Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

We’re going to need a bigger swingometer – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,733
edited May 14 in General
We’re going to need a bigger swingometer – politicalbetting.com

Also Reeves is *miles* ahead of Hunt in best chancellor polling which wasn't true of Clarke vs Brown. Clarke was the most popular Tory in 1997. Hunt is not…

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,072
    First.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,072
    And first like the Tories.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,260
    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 8,080
    dixiedean said:

    And first like the Tories.

    You mean: third like the Tories in the local elections.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,260
    FPT
    Andy_JS said:

    Why did all this trans stuff get politicised? It used to be a totally non-political topic.

    Stonewall needed a new money making scheme and so it was trans, they conned all the woke halfwits, persuaded gullible idiots that they needed to use women's safe areas as a right and soon every weirdo and halfwit was promoting it , including thick politicians. There came a point when the public got sick of it and now
    we see the results.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 5,110
    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,260

    Slumming it in Scarborough this week :lol:




    Looks rather nice
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,402

    Slumming it in Scarborough this week :lol:




    Hayling Island, surely?
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,732
    Foxy said:

    What did Sunak say in his big relaunch yesterday? That the world is increasingly dangerous so we should re-elect a government that is behind the opposition on every polled topic?

    He isn't very good at this campaigning malarkey is he?

    No reason why he should be. The only remotely challenging campaign he has fought and won was to become the Conservative candidate in Richmond. Politics is partly about developing a set of skills in rep before you are seen on the big stage.

    As for the final score, it all depends on how late Rishi leaves it and how much support that costs.

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,604
    edited May 14
    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 10,043
    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,288
    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,573
    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,573
    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,953
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    A fun one would be a graduate tax. Paid by the employer.

    I suspect that barrow boys would be back in fashion, in the City, by lunchtime.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,047
    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    Surely wage growth is mostly due to the 10% rise in April to the minimum wage?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    Sort of on topic: Last night I had a dream where the exit poll showed Labour on 320 seats.
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,325
    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    I think you missed the point Malc... its a question of cost, and the problem is that Universities in Scotland are struggling to balance the books. Heaven knows I get enough charity appeal stuff from my own (ancient Scottish) University, and still the cuts keep coming. I also serve on an Oxbridge university committee and things are only marginally better there too.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,288
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    edited May 14
    120 seats is actually where I expect the Tories to end up - it's also roughly where the Delta poll and the remove Reform none voters from the said poll checks also placed the Tories on electoral calculus.

    But this is the thing - those 120 seats are because the Tory vote sits in the middle of the Precipice there 4-5 point range where seats results could easily be 200 seats or on a bad night with more tactical anti-tory voting 20....

    Put it this way I wouldn't willingly buy or sell Tory seats at 120 or in fact at any level in this market.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,248
    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    I believe filthy porn is banned.

    But please, post them.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
    oh we know what happens next - that car crash is already kicking off in the early stages / slow motion...
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    What is this real terms pay increase of which you speak?

    Certainly hasn't filtered through to my corner of the economy.
  • Options
    londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,253

    Sort of on topic: Last night I had a dream where the exit poll showed Labour on 320 seats.

    It would be a bit like 1964. LAB would have overturned a near 100 CON majority but would be just short of one. I know LAB got a very small majority in 1964.

    It's still enough for LAB to govern for say 2 years maybe with some implicit LD support then it goes well go for another GE just like 1966!
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,627
    Foxy said:

    What did Sunak say in his big relaunch yesterday? That the world is increasingly dangerous so we should re-elect a government that is behind the opposition on every polled topic?

    He isn't very good at this campaigning malarkey is he?

    We've got five months or more of relaunches before we can put him out of our misery.

  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,965

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    Everyone knows this is Leon's travel blog free publicity for his Speccie articles. If you don't like it, I suggest you find a politics based blog.
    Alt-view
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,288

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    NO
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,965

    Foxy said:

    What did Sunak say in his big relaunch yesterday? That the world is increasingly dangerous so we should re-elect a government that is behind the opposition on every polled topic?

    He isn't very good at this campaigning malarkey is he?

    We've got five months or more of relaunches before we can put him out of our misery.

    I was wondering, should we have a sweep on how many re-launches before the election?

    I'd go for four (yes, I'm hoping for an early GE).
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,732
    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
    What happened next was that universities went all-in on foreign students prepared to pay shedloads of cash. We can question why they were prepared to throw so much money at us, but they were.

