There's no point debating with Farage. He is what he is, he'll get the vote he gets. He's a vibe - a brainstem feeling of resentment about smoking in pubs and classic cars and silver service. You might as well debate a Hamlet ad from the 80s."
Another campaign day, another load of rubbish about the death of the Tory party and sensationalist Farage hype. I know the press have to sell tomorrow’s chip wrap, but it’s all a bit silly. We know mid campaign polls can be bollocks, so why do folk get obsessed by them.
Whilst not impossible, I severely doubt any of the hyped outcomes.
Farage is not leader of the opposition and will continue to struggle to win a seat. There will be a Lib Dem recovery in parts of the south and west. Labour will vastly impose on 2019 and will have achieved an amazing result to get a majority of one. Today it looks like they will get a majority, but it will be far smaller than the polls suggest.
Never underestimate the Tories, their vote will turn out and even if they do badly their seat count will be nearer 200 than 100.
It is a scenario! The death of the UK polling industry where every pollster including the ones employed by parties for private polls get it completely wrong.
It goes beyond polling - parties also have canvass returns to guide them. In your scenario the Tories are doing MUCH better than the headlines suggest. And yet when we look at what the Tories are doing, it demonstrates that if anything the polls aren't showing en ough of a rout.
If Tory last time voters were Tory this time, we would know. Tory activists are knocking doors and making calls. That data gets fed into their model alongside their own polling. And sets the direction for the campaign.
Sunak is being sent in to defend True Blue seats with 20k majorities. Ministers are pushing lines to not give Labour a super majority. Are saying its OK to put Farage on Tory leaflets. Are desperately pitching to their core vote.
They would not be doing any of those things if your scenario was in play. There could be an abrupt plot twist - at the last a few million decide to vote Tory after all. But that is hopium. It isn't rooted in reality.
So it could happen. It just very certainly won't.
My point is that a 150-200 seat outcome for Labour or Conservative is traditionally a very bad result. You don’t need the hype of the last few days to still have a monumentally bad result.
Having spent the last few decades, I’ve learned that Tory voters turn out on election day and should not be underestimated.
I would be delighted if that were not the case. The Tories will do badly, but I would be surprised if the result lives up to the hype.
The local election results would, I think, point to a result at around the ~200 seat mark. Very bad, but slightly better than 1997.
However, Sunak's campaign has so far been weaker than Major's.
I have shied away from making a prediction, but with 19 days to go I will now do so. I agree to a large extent with Jonathan. The shambling blue hordes of the Tory vote will turn out in sufficient numbers to stave off ELE. It will, in large part, be a vote against Labour, a reflex, a habit, a vote for the local candidate rather than for the leader or the government. But many will still, reluctantly, turn out.
Similarly, Labour voters will, to an extent, evaporate like the morning dew. Victory, seemingly inevitable, will not require everyone to add their nail to the coffin, and so reasons for other votes, or not voting will be found.
My predicted vote (seat) shares: CON 29% (205) LAB 38% (355) LDM 14% (45) GRN 4% (2) RFM 9% (2) 23 other British seats and 18 for NI. I'll put a full entry together for Farooq's competition soon too.
Important post. The locals were real votes, not polls and are a useful counter balance. My impression is that the Tory position has weakened a little since May, but not as much as the hype.
There is an awful lot of sense in what you and Lost Password say. Whilst 'polling' points us to something utterly seismic, history not so much, nor the real votes of May, nor indeed the real votes of the local by elections since the GE was called (albeit a very limited data set). We also have two of the MRPs within the last 2 weeks putting 150 to 200 firmly within range. Farage might have shifted that somewhat but Lab have also declined too. The more Labour to carry all becomes a narrative, the more the panicked natural Tories vote, see 1997 and 2001, both showing ELE all the way to polling day. Even at 19% with the first MRP, 72 seats were held, and thats with a big old Labour %. Unless the Tory vote starts to fold into Reform i think a stabilisation and old hens turnout to mid 20s and perhaps 28% or so is inevitable, and with that 150 seats plus, probaly 175 or so. The polling is making us confuse an utter humiliation losing 200 seats with glory. If they 'defend' all the 20k majorities thry are touching 100, all the 15ks and they are at 97 levels and above.......... We shall see
I think it's worth pointing out that my prediction would be historically awful for the Tories. A lower vote share than Major in 1997, lower even than in 1832. A huge loss of seats. One of the very rare instances of a government with a majority being replaced by the opposition winning a majority.
