta 16 16 +0
    Techne 16 15 -1

    That's three falls, one stable and one rise, with the total rise equalling the fall

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,662

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    The US (and the other central banks pulled along in its wake) have had an incredibly expansionary monetary policy, and that has led to global inflation.

    Its subsequent swerve into tightening has not cancelled out the previous inflationary pressures (things like prices of building materials), because the decline those sorts of demand takes a long time to filter through, whilst it probably throws some additional inflationary pressures the way of non-dollar economies in the way Kitchen Cabinet describes.

    The point of responsible stewardship of the world economy is that you don't conduct monetary policy like a pissed up drunk driver lurching this way and that.

    I agree with the first part of your argument: the Fed's loose policies did cause inflation throughout the world.

    The second part, is utter nonsense.

    The Fed raising rates will have lowered the price of commodities, because it's primary effect will have been to reduce US domestic demand.

    The currency a commodity is denominated in has no effect on its currency adjusted price, and it's trivially easy to prove this. @TheKitchenCabinet is simply wrong: the Fed raising interest rates will not have contributed to inflation in other countries by raising the price of commodities.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,662

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
    I'm sorry, but this is economically illiterate nonsense, and I'm genuinely shocked that you believe it.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    The US (and the other central banks pulled along in its wake) have had an incredibly expansionary monetary policy, and that has led to global inflation.

    Its subsequent swerve into tightening has not cancelled out the previous inflationary pressures (things like prices of building materials), because the decline those sorts of demand takes a long time to filter through, whilst it probably throws some additional inflationary pressures the way of non-dollar economies in the way Kitchen Cabinet describes.

    The point of responsible stewardship of the world economy is that you don't conduct monetary policy like a pissed up drunk driver lurching this way and that.

    I agree with the first part of your argument: the Fed's loose policies did cause inflation throughout the world.

    The second part, is utter nonsense.

    The Fed raising rates will have lowered the price of commodities, because it's primary effect will have been to reduce US domestic demand.

    The currency a commodity is denominated in has no effect on its currency adjusted price, and it's trivially easy to prove this. @TheKitchenCabinet is simply wrong: the Fed raising interest rates will not have contributed to inflation in other countries by raising the price of commodities.
    You might think I'm wrong @rcs1000 but the BIS doesn't as it explained last month:

    https://www.bis.org/publ/work1083.pdf

    Their conclusion is pretty clear. Historically, rising commodity prices usually meant a falling dollar - and vice versa crucially - which gave many countries a natural hedge. That process has now been eliminated.

    So back to the original point. The Fed's rise in interest rates has caused a double issue for many countries.

  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,752
    kle4 said:
    What does Rishi think about everyone getting a free owl?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,680

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting





  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    ...
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    The US (and the other central banks pulled along in its wake) have had an incredibly expansionary monetary policy, and that has led to global inflation.

    Its subsequent swerve into tightening has not cancelled out the previous inflationary pressures (things like prices of building materials), because the decline those sorts of demand takes a long time to filter through, whilst it probably throws some additional inflationary pressures the way of non-dollar economies in the way Kitchen Cabinet describes.

    The point of responsible stewardship of the world economy is that you don't conduct monetary policy like a pissed up drunk driver lurching this way and that.

    I agree with the first part of your argument: the Fed's loose policies did cause inflation throughout the world.

    The second part, is utter nonsense.

    The Fed raising rates will have lowered the price of commodities, because it's primary effect will have been to reduce US domestic demand.

    The currency a commodity is denominated in has no effect on its currency adjusted price, and it's trivially easy to prove this. @TheKitchenCabinet is simply wrong: the Fed raising interest rates will not have contributed to inflation in other countries by raising the price of commodities.
    I will freely give way to your superior knowledge on these issues - I would have thought driving the dollar higher would have at least caused US oil exports to be more expensive, if priced in dollars. However, as I say, it's not my field of expertise.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    kle4 said:

    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953

    What happened to you, Dmitry? You used to be trusted enough to be a real no.2 puppet, now you're just the one who mouths off on twitter.
    The reality is that he is the former President of Russia. Saying some truly appalling things. It should be neither normalised or laughed off.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
    I'm sorry, but this is economically illiterate nonsense, and I'm genuinely shocked that you believe it.
    Mmmm, ok let's simplify it.

    When countries depreciate their currencies, it makes their exports cheaper but increases the costs of imports and drives inflation through rising prices and services. It's the exchange rate pass through effect.

    What you seem to be saying is that doesn't happen because the underlying cost of the commodity doesn't change even if the local currency has depreciated.