    Without them, the numbers just don't add up. And uni cuts will have a NIMBY dynamic; even those who want a hard rain for HE will scream blue murder if their local campus or (grand)child's course is in the firing line.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,317
    Foxy said:

    What did Sunak say in his big relaunch yesterday? That the world is increasingly dangerous so we should re-elect a government that is behind the opposition on every polled topic?

    He isn't very good at this campaigning malarkey is he?

    ...
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,047
    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    The ban on discussing AI applies to only one poster. Anyone else is free to discuss.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,627

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
    What happened next was that universities went all-in on foreign students prepared to pay shedloads of cash. We can question why they were prepared to throw so much money at us, but they were.

    Without them, the numbers just don't add up. And uni cuts will have a NIMBY dynamic; even those who want a hard rain for HE will scream blue murder if their local campus or (grand)child's course is in the firing line.
    It was government policy for HE to take on more foreign students.

  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    I believe filthy porn is banned.

    But please, post them.
    I do, on a more, er, 'specialist' forum.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,627

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
    What happened next was that universities went all-in on foreign students prepared to pay shedloads of cash. We can question why they were prepared to throw so much money at us, but they were.

    Without them, the numbers just don't add up. And uni cuts will have a NIMBY dynamic; even those who want a hard rain for HE will scream blue murder if their local campus or (grand)child's course is in the firing line.
    We may be about to find out how reliant some towns and cities have become on their local uni driving most of their local economy and growth.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,317
    @Scarlett__Mag

    Writeup of new @JLPartnersPolls Nigel Farage poll in this morning's @politicoeu playbook


  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,965
    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    Though if you average over 5, 10 or 15 years real wage growth is a little bit more elusive.

    Anyway, the two-letter abbreviation that you-know-who must not mention will soon take care of all our productivity issues, shirley?
  • Options
    FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,931
    edited May 14
    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
    Yes, I think AI will change the world, just as computers, then the internet, smartphones and social media changed the world. It will be another generation defining event. Just as with those technologies, there will be a load of hype to begin with, then things will go a bit quiet, and then it'll steadily become established. There won't be a massive wave of unemployment, but job roles will change, just as they have always changed.

    P.S. I also use AI in my day job (software development) and it is incredibly useful, but in the end it is still just a tool.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,051
    edited May 14
    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Thanks, I heard verbatim on the radio this morning "Unemployment has edged up slightly casting doubt on an early interest rate cut", which made no sense in my head whatsoever.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    Whatever the policy is, one is needed.

    The current plan seems to be starve universities of funding, and wait to see what
    happens next.
    What happened next was that universities went all-in on foreign students prepared to pay shedloads of cash. We can question why they were prepared to throw so much money at us, but they were.

    Without them, the numbers just don't add up. And uni cuts will have a NIMBY dynamic; even those who want a hard rain for HE will scream blue murder if their local campus or (grand)child's course is in the firing line.
    It was government policy for HE to take on more foreign students.

    Yep - it's a great example of 2 mutual exclusive requirements (incentives to attract foreign students vs less immigrants) contradicting each other with serious consequences.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    Pulpstar said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Thanks, I heard verbatim on the radio this morning "Unemployment has edged up slightly casting doubt on an early interest rate cut", which made no sense in my head whatsoever.
    I'm sure I said this last week but I'm. seeing a serious lack of willingness to invest in new IT projects at the moment. The only work I'm currently seeing is unavoidable upgrade projects and even them it's being done on the cheap.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315
    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
    He's not right, as he's not claiming that it's 'perfectly possible' AI will change the world. He is claiming that he is *certain* it will change the world, and that we'll all lose our jobs and OH MY GOD!!!!!!

    Like the lableak theory, he takes a possibility and turns it into certainty. Unfortunately for him, his past predictions are (ahem) rather poor, especially in this sector.He also all too often confuses AGI and AI, and sentience, consciousness and intelligence - perhaps purposefully.

    As for your last line: that's my view. *If* current-methodology AI pans out as the hypers think (and that is *not* a certainty...), the social and political changes might not be what we think, or at the scale (they might be bigger or smaller). It's incredibly hard to come up with any prediction that isn't just waving your finger in the air, as much would depend on the capabilities of the AI and the way it is received.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,627
    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    Also it is an export.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,050
    edited May 14
    Good morning, everyone.

    I've had a few run-ins with AI, some work-related, others not.

    For example, in both the 5e campaign I run and the Pathfinder 2e campaign I play in, I've used AI for art. This is not a cost to any artist as I just would draw it myself or use freely available images otherwise.