Betting post Great Yarmouth bet365 Lab 1/3 Ref 7/2 Con 11/2
Reform will do well here but I don't believe exclusively at the expense of the Tories, i think their surge will turn this into a three way scrap and given the big majority in place, 11/2 has to be the value here DYOR
Nice one. Brandon Lewis got 65.8% in 2019; he should be able to hang on, as Reform will limit the swing to Labour. (You're still wrong about Wes, Jess and Shabana though )
Brandon standon down! That's a factor needing incorporating of course And Wes and Jess I think are ok yes (wes more than jess) but I seriously believe Shabhana is in serious trouble, Yakoob has the big mo and Labour in Birmingham are struggling
Oh, you're right. Didn't realise Brandon was standing down. He'll be sorely missed (not).
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
Betting post Great Yarmouth bet365 Lab 1/3 Ref 7/2 Con 11/2
Reform will do well here but I don't believe exclusively at the expense of the Tories, i think their surge will turn this into a three way scrap and given the big majority in place, 11/2 has to be the value here DYOR
Nice one. Brandon Lewis got 65.8% in 2019; he should be able to hang on, as Reform will limit the swing to Labour. (You're still wrong about Wes, Jess and Shabana though )
Brandon standon down! That's a factor needing incorporating of course And Wes and Jess I think are ok yes (wes more than jess) but I seriously believe Shabhana is in serious trouble, Yakoob has the big mo and Labour in Birmingham are struggling
Oh, you're right. Didn't realise Brandon was standing down. He'll be sorely missed (not).
I don't think it makes an enormous difference to the analysis given most of the personal vote probably ceases to exist on a huge downturn in support as we are seeing and, I guess, might even become a drag
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Your palate is jaded and you're in need of stimulation again. Try "Person of Interest" on Amazon prime. 10 years old. Prescient.
Labour activists in Brighton have been sent out en masse to Worthing West this morning, seeking to overturn Peter Bottomley's 15k majority. They seem pretty confident of taking it, and the bookies agree. Who'd have thought it?
There's no point debating with Farage. He is what he is, he'll get the vote he gets. He's a vibe - a brainstem feeling of resentment about smoking in pubs and classic cars and silver service. You might as well debate a Hamlet ad from the 80s."
Because saying “shut up, you racist bore”, rather than challenging what they say, never attracts more people to fringe candidates. Slow hand clap for Mr O’Hara.
Why am I so engaged on here this morning? Well, simply because the weather down here on the south coast is abysmal: cold, wet and very windy. I abandoned my regular morning walk. It's really unbelievable for mid-June, and has been pretty grotty for most of the month. The Tories really do deserve to be punished.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. The summary of their answers is: 1) Keir Starmer will increase your taxes, no mention is generally made at this point about the fact that the tax base is higher than it has been for decades, the tax cuts the Tories are ‘promising’ are unfunded and the reality is that their tax cuts are either undeliverable or will increase the debts for our kids to pay. 2) Ed Davey was responsible for the post office a decade ago and, given they presumably think he is the most intelligent man in the world, should have seen the post office scandal before anyone else. They tend not to mention the significant numbers of Tory ministers who missed the post office scandal until ITV pointed it out to them earlier this year. 3) If we don’t vote Tory Nigel Farage will be emboldened and he is ‘far right’. This generally comes before they suggest that people should add Tory and Reform votes together to get some hypothetical ‘right wing support’ number and acknowledge that there is a good chance that Farage will take over the Tories after the election so a Tory vote and a reform vote may, or may not, be the same thing. What I have not heard (for months if not years) is a Tory voter who can give me a reason to vote Tory which relates to the Tory party and their actions and values. It is only ever about the avoidance of something which they insist will be worse. I am at heart a voter of the radical centre, I dislike the extremes on both sides. But I have to say I have reached the stage where I have more respect for reform voters (or those who vote for the workers party) than I do for those sticking with the Tories. I disagree with pretty much all that those ‘extreme’ parties believe, but I respect the fact that they believe in something. If the Tories want to gain respect from me they need to stop seeing themselves as the natural party of managing the demise of the U.K. and regain some values of their own. At the moment I just see a vote for them as a vote for inevitable decline of the country.