    Correct?

  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,476
    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    If relative interest rates move higher in the US vs the UK then the dollar strengthens

    It therefore costs more £ to buy an $80 barrel of oil, all other things a being equal

    Basically US monetary policy can have exogenous effects on third countries
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    kle4 said:

    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953

    What happened to you, Dmitry? You used to be trusted enough to be a real no.2 puppet, now you're just the one who mouths off on twitter.
    The reality is that he is the former President of Russia. Saying some truly appalling things. It should be neither normalised or laughed off.
    When the situation is so bleak gallows humour is entirely appropriate.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
    The far bigger effect was supply and demand.
    Saudi refusal to increase supplies was likely most significant.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT: It's good to see a black man getting reparations -- and without costing the American taxpayers any money. But some people just don't like to see poor folks from places like Pin Point, Georgia getting their due.

    (OK, I am mostly joking. Mostly.

    But I would not automatically reject the argument that there was some rough justice in those gifts.)

    There's a line here.

    Justice Thomas is allowed to have whatever friends he chooses. He is also allowed to enjoy their hospitality.

    But at a certain point, it's not hospitality to a friend.

    So, going on vacation with billionaire pals, including private jets and yachts: fine, but probably should have been declared.

    Having access to billionaire pal's private jet and using it for one's own personal purposes, without sad pal; well, that looks awfully like a very valuable gift to me.

    And if said pal is a political activist, who gives dearly to causes close to their heart (and which causes might happen to come in front of the Supreme Court), then at the very least a judge (any judge) should avoid any merest hint of impropriety.
    Around $500k per annum, estimated value.
    Thomas is taking the piss.
    Not at all, wouldn't you consider someone who gave your hundreds of thousands a year in freebies a close friend?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,961
    viewcode said:

    Um, I'm happy to accept that the lead is contracting but the info given in the picture only slightly supports that. Only five pollsters appear twice or more and they are:

    Pollster Mar Apr Delta
    Deltapoll 15 21 +6
    Omnisis 23 20 -3
    R&W 19 17 -2
    Savanta 16 16 +0
    Techne 16 15 -1

    That's three falls, one stable and one rise, with the total rise equalling the fall

    What about the 11% lead that's just been released?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953

    What happened to you, Dmitry? You used to be trusted enough to be a real no.2 puppet, now you're just the one who mouths off on twitter.
    The reality is that he is the former President of Russia. Saying some truly appalling things. It should be neither normalised or laughed off.
    When the situation is so bleak gallows humour is entirely appropriate.
    Did he meet Donald Trump? - I still like my theory that Trump carries a MAGA virus. People who hung out with him become dribbling morons.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779

    ...

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    The US (and the other central banks pulled along in its wake) have had an incredibly expansionary monetary policy, and that has led to global inflation.

    Its subsequent swerve into tightening has not cancelled out the previous inflationary pressures (things like prices of building materials), because the decline those sorts of demand takes a long time to filter through, whilst it probably throws some additional inflationary pressures the way of non-dollar economies in the way Kitchen Cabinet describes.

    The point of responsible stewardship of the world economy is that you don't conduct monetary policy like a pissed up drunk driver lurching this way and that.

    I agree with the first part of your argument: the Fed's loose policies did cause inflation throughout the world.

    The second part, is utter nonsense.

    The Fed raising rates will have lowered the price of commodities, because it's primary effect will have been to reduce US domestic demand.

    The currency a commodity is denominated in has no effect on its currency adjusted price, and it's trivially easy to prove this. @TheKitchenCabinet is simply wrong: the Fed raising interest rates will not have contributed to inflation in other countries by raising the price of commodities.
    I will freely give way to your superior knowledge on these issues - I would have thought driving the dollar higher would have at least caused US oil exports to be more expensive, if priced in dollars. However, as I say, it's not my field of expertise.
    What he's telling you is more or less the definition of a commodity.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Dmitry Medvedev seems to be continuing his one man mission to deplete Russia of all its vodka supplies:

    https://twitter.com/MedvedevRussiaE/status/1644669039095037953

    What happened to you, Dmitry? You used to be trusted enough to be a real no.2 puppet, now you're just the one who mouths off on twitter.
    The reality is that he is the former President of Russia. Saying some truly appalling things. It should be neither normalised or laughed off.
    When the situation is so bleak gallows humour is entirely appropriate.
    Yeah I get that. Just saying we don't want to forget how abhorrent it is for someone in his position to say these things.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840
    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    This is fantasy, based on irrelevant mid-term polling. The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.