    In work, some has been directly lost to AI writing text. However, for one aspect, the act of doing the work necessary to create very short (single sentence) AI text exceeded actually just writing the text so AI was not used for that. And one client is very much against AI-generated content, with some people seemingly very quick to spot that sort of thing.

    Hard to say how much it'll alter things ultimately. One area I'm looking forward to is mixing voice and text generation so that video game companions can have an actual conversation with the player. Herika[sp] in Skyrim shows this is already possible, if a little clunky to set up.

    Edited extra bit: I'm a freelance writer, for those interested in throwing some work my way.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,732

    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    Also it is an export.

    What we really want is for these foreigners to stay abroad and just chuck as some cash without it inconveniencing us at all.

    To be fair, that's probably what most of us really want on a personal level too.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,226
    edited May 14
    The (second?) teaser trailer for "Megalopolis" is out. I have two contradictory emotions
    • I think it's going to be awful
    • I'm still going to see it
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU1QyAYa60g
  • Options
    Mark_MiewurdzMark_Miewurdz Posts: 19
    As others have said there needs to be a discussion about what unis are for and then how to fund them to do that. Running them as quasi-businesses who are at the mercy of political whims is never going to work.
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,897
    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    You are lucky there are lots of posters like me who lack the tech-y skills to show pictures.
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 723
    Israeli tanks, bulldozers, and military vehicles are surrounding the evacuation centres WITHIN Jabalia refugee camp.

    Meanwhile the UNRWA HQ has again been attacked by an Israeli mob in occupied al-Quds.

    Oxfam say that Israeli attacks have caused $210m of damage to Gaza's water supply and sanitation system. (Note: water, roads, buildings, hospitals, schools, homes - these are what the Israelis call "the infrastructure of terror".)

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/5/14/israels-war-on-gaza-live-14-killed-in-israeli-attack-on-central-gaza-home?update=2898572
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 723

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
    He's not right, as he's not claiming that it's 'perfectly possible' AI will change the world. He is claiming that he is *certain* it will change the world, and that we'll all lose our jobs and OH MY GOD!!!!!!

    Like the lableak theory, he takes a possibility and turns it into certainty. Unfortunately for him, his past predictions are (ahem) rather poor, especially in this sector.He also all too often confuses AGI and AI, and sentience, consciousness and intelligence - perhaps purposefully.

    As for your last line: that's my view. *If* current-methodology AI pans out as the hypers think (and that is *not* a certainty...), the social and political changes might not be what we think, or at the scale (they might be bigger or smaller). It's incredibly hard to come up with any prediction that isn't just waving your finger in the air, as much would depend on the capabilities of the AI and the way it is received.
    The very concept of AI is a mystification. It's just binary programming.
  • Options
    UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 789
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    There is one particular, rather parochial Scottish University, that I have some knowledge of, that seems to feel international and English students are an anathema and makes no effort to attract either despite being in some position to attract a certain type of student (those who enjoy rural life, in particular). They have been able to survive this far, so far as I can see, on subsidy to build themselves up as a local university (for local people) but the training wheels are off now and it seems they've missed the boat on being able to attract outside students, even if they wanted to (there is reportedly a bit of talk within the institution of not wanting outsiders diluting the local culture). How they survive as a lower-tier University I have no idea.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,635
    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    There was a survey in 2008 (when Lampeter collapsed and had to be rescued) that noted in any area where the university was a dominant employer, rescue was nearly always a better option than bankruptcy and closure.

    They also noted this didn't apply in London, where something silly like half of all universities in the UK are and where they could probably be closed easily enough without anyone really noticing.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,237
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    Surely wage growth is mostly due to the 10% rise in April to the minimum wage?
    The AWE data published this morning only go up to March.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,733
    Scott_xP said:

    @Scarlett__Mag

    Writeup of new @JLPartnersPolls Nigel Farage poll in this morning's @politicoeu playbook


    And this is the other reason we need the mods to fix the image settings.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,599

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    Surely wage growth is mostly due to the 10% rise in April to the minimum wage?
    The AWE data published this morning only go up to March.
    Atomic Weapons Establishment?