Keeping out worse is usually the only reason to vote for any party.
I know that I will dislike a Labour government intensely, and that if the Conservatives come back in the future, they will reverse nothing that I disliked about Labour.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
Good luck getting big stakes cash bets accepted in a bookies without id being tracked.
Good Morning folks. So we will have a new goverment and leader. I hope it turns out to be a positive experience. KC for me spends a lot of time critcising what other have done and do. This does not wash. We need a leader who is a doer not a wordsmith or a waffler. Action speaks louder than words comes to mind. Making the economy stronger and improving peoples quality of life is what the country needs. If he and his party can achieve that he will get a second term. If not he will be here and gone tomorrow.As we know a week is a long time in politics. The country deserves somthing good!
Morning, I'd missed that King Charles was standing in this one.
The Duke of Marlborough is on Woodstock Town Council, so I guess it's not totally unprecedented?
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
OK, Labour are going to win and probably win big. What I think is now most interesting about the election is how much will Farage splitting the Tory vote
1. Affect the number of Tories returned, maybe putting them third. 2. Affect the number of MPs for other parties, LibDem, Green, Reform etc 3. Affect which Tories are left after the dust settles. This will determine whether we get a Tory party that can recover or one that goes hard right.
The Conservatives have benefitted for decades by the anti-tory vote being split. If Reform are more than a flash in the pan this could be a reaaly big change. I would think that it would be a difficult job to work this out from the polling, but it would be interesting to know.
Unless the survivors are very skewed, the remnant in Parliament is less important than the remnant in the country.
If the Reform-curious right have more than a third of the MPs, they can get one of their own through to the membership vote. Indeed, a bit less than a third will do the job. That's not certain, but it seems plausible.
And whilst the membership don't have to vote for the loopiest right winger they are offered, it will require remarkable self-restraint.
If the final round ends up as (say) Cleverly-Badenoch, that's bad but not too bad. But Braverman-someone else, that only ends in one, disastrous way.
And yet, history, memory and identity are powerful things for people. Ultimately, I'm a dripping wet one nation conservative. I've not voted for them for a while, I think this government is a disaster, everything they say and do screams "why don't you (go away) and join the Liberals?"
But that's still a step too far.
Yes, but it would be interesting to have some idea of which Tories would survive. For example Suella looks fairly safe, whereas Jeremy Hunt doesn't, so chalk up one for the Faragist wing of the Tory party and lose a centrist potential leader. It must be possible to run some maths on individual constituency polls with assumptions on Reform percentages. I for one would be fascinated to see those results, but I suspect it's too difficult.
Labour activists in Brighton have been sent out en masse to Worthing West this morning, seeking to overturn Peter Bottomley's 15k majority. They seem pretty confident of taking it, and the bookies agree. Who'd have thought it?
The local elections showed them winning IIRC.
Yes, they even won Adur Council, an astonishing result. There's two Worthing seats: Labour should win Worthing East and Shoreham (i.e. the Brighton overspill part of Worthing), but Worthing West is a bit more challenging.
Here’s an interesting story, what do we think given the headlines Sunak got for missing the end of the D-Day commemorations?
“US vice president Kamala Harris will attend the international Ukraine peace summit in Switzerland this weekend, where she will meet with Volodymyr Zelensky and address world leaders.
Ms Harris, who will spend less than 24 hours at the gathering in Lucerne, will be standing in for president Joe Biden at the event. The president will be just ending his participation at the G7 summit in Italy and returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Los Angeles.”
“Returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser” is code for “tucked up in bed with a horlicks” isn’t it?
Ha possibly. I suspect that there’s only so many days they can keep him ‘awake and alert’ before he needs some time to recover.
The different media environment in the US, with partisan ‘news’ channels, probably means that this won’t cut through in the same way as does in the UK. Fox News will run all day with it, but they’re preaching to the choir of conservatives who already dislike the guy.
On the substance of the summit, I think there’s a real opportunity for Ukraine in the coming months, with evidence of Russian air defences being short in both numbers and capability, and vulnerable to being taken out by small drones. If Ukraine can achieve air superiority, they have a real opportunity to gain significant ground over the summer.
I wondered whether the cash from Russian assets will help cover the risk of a Trump win. Presumably he won’t mind selling them arms in return for that cash.
Interesting point, it does take away a lot of the US Conservative arguments against funding Ukraine (over domestic priorities), if the funding is coming from frozen Russian assets rather than the US Treasury.
As I predicted, the last lot of funding was passed with the argument that the vast majority of the money was going to US defence contractors, and supporting tens of thousands of American jobs in Republican States and Districts. There’s several new ammunition factories under construction in the States at the moment.
It was never about the money. Destroying Russia’s military capability, in return for spending a tiny proportion of US GDP, is an incredibly good deal for the USA.
If it succeeds. And that is a big if.
If the price is the end of the dollar as universal international trade currency for the world, as it increasingly seems to be, it is a catastrophe for the US. Doubly so, given its current national debt and budget deficit.
Being world reserve currency brings huge advantages. Principally the ability to run up debt without debauching your currency because other countries need to hold vast dollar reserves in order to buy essentials like oil and conduct industrial trade. End that and the tide goes out in a big way for the US.
Secondly being world reserve currency enables you to tilt the terms of international trade in your favour and ruinously sanction those who wont play ball.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. The summary of their answers is: 1) Keir Starmer will increase your taxes, no mention is generally made at this point about the fact that the tax base is higher than it has been for decades, the tax cuts the Tories are ‘promising’ are unfunded and the reality is that their tax cuts are either undeliverable or will increase the debts for our kids to pay. 2) Ed Davey was responsible for the post office a decade ago and, given they presumably think he is the most intelligent man in the world, should have seen the post office scandal before anyone else. They tend not to mention the significant numbers of Tory ministers who missed the post office scandal until ITV pointed it out to them earlier this year. 3) If we don’t vote Tory Nigel Farage will be emboldened and he is ‘far right’. This generally comes before they suggest that people should add Tory and Reform votes together to get some hypothetical ‘right wing support’ number and acknowledge that there is a good chance that Farage will take over the Tories after the election so a Tory vote and a reform vote may, or may not, be the same thing. What I have not heard (for months if not years) is a Tory voter who can give me a reason to vote Tory which relates to the Tory party and their actions and values. It is only ever about the avoidance of something which they insist will be worse. I am at heart a voter of the radical centre, I dislike the extremes on both sides. But I have to say I have reached the stage where I have more respect for reform voters (or those who vote for the workers party) than I do for those sticking with the Tories. I disagree with pretty much all that those ‘extreme’ parties believe, but I respect the fact that they believe in something. If the Tories want to gain respect from me they need to stop seeing themselves as the natural party of managing the demise of the U.K. and regain some values of their own. At the moment I just see a vote for them as a vote for inevitable decline of the country.
There are two demographics which have done well from the last few years:
Oldies Northern working class - especially young and male
How much credit the Conservatives should get for that is debateable.
Edit: Actually three - the other is GenXers who got on the housing ladder early enough.