    The enormity of the challenge facing Labour in securing even a majority of one seat is well documented - and Keir Starmer is most certainly no Blair, Attlee or Wilson. The most likely outcome of the next election is a Hung Parliament; the second most likely is that Labour gives people nothing meaningful to vote for whatsoever, and the Tories win again by default.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.
    Will it not?

    Yes, it requires something special. But the Tories increasing their share and winning huge after winning the previous 3 elections was also special.
  • Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
    The far bigger effect was supply and demand.
    Saudi refusal to increase supplies was likely most significant.
    Which is why I have problems with the Fed's massive rise in interest rates.

    What happened with inflation in 2022 was several factors at once.

    First, the supply chain issues post-Covid. Although largely unwound by now, it caused issues then. Raising interest rates would do nothing to fix that.

    Secondly, the spike in commodity prices post-Russia invading Ukraine, directly (where Russia was a commodity producer) and indirectly (Russia and Ukraine provided 10% of global sea crews). Raising interest rates does nothing there.

    Thirdly, rising asset values. There interest rates do have an effect. But - and it's something that has been explained before - a more effective way to curb asset values was via taxation (and therefore raise income).

    What the US Government (and Fed by implication) did was chicken out on raising taxes on rising prices because of the political consequences and went for the blunt tool of interest rates
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    ...
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Eh?

    The price of a commodity (say oil) is set by demand for it. If it was priced in Euros or Yen, then it would make exactly no difference.

    The raising of US interest rates will have had the opposite effect; it will have depressed US demand for oil, therefore reducing the price.
    Commodity costs are priced in dollars. You might hedge your FX exposure but in many cases that doesn't happen.

    What was happening last year was a double whammy - the cost of the underlying commodities was going up and the cost of buying that inflated commodity in dollars increased because the dollar was strengthening.

    Technically, the oil price would have reduced inflation but core inflation rates often exclude energy / oil prices because they can be volatile.
    The far bigger effect was supply and demand.
    Saudi refusal to increase supplies was likely most significant.
    This is why we need to cultivate our own hydrocarbon industry and why Sunak Hunt's efforts in the opposite direction are economic vandalism.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    I think the confusion here is that its really a political view not an economic one he's expressing.

    The United States is to blame for all the world's problems. Work back from that conclusion to find the economic logic.

    As a non-economist I find it odd that the Fed raising rates and reducing demand for oil and the price of oil in dollars would create inflation elsewhere presumably through a strengthening dollar? Don't see it since we're all in the business of raising rates anyway.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,993
    Evening all 😀

    It’s rare seemingly these days I agree with one of OGH’s polling headers and this is no exception.

    Yes the gap has closed since the last days of Truss but as others have pointed out there hasn’t been much movement of late.

    Using Redfield & Wilton as an example, on October 19th, the VI was 55-19 but by November 27th, this had closed to 47-27 and by March 26th it was 46-27.

    The polls tightened with the departure of Truss with a general 6-8% swing back to the Conservatives. Since then, I would argue, the odd Deltapoll outlier notwithstanding, there’s been very little movement with Labour leads between 15 and 20 points.

    The 2019 Conservative vote, according to the latest R&W, splits 55% Conservative, 20% Labour and 12% Don’t Know. That 20% move to Labour equates to 9% of the electorate as the Conservatives polled 45% last time.

    OGH is correct there has been a small movement of Conservative voters back into the loyal column from the Don’t Know but again that mostly happened with the removal of Truss - last autumn the loyal numbers were in the high 40s and the DKs were nearer 20% and that move is reflected in the overall VI which has seen the Conservative move from around 20% to the upper 20s.

    The swing in England from Conservative to Labour is 16-18% and I suspect the local elections next month will show the depth of the Conservative problem in the seats where they are facing Labour.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840
    kle4 said:

    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.
    Will it not?

    Yes, it requires something special. But the Tories increasing their share and winning huge after winning the previous 3 elections was also special.
    What more is Sir Keir going to do to lure the oldies away from that nice Rishi - and how is he going to pay for it? Amend the triple lock so it pays 5% over the rate of inflation every year? Implement a negative rate of IHT, so the state pays your heirs a bonus in proportion to the value of your house when you kick the bucket? Create a priority lane at hospital so that anyone with a bus pass gets to jump to the front of the queue? Presumably all paid for by a massive hike in National Insurance contribution rates, or some such other thing that they're exempt from paying?

    He can't afford to bribe the old even more generously than the current lot without stealing from the young to do it, so he can only try to win them over at the cost of immolating his own base.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,961

    OldBasing said:

    The average Labour lead from the polls quoted in the thread header is 18%. Still landslide territory.