    I'm always worried when they produce forward projections that don't go very far into the future :open_mouth:
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,599
    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    How would you feel about an animated GIF slideshow? Single image, technically. And in 8-bit 256 colour glory :smiley:
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,599

    Scott_xP said:

    @Scarlett__Mag

    Writeup of new @JLPartnersPolls Nigel Farage poll in this morning's @politicoeu playbook


    And this is the other reason we need the mods to fix the image settings.
    Vector formats only - embedded SVG 👍

    Or, for images of text, maybe the actual text!
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,542

    Slumming it in Scarborough this week :lol:




    Hayling Island, surely?
    Very amusing. My dear departed mother in law, who I loved very much, lived on Hayling for the last 20 years of her life. Famously flat, the island's highest point is about 10 m above sea level.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,164
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    There was a survey in 2008 (when Lampeter collapsed and had to be rescued) that noted in any area where the university was a dominant employer, rescue was nearly always a better option than bankruptcy and closure.

    They also noted this didn't apply in London, where something silly like half of all universities in the UK are and where they could probably be closed easily enough without anyone really noticing.
    Why do some universities have one site in their ‘home’ town/city and another in London? Sunderland is an example.
    I went to what is now Sunderland to get away from the London area!
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,051
    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
    Quite why Leon is banned for posting AI stuff when others are allowed to derail thread after thread with endless trans crap is beyond me. Often just posting links to TERF talking points without any useful insight or commentary.

    AI may be an obsession for Leon, but at least it's not a spiteful, hateful, obsession like the other thing seems to be for some on here.

    Strikes me that if endless derailing of threads on the former topic is banned, the latter topic should be too.

    Free the Leon One!

  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646
    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    Fuck off?
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,542

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    You may not be entitled to but I, for one, look forward to it! Favourite loco, aside of Class 59s...
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646
    Class 91 at York station yesterday, 30+ years old but kept in good nick along with associated carriages:


  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315
    Off-topic:

    Many of the new-build houses near me are having solar panels put on their roofs. That is good.

    However, although I am not sure, it seems some are being placed on the roof *instead* of tiles, with the tiles being placed around them on the rest of the roof. This instinctively seems wrong to me, and I was just wondering if it was now an accepted practice, or just another crass money-saving idea?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646

    Class 91 at York station yesterday, 30+ years old but kept in good nick along with associated carriages:


    Oh no it's blurry!! :(
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315
    edited May 14

    Class 91 at York station yesterday, 30+ years old but kept in good nick along with associated carriages:


    The picture's blurred (as all good porn should be...), but isn't that the one in the original InterCity 'Swift' livery? If so, I saw it pass through St Neots the other week.

    Incidentally, it also makes me feel old. When I was younger, there was a great program on the TV about its development, and now it is being retired.

    Edit: this was it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvsIYaRmRAM
  • Options
    BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,395

    Class 91 at York station yesterday, 30+ years old but kept in good nick along with associated carriages:


    Oh no it's blurry!! :(
    I thought it was one your barcharts
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,465
    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,237

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    I don't know how to post a photo. Probably for the best.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593
    edited May 14
    Morning all. I could post a series of pictures of Norwich but none of you deserve such beauty so I'll keep it to myself. I notice The Sun are ramping their 'Nigel returns and destroys the Tories' poll which actually shows it making almost no difference other than to inflate Reforms Nul Seats VI and hand a few more blue seats to the LDs.
    Almost like they had written the story before they got the figures......
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,740
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    There was a survey in 2008 (when Lampeter collapsed and had to be rescued) that noted in any area where the university was a dominant employer, rescue was nearly always a better option than bankruptcy and closure.

    They also noted this didn't apply in London, where something silly like half of all universities in the UK are and where they could probably be closed easily enough without anyone really noticing.
    The conclusion anyone reaches on this is going to depend on whether you approach it from a public sector/top down/bottomless pit of government money or free market business point of view.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,542
    Donkeys said:

    Israeli tanks, bulldozers, and military vehicles are surrounding the evacuation centres WITHIN Jabalia refugee camp.

    Meanwhile the UNRWA HQ has again been attacked by an Israeli mob in occupied al-Quds.

    Oxfam say that Israeli attacks have caused $210m of damage to Gaza's water supply and sanitation system. (Note: water, roads, buildings, hospitals, schools, homes - these are what the Israelis call "the infrastructure of terror".)

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/5/14/israels-war-on-gaza-live-14-killed-in-israeli-attack-on-central-gaza-home?update=2898572

    Thats what happens when your government declares war on an opponent who (a) has the capacity and (b) is increasingly under the sway of those who want revenge. How much damage did the allies do to Germany 1939-45?
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,599

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Pretty to look at though they are (and I have posted some images these past few weeks), pictures posted now on PB are FUCKING HUGE on the page, are distracting, and take some scrolling past, no matter the aesthetic value.