Housing status, as usual, being the big determinant of financial well being.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. The summary of their answers is: 1) Keir Starmer will increase your taxes, no mention is generally made at this point about the fact that the tax base is higher than it has been for decades, the tax cuts the Tories are ‘promising’ are unfunded and the reality is that their tax cuts are either undeliverable or will increase the debts for our kids to pay. 2) Ed Davey was responsible for the post office a decade ago and, given they presumably think he is the most intelligent man in the world, should have seen the post office scandal before anyone else. They tend not to mention the significant numbers of Tory ministers who missed the post office scandal until ITV pointed it out to them earlier this year. 3) If we don’t vote Tory Nigel Farage will be emboldened and he is ‘far right’. This generally comes before they suggest that people should add Tory and Reform votes together to get some hypothetical ‘right wing support’ number and acknowledge that there is a good chance that Farage will take over the Tories after the election so a Tory vote and a reform vote may, or may not, be the same thing. What I have not heard (for months if not years) is a Tory voter who can give me a reason to vote Tory which relates to the Tory party and their actions and values. It is only ever about the avoidance of something which they insist will be worse. I am at heart a voter of the radical centre, I dislike the extremes on both sides. But I have to say I have reached the stage where I have more respect for reform voters (or those who vote for the workers party) than I do for those sticking with the Tories. I disagree with pretty much all that those ‘extreme’ parties believe, but I respect the fact that they believe in something. If the Tories want to gain respect from me they need to stop seeing themselves as the natural party of managing the demise of the U.K. and regain some values of their own. At the moment I just see a vote for them as a vote for inevitable decline of the country.
Keeping out worse is usually the only reason to vote for any party.
I know that I will dislike a Labour government intensely, and that if the Conservatives come back in the future, they will reverse nothing that I disliked about Labour.
I am happily voting for my first choice of party in this election, as I normally do.
One of the perks of being in a safe seat, I know my vote won’t make any difference to the result!
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. The summary of their answers is: 1) Keir Starmer will increase your taxes, no mention is generally made at this point about the fact that the tax base is higher than it has been for decades, the tax cuts the Tories are ‘promising’ are unfunded and the reality is that their tax cuts are either undeliverable or will increase the debts for our kids to pay. 2) Ed Davey was responsible for the post office a decade ago and, given they presumably think he is the most intelligent man in the world, should have seen the post office scandal before anyone else. They tend not to mention the significant numbers of Tory ministers who missed the post office scandal until ITV pointed it out to them earlier this year. 3) If we don’t vote Tory Nigel Farage will be emboldened and he is ‘far right’. This generally comes before they suggest that people should add Tory and Reform votes together to get some hypothetical ‘right wing support’ number and acknowledge that there is a good chance that Farage will take over the Tories after the election so a Tory vote and a reform vote may, or may not, be the same thing. What I have not heard (for months if not years) is a Tory voter who can give me a reason to vote Tory which relates to the Tory party and their actions and values. It is only ever about the avoidance of something which they insist will be worse. I am at heart a voter of the radical centre, I dislike the extremes on both sides. But I have to say I have reached the stage where I have more respect for reform voters (or those who vote for the workers party) than I do for those sticking with the Tories. I disagree with pretty much all that those ‘extreme’ parties believe, but I respect the fact that they believe in something. If the Tories want to gain respect from me they need to stop seeing themselves as the natural party of managing the demise of the U.K. and regain some values of their own. At the moment I just see a vote for them as a vote for inevitable decline of the country.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
I think raising taxes on unearned income to be the same as or greater than earned income would be very popular electorally with under 50s.
Here’s an interesting story, what do we think given the headlines Sunak got for missing the end of the D-Day commemorations?
“US vice president Kamala Harris will attend the international Ukraine peace summit in Switzerland this weekend, where she will meet with Volodymyr Zelensky and address world leaders.
Ms Harris, who will spend less than 24 hours at the gathering in Lucerne, will be standing in for president Joe Biden at the event. The president will be just ending his participation at the G7 summit in Italy and returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Los Angeles.”
“Returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser” is code for “tucked up in bed with a horlicks” isn’t it?
Ha possibly. I suspect that there’s only so many days they can keep him ‘awake and alert’ before he needs some time to recover.
The different media environment in the US, with partisan ‘news’ channels, probably means that this won’t cut through in the same way as does in the UK. Fox News will run all day with it, but they’re preaching to the choir of conservatives who already dislike the guy.