    It won't be that on polling day
    We shall see...
    Sod's Law that just as everyone is discussing this a new poll comes out with a lead of just 11%.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871
    ...

    rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    I think the confusion here is that its really a political view not an economic one he's expressing.

    The United States is to blame for all the world's problems. Work back from that conclusion to find the economic logic.

    As a non-economist I find it odd that the Fed raising rates and reducing demand for oil and the price of oil in dollars would create inflation elsewhere presumably through a strengthening dollar? Don't see it since we're all in the business of raising rates anyway.
    You might wish to confine your attempts to be patronising to things you know something about. I studied economic history at degree level - the turbulence caused to the world economy by American policies since assuming the mantel of lender of last resort post WW1 are a matter of public record.
  • rcs1000 said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    It is very interesting to see China step into the role of world diplomat - with the KSA Iran deal etc., now this. It is sheer self interest, as China needs the world economies to continue to be able to afford Chinese exported tat. But that's good. It's very like Britain used to be - enforcing free trade around the world because it suited our economy. By contrast, America was a world hegemon with a primarily domestic economy, and made decisions accordingly. However pure one believes America's ultimate motives to be, there is no doubt that they have been prepared, consistently, to cause disruption to world markets/economies/states to pursue their objectives. I think that augers quite well for the future.
    As we saw last year - one of the blowback effects of the Fed's massive hike in interest rates - essentially for domestic political purposes - was that it fuelled inflation in many countries because commodities are priced in dollars.
    Exactly, and the vast post-Covid 'stimulus' programme in the States was already causing massive inflation worldwide - building materials costing 3 or 4 times as much. This has always been the way with the US.
    So, let me get this right:

    If the Fed has loose monetary policy, that stimulates demand, and causes inflation.

    And if they have tight monetary policy, that causes the price of commodities to rise, and causes inflation.

    Do I have your view correct?
    I think the confusion here is that its really a political view not an economic one he's expressing.

    The United States is to blame for all the world's problems. Work back from that conclusion to find the economic logic.

    As a non-economist I find it odd that the Fed raising rates and reducing demand for oil and the price of oil in dollars would create inflation elsewhere presumably through a strengthening dollar? Don't see it since we're all in the business of raising rates anyway.
    It's the relative raising of rates. The Fed has strengthened a lot more and more quickly than most other countries .

    If you look at countries that strengthened their interest rates more than the US - Mexico and Brazil for example - their currencies appreciated and inflation has come down earlier and more quickly.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,680
    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    This is fantasy, based on irrelevant mid-term polling. The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.

    The enormity of the challenge facing Labour in securing even a majority of one seat is well documented - and Keir Starmer is most certainly no Blair, Attlee or Wilson. The most likely outcome of the next election is a Hung Parliament; the second most likely is that Labour gives people nothing meaningful to vote for whatsoever, and the Tories win again by default.
    You can get 2/1 on a Hung parliament and 7/1 on a Tory government so if you are that confident, get betting!
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,388
    Andy_JS said:

    "Labour is on 41% (-3), the Conservatives 30% (+1), the Lib Dems 10% (+1), Reform 7% (unchanged) and the Greens are also unchanged on 5%."

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance

    Broken, sleazy, lying Labour on the slide...
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    Nigelb said:

    WRT China - Is Macron naive or worse. Whilst Von Der Leyen at least seems more of a realist this quote really grates on me.

    Von der Leyen: "I encouraged President Xi to reach out to President Zelensky. It was interesting to hear that President Xi reiterated his willingess to speak (to him) when the time and conditions are right"

    https://twitter.com/emilyrauhala/status/1643959765800738817

    Interesting??? When the time is right??? It's time we called China out on its peace plan. How can they be taken seriously when they only talk to one side. Enough of the warm words. Even in public. I hope they were a bit more direct in private.

    I cannot see any Chinese plan that would be favourable to Ukraine or its partners. The only thing that works is threatening them with sanctions if they support Russia militarily. We might think we're defending Ukraine's right to be a free country determining its own path but in Beijing as well as Moscow Ukraine is just a western proxy. No doubt if he does deign to pick up the phone to Zelensky, they'll be lots of applause from various quarters about how magnanimous of Xi to take the time to speak with a fellow President thousands of miles away. Enough! Stop playing these thugs' game.