    Could you fuckers please keep posting snaps of some mountain/charming foreign town/lager and chips down to a bare minimum.




    A limit of one photo post per day per poster would do the job.
    Do we get to save them up ?
    As I've never posted a photo before, then am I entitled to put up my entire back catalogue of shots of Class 37s?
    I don't know how to post a photo. Probably for the best.
    Write address on envelope. Place photo in envelope. Seal envelope. Attach stamp. Hope stamp isn't fake. Take to post box. Insert into post box. Hope BlancheLivermore made it home on time.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    edited May 14

    Off-topic:

    Many of the new-build houses near me are having solar panels put on their roofs. That is good.

    However, although I am not sure, it seems some are being placed on the roof *instead* of tiles, with the tiles being placed around them on the rest of the roof. This instinctively seems wrong to me, and I was just wondering if it was now an accepted practice, or just another crass money-saving idea?

    It’s best practice but a lot more expensive

    The reason why most are on top of existing tiles is because retrofitting them into the roof is just a lot quicker and so a lot cheaper

    The only way it makes sense to retrofit in the roof is if you need to reroof the house anyway
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315
    I've just seen a tweet about the Lucy Letby case.

    https://twitter.com/_PMCTraitor/status/1790063833198842175

    I've no reason to believe that her conviction was unjust, or that a miscarriage of justice was involved. But I do think having dramas and documentaries made *whilst* the case is ongoing, with the active participation of people involved with the case, is troubling. As I've said before about other 'contemporary' or near-contemporary documentaries.

    (Again, this post is not about the Letby case; it's about the media interactions with it.)
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,315
    eek said:

    Off-topic:

    Many of the new-build houses near me are having solar panels put on their roofs. That is good.

    However, although I am not sure, it seems some are being placed on the roof *instead* of tiles, with the tiles being placed around them on the rest of the roof. This instinctively seems wrong to me, and I was just wondering if it was now an accepted practice, or just another crass money-saving idea?

    It’s best practice but a lot more expensive

    The reason why most are on top of existing tiles is because retrofitting them into the roof is just a lot quicker and so a lot cheaper

    The only way it makes sense to retrofit in the roof is if you need to reroof the house anyway
    One of the things that concerns me is that the panels will be lighter, and they'll skimp on the joists. Joists are already so insubstantial that you often cannot retrofit roofs into lofts around here, at least without considerable strengthening.
  • Options
    Mark_MiewurdzMark_Miewurdz Posts: 19

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    There was a survey in 2008 (when Lampeter collapsed and had to be rescued) that noted in any area where the university was a dominant employer, rescue was nearly always a better option than bankruptcy and closure.

    They also noted this didn't apply in London, where something silly like half of all universities in the UK are and where they could probably be closed easily enough without anyone really noticing.
    Why do some universities have one site in their ‘home’ town/city and another in London? Sunderland is an example.
    I went to what is now Sunderland to get away from the London area!
    Unis being run as if they wre businesses - saw an opportunity to expand and went for it. Others opened campuses in China and other places. But then owing to tuition fees remaining fixed while inflation took off, government hostility esp withregards foreign students and geopolitical stuff withregards expanding overseas - it didn't work out. I agree 'The Uni of Sunderland (and othets) in London' is a ridiculous concept.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    DavidL said:

    » show previous quotes
    The better Scottish Universities did well in attracting English students willing to pay them £9k a year for courses that the SG was paying just over £5k for. Boris threatened to close that loophole but I don't think he did. The number of funded places available for Scottish student has been falling because the budget simply can't stretch to cover the cost of those who want to attend for this "free" education. Ironically, this has driven quite a lot of Scottish students south, willing to take on English fees to get a better education or a University place. One of these is my son.

    But your friend is right. The likes of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews have balanced the books with ever increasing numbers of foreign students paying up to £20k a year for some courses. How the strand below that are coping is a mystery to me.

    David insinuating that you have to go to England to get a decent education is pure bollox. There are brilliant universities in Scotland that are a match for anywhere in the world. Wanting to boast that you went to Oxford or Cambridge is not down to lack of good university courses in Scotland, just means you can buy a bragging place if you have lots of money.

    That's not what I am saying Malcolm. I agree that Scotland has some excellent Universities. What is driving some young people south is that it is hard to get an assisted place from the SG in them because the number of assisted places is being restricted as the budget gets tighter.

    Scottish Universities are also really struggling to compete because the money they receive from the SG per student is substantially less than the fees charged to students under the English system. The cream of Scottish Universities have compensated by having more foreign students and also (particularly in St Andrews and Edinburgh) having lots of English students paying the same as they would in England. But these options are not available for all or even most Universities. Their financial position is increasingly perilous.

    If you are wanting to go to University it can be easier to get a place in a good English University paying the English fees (by borrowing) than getting an assisted place in Scotland. The "free" University option in Scotland seemed like a good idea but it has had negative consequences that will increase sharply if University fees go up again south of the border. Personally, I favour some form of graduate tax as a means of funding Universities.
    I would favour a more radical system, such as no limit on fees. Government loans going only to those who have paid 2 years National Insurance in the UK.

    This would mean that it would be the norm for students to work for 2 or more years before University, and thereby have a much better idea of what and why they want higher education.
    That would be an excellent set of ideas. It would also collapse most of the uni sector overnight, which would make many people very unhappy. Therefore, I can't see it happening.

    A lot of the malaise which currently affects this country is thanks to Tony Blair's stupid idea of sending 50% of young people to uni. This has now saddled half of a whole generation with debt, whilst wasting 3-4 productive years of their life out of the labour force. Then we've plugged this gap in the labour force with immigrants, forgetting that they still need houses, doctors, teacher, plumbers too.

    I'm sure that most people do learn some useful skills at uni - but all the evidence suggests it's poor value for their money/time for most of them, and society in general.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,635
    algarkirk said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    There was a survey in 2008 (when Lampeter collapsed and had to be rescued) that noted in any area where the university was a dominant employer, rescue was nearly always a better option than bankruptcy and closure.

    They also noted this didn't apply in London, where something silly like half of all universities in the UK are and where they could probably be closed easily enough without anyone really noticing.
    The conclusion anyone reaches on this is going to depend on whether you approach it from a public sector/top down/bottomless pit of government money or free market business point of view.
    Not necessarily. In the case of Lampeter it would actually have cost more in terms of the financial impact to the government to close the university than to rescue it via increased unemployment benefit, reduced tax income for the local area, etc. (there's a general suspicion that in the last few years changes have been made by the leadership of the new university to make that less plausible, as they want to concentrate on their campuses in Carmarthen and Swansea). And it should be noted the 'rescue' involved what amounted to the university being wound up and its assets transferred to two other unis as part of a wider merger process.

    But I wonder how much impact it would really have in a town with multiple universities e.g. Manchester, Leeds, Leicester, Bristol or even Cambridge, how damaging it would be? (obviously for Cambridge I'm thinking of Anglia Ruskin rather than King's College...)
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,740

    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.

    Agree. There is a case to be made for anything from Tories well down into double figures to NOM. There are a lot of moving parts in the machine: turnout, don't knows, variable swing, Reform, tactical voting, the boats and the flights, Labour mistakes (just getting into gear - Elphicke, Rayner, unions, anyone seen Burgon recently?), media (The Sun?), and of course Black Swans.

    Question: What is the minimum number of seats the Tories have to lose (from 365) to certainly be unable to form a government?
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,071
    eek said:

    FPT

    Nigelb said:

    Hard rain is gonna fall...




    Jim Pickard 🐋
    @PickardJE
    number of international students paying deposits to study at UK universities has “plummeted” after Sunak put restrictions on education visas

    Enroly said deposits to a sample of 24 British universities had declined 57% year-on-year as of May

    via
    @pmdfoster

    https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1790087162223849769

    That's university finances (and incidentally our balance of payments) screwed.
    It will be catastrophic for a significant number of universities.
    They're nothing but visa factories for migration, and dependents in particular.

    If dozens of marginal universities close I can't say I'm bothered.
    On 1 level I agree with you but there is a lot of jobs in universities, a lot of regional pride and people have long memories. They also consume a lot of town centre space and closure would be very visible alongside the related business closures.

    I suspect were a university to close (and many are likely to unless this idea is reversed) I expect it would impact Tory votes for a very long time in the area..
    If a university were to close it would impact Labour and Green votes as their voters moved away, Shirley?
  • Options
    megasaurmegasaur Posts: 272

    I've just seen a tweet about the Lucy Letby case.

    https://twitter.com/_PMCTraitor/status/1790063833198842175

    I've no reason to believe that her conviction was unjust, or that a miscarriage of justice was involved. But I do think having dramas and documentaries made *whilst* the case is ongoing, with the active participation of people involved with the case, is troubling. As I've said before about other 'contemporary' or near-contemporary documentaries.