    I disagree.
    We played the game with thugs throughout the Cold War. While China isn't supplying Russia directly with arms we should continue with the diplomatic charade.
    It leaves open options which shouldn't be closed off without good reason.
    I'm not sure we played THEIR game during the cold war. And Macron taking 50 CEOs to China for a 3 day state visit with all the trimmings is not a diplomatic charade. Von Der Leyen was in the more bad cop role but praising Xi for considering talking to Zelensky is not necessary. Diplomacy fine but flattery is never going to work with people like this. When will we learn?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840
    Barnesian said:

    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    This is fantasy, based on irrelevant mid-term polling. The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.

    The enormity of the challenge facing Labour in securing even a majority of one seat is well documented - and Keir Starmer is most certainly no Blair, Attlee or Wilson. The most likely outcome of the next election is a Hung Parliament; the second most likely is that Labour gives people nothing meaningful to vote for whatsoever, and the Tories win again by default.
    You can get 2/1 on a Hung parliament and 7/1 on a Tory government so if you are that confident, get betting!
    That's not such a bad idea.

    I normally only have one token bet a year on the Grand National, but if it occurs to me when I go down the local betting shop (for this is an area where I have not advanced so far as the high sophistication of online gambling) then I may actually ask about this at the same time.

    I don't view it as the most likely outcome but if they're offering anything as long as 7/1 on the Tories then it sounds like it might be worth £50 or something. That way, either they get their comeuppance next year or I make a tidy sum in winnings. Result!
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843
    edited April 2023
    GIN1138 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Labour is on 41% (-3), the Conservatives 30% (+1), the Lib Dems 10% (+1), Reform 7% (unchanged) and the Greens are also unchanged on 5%."

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance

    Broken, sleazy, lying Labour on the slide...
    Schadenfreude would reach new heights if Labour didn't get a majority or like Wilson.. say a majority of 3. Impotent Labour is the least worst outcome....
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,680
    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    pigeon said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    If the Labour leads drops into single digits they will officially start bricking it

    Tories still frowning in April:

    image
    Here is my EMA chart


    and latest prediction without tactical voting


    and with tactical voting


    This is fantasy, based on irrelevant mid-term polling. The grey vote is not going to abandon the Tories on the required scale.

    The enormity of the challenge facing Labour in securing even a majority of one seat is well documented - and Keir Starmer is most certainly no Blair, Attlee or Wilson. The most likely outcome of the next election is a Hung Parliament; the second most likely is that Labour gives people nothing meaningful to vote for whatsoever, and the Tories win again by default.
    You can get 2/1 on a Hung parliament and 7/1 on a Tory government so if you are that confident, get betting!
    That's not such a bad idea.

    I normally only have one token bet a year on the Grand National, but if it occurs to me when I go down the local betting shop (for this is an area where I have not advanced so far as the high sophistication of online gambling) then I may actually ask about this at the same time.

    I don't view it as the most likely outcome but if they're offering anything as long as 7/1 on the Tories then it sounds like it might be worth £50 or something. That way, either they get their comeuppance next year or I make a tidy sum in winnings. Result!
    You can 7/1 at most bookies.


  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,803
    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/08/republican-party-abortion-trap-00091088
    … Now, a four-point question probably best measures where Americans sit on the issue: legal in all cases, legal in most, illegal in all and illegal in most. The 2022 national exit poll used this device, finding that 29 percent of voters believed abortion should be “legal in all cases,” while another 30 percent thought it should be “legal in most cases.” That left 26 percent who thought it should be “illegal in most cases” and only 10 percent who said it should be “illegal in all cases.”

    That leaves roughly six-in-10 voters supporting legal abortion in most cases — with the median voter supporting some restrictions — and just over a third who want it to be entirely or mostly illegal...

    FWIW I don't think the distinction between 'illegal in most' and 'legal in most' can be formulated without going into a lot of detail. My own very centrist view could be described as both of these, depending on what counts as a case.
    From talking with actual Americans

    Illegal in most - “Stop with the hypotheticals. I don’t like abortion. And we don’t really need it in most cases”

    Legal in most - “That hypothetical I’ll give you. But I feel that abortion should a last resort. So apart from…..”
    From my American wife - "it's no business of politicians to tell woman what they should do".
    So does your wife think that abortion should be allowed a day or an hour before birth ?

    If not then she does think it is the business of politicians to tell a woman what they can do.

    And the only question being where the time limit is set.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,156
    GIN1138 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Labour is on 41% (-3), the Conservatives 30% (+1), the Lib Dems 10% (+1), Reform 7% (unchanged) and the Greens are also unchanged on 5%."

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/08/yvette-cooper-was-not-told-about-labours-sunak-attack-ad-in-advance

    Broken, sleazy, lying Labour on the slide...
    OI! That's MY line! :lol:
This discussion has been closed.