    (Again, this post is not about the Letby case; it's about the media interactions with it.)

    Dreadful.

    I also can't understand why a doctor who was a de facto prosecutor and presumably at one stage a possible suspect was allowed to give evidence anonymously. The whole thing looks very like the Post Office prosecutions.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,465
    algarkirk said:

    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.

    Agree. There is a case to be made for anything from Tories well down into double figures to NOM. There are a lot of moving parts in the machine: turnout, don't knows, variable swing, Reform, tactical voting, the boats and the flights, Labour mistakes (just getting into gear - Elphicke, Rayner, unions, anyone seen Burgon recently?), media (The Sun?), and of course Black Swans.

    Question: What is the minimum number of seats the Tories have to lose (from 365) to certainly be unable to form a government?
    50.

    The DUP *might* do another deal if there's enough cash on the table but I wouldn't assume it, by any means. I think they'd probably prefer to try their chances screwing Labour over instead (and would, of course, have equal leverage there as with the Tories). Every other party (bar SF, obviously) would vote against. Realistically, about 44. And that'd go with a by-election soon enough.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593
    algarkirk said:

    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.

    Agree. There is a case to be made for anything from Tories well down into double figures to NOM. There are a lot of moving parts in the machine: turnout, don't knows, variable swing, Reform, tactical voting, the boats and the flights, Labour mistakes (just getting into gear - Elphicke, Rayner, unions, anyone seen Burgon recently?), media (The Sun?), and of course Black Swans.

    Question: What is the minimum number of seats the Tories have to lose (from 365) to certainly be unable to form a government?
    Around 310 and under and they cannot survive confidence even with DUP (who might well say FO anyway)
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,542
    algarkirk said:

    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.

    Agree. There is a case to be made for anything from Tories well down into double figures to NOM. There are a lot of moving parts in the machine: turnout, don't knows, variable swing, Reform, tactical voting, the boats and the flights, Labour mistakes (just getting into gear - Elphicke, Rayner, unions, anyone seen Burgon recently?), media (The Sun?), and of course Black Swans.

    Question: What is the minimum number of seats the Tories have to lose (from 365) to certainly be unable to form a government?
    I find it hard to see a path to NOM. I know that Labour need to gain a lot of seats, but one of their issues looks to have resolved itself - Scotland. Ok how they mocked the Tories with the more Pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs and then it came for Labour too...
    But with the SNP imploding, the Scottish Plod about to reveal what they know about the SNP finances (apparently), Labour look set for a decent haul of Scottish MPs, so they need proportionately fewer from rUK.

    And as others have said (often repeatedly and at length) no-one is listening to the Tories now. They are done until they go away and rediscover centrist policies. If they ever do.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,016
    Donkeys said:

    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    I picked up a vibe in the last thread that ai is suddenly a banned topic? In global politics today we’re just seeing the latest iteration of how slow politicians and the public are in anticipating and preparing for epoch changing events and technology (rise of fascism, global warming, the internet, covid, whatever).

    If it were not obvious already, after yesterday’s openai release, it should be clear hat the capabilities of this tech are going to utterly shape the course of this century.

    Occasionally I tune in and see the debates between professional politicians and those that consider themselves politically engaged. I’m blown away by the triviality. So much focus on minor differences in fiscal allocation. And almost no consideration of how the grand sweep of time renders those debates meaningless.

    It's Leon's current bug bear which means he posts about every 5 minutes given the chance hence he is banned from talking about it if no one else is...

    On 1 level he's right it's perfectly possible that AI will change the world as someone who uses it I don't think it will in the way Leon thinks it will.
    He's not right, as he's not claiming that it's 'perfectly possible' AI will change the world. He is claiming that he is *certain* it will change the world, and that we'll all lose our jobs and OH MY GOD!!!!!!

    Like the lableak theory, he takes a possibility and turns it into certainty. Unfortunately for him, his past predictions are (ahem) rather poor, especially in this sector.He also all too often confuses AGI and AI, and sentience, consciousness and intelligence - perhaps purposefully.

    As for your last line: that's my view. *If* current-methodology AI pans out as the hypers think (and that is *not* a certainty...), the social and political changes might not be what we think, or at the scale (they might be bigger or smaller). It's incredibly hard to come up with any prediction that isn't just waving your finger in the air, as much would depend on the capabilities of the AI and the way it is received.
    The very concept of AI is a mystification. It's just binary programming.
    Like our brains that unconsciously spin a web of consciousness.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,465

    Class 91 at York station yesterday, 30+ years old but kept in good nick along with associated carriages:


    The picture's blurred (as all good porn should be...), but isn't that the one in the original InterCity 'Swift' livery? If so, I saw it pass through St Neots the other week.

    Incidentally, it also makes me feel old. When I was younger, there was a great program on the TV about its development, and now it is being retired.

    Edit: this was it:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvsIYaRmRAM
    Isn't there more than one? We were at a friend's party on Sunday very close to the Doncaster-Leeds line and I'm sure at least two went past in the same direction, both in original livery.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,573

    DavidL said:

    nico679 said:

    Unemployment up and wage growth remains at 6% .

    So the former would edge the BOE to an earlier rate cut , the latter makes things a bit more complicated .

    Yep, at that rate real wages will soon be growing at more than 3% a year. Our productivity growth does not justify anything like that.

    I expect a 0.25% fall in base rates next month after better inflation figures but wage growth, driven by people playing catch up, is an issue.
    What is this real terms pay increase of which you speak?

    Certainly hasn't filtered through to my corner of the economy.
    CPI is currently 3.8% (and will fall sharply over the next couple of months) Wage growth is, on average, 6% on the figures this morning. So real wage growth is, on average, currently 2,2%.

    Of course, as this is an average, some will be doing better than others but this level of wage growth should sustain growth in the economy for the rest of the year.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,599

    As others have said there needs to be a discussion about what unis are for and then how to fund them to do that. Running them as quasi-businesses who are at the mercy of political whims is never going to work.

    Yes. And as part of that decide whether they are public or private (they straddle that to some extent at the moment).

    If public for a public good then decide how many places we need and fund them, probably through general taxation, but focused on higher earners. Or a graduate tax, I'm not really too fussed. It may mean fewer undergrads - or more if we conclude that we need more as a country. It would probably lead to places per subject area rather than overall, so we get the mix of people we need.

    If private, let them set their own fees and thrive or fail like other businesses and leave them well alone. Have a government loan scheme, potentially, but on realistic terms (can be revenue neutral, but should be on the basis that it will at least break even - enough people will repay in full to make that happen).

    Personally, I prefer public and for the public good. That's one of the reasons I'm in academia. If we went the second route then I'd see it just like any other private enterprise and they'd need to compete for me on salary like any other employer.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147

    On topic, I'd agree that 120 Tory MPs would be about the minimum if we were still dealing with the 1997 world of 3-party politics. But we're not.

    The pterodactyl in the ointment is Reform. Voting intention + leadership ratings + relative issues competence + tactical voting + semi-proportional swing could well push the Tories down to 120 seats.

    However, the 'worst case' scenario is that Reform's vote comes primarily from ex-2019 Tories (we know this is true at the moment: Deltapoll's most recent had about two-thirds of their current support coming from there; most of the rest, presumably was the Brexit Party), and holds up at current levels.

    Now, I know there's a degree of double-counting there but I think there's also a widespread assumption that polls will tighten as we head to the election, as they usually do. And perhaps, probably, they will. But it's no guarantee. The usual pressures on minor-party squeeze aren't there in anything like the scale that they were in 2019. Labour isn't as extreme, the issues aren't as stark, the election isn't as close: and the Tories are really disliked. Swingback has usually started well before now whereas if anything, the Tories are still sinking in support. If Reform polls 10%+ it's possible that the 'worst case' is the Conservatives well down into double figures.

    We shouldn't allow our thinking to be hemmed in by past events. I suspect that '120' is considered a minimum because it's ballpark within the worst-ever Tory experience; it cannot go lower because it has not gone lower.

    Yet the Tories are polling 10% below where they were in 1997. True, Labour is also lower but then the polls also exaggerated their support then (a point often forgotten because of the landslide delivered and because tactical voting produced a result more consistent with the predictions of those bigger leads; the two effects cancelled each other out to an extent).

    Even discounting black swans - and it does look as if Sunak is there for the duration and that the Tories won't accidentally re-elect Liz Truss or similar - we should take seriously the possibility, though not the probability, of a 1931-type outcome.

    As I said earlier current polling puts the Tory party on the precipice where the difference between 200 seats and 20 is 4% / margin of error and even that depends on the level of tactical voting.

    I can easily see the Tories getting 200 seats, I can equally given a little bit of bad news see them getting few to none
Sign In or Register to comment.