On the substance of the summit, I think there’s a real opportunity for Ukraine in the coming months, with evidence of Russian air defences being short in both numbers and capability, and vulnerable to being taken out by small drones. If Ukraine can achieve air superiority, they have a real opportunity to gain significant ground over the summer.
I wondered whether the cash from Russian assets will help cover the risk of a Trump win. Presumably he won’t mind selling them arms in return for that cash.
Interesting point, it does take away a lot of the US Conservative arguments against funding Ukraine (over domestic priorities), if the funding is coming from frozen Russian assets rather than the US Treasury.
As I predicted, the last lot of funding was passed with the argument that the vast majority of the money was going to US defence contractors, and supporting tens of thousands of American jobs in Republican States and Districts. There’s several new ammunition factories under construction in the States at the moment.
It was never about the money. Destroying Russia’s military capability, in return for spending a tiny proportion of US GDP, is an incredibly good deal for the USA.
If it succeeds. And that is a big if.
If the price is the end of the dollar as universal international trade currency for the world, as it increasingly seems to be, it is a catastrophe for the US. Doubly so, given its current national debt and budget deficit.
Being world reserve currency brings huge advantages. Principally the ability to run up debt without debauching your currency because other countries need to hold vast dollar reserves in order to buy essentials like oil and conduct industrial trade. End that and the tide goes out in a big way for the US.
Secondly being world reserve currency enables you to tilt the terms of international trade in your favour and ruinously sanction those who wont play ball.
I’d tell a pollster I’m a don’t know, but probably vote Conservative through gritted teeth on the day. But, if the game really is up, and the party’s down in the low teens, I’ll vote Reform.
For me, Reform is a clear sell on the markets.
If they ever got close to government they'd make fall apart in months and make the Conservatives look supremely competent.
What I want is the selection of excellent and talented candidates and a future Conservative government that actually delivers on its manifesto.
Reform may win 1 seat (Clacton) and that's a maybe...
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
OK, Labour are going to win and probably win big. What I think is now most interesting about the election is how much will Farage splitting the Tory vote
1. Affect the number of Tories returned, maybe putting them third. 2. Affect the number of MPs for other parties, LibDem, Green, Reform etc 3. Affect which Tories are left after the dust settles. This will determine whether we get a Tory party that can recover or one that goes hard right.
The Conservatives have benefitted for decades by the anti-tory vote being split. If Reform are more than a flash in the pan this could be a reaaly big change. I would think that it would be a difficult job to work this out from the polling, but it would be interesting to know.
Unless the survivors are very skewed, the remnant in Parliament is less important than the remnant in the country.
If the Reform-curious right have more than a third of the MPs, they can get one of their own through to the membership vote. Indeed, a bit less than a third will do the job. That's not certain, but it seems plausible.
And whilst the membership don't have to vote for the loopiest right winger they are offered, it will require remarkable self-restraint.
If the final round ends up as (say) Cleverly-Badenoch, that's bad but not too bad. But Braverman-someone else, that only ends in one, disastrous way.
And yet, history, memory and identity are powerful things for people. Ultimately, I'm a dripping wet one nation conservative. I've not voted for them for a while, I think this government is a disaster, everything they say and do screams "why don't you (go away) and join the Liberals?"
But that's still a step too far.
Yes, but it would be interesting to have some idea of which Tories would survive. For example Suella looks fairly safe, whereas Jeremy Hunt doesn't, so chalk up one for the Faragist wing of the Tory party and lose a centrist potential leader. It must be possible to run some maths on individual constituency polls with assumptions on Reform percentages. I for one would be fascinated to see those results, but I suspect it's too difficult.
If Reform win 17% overall, it won't be 17% everywhere. It will be far lower in Wales (Valleys maybe excepted), Scotland, London, university seats, Merseyside, and well-heeled constituencies.
Conversely, there will be seats in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent, Durham, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, where they'd be hitting the 30-40% mark.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
Good luck getting big stakes cash bets accepted in a bookies without id being tracked.
The largest cash bet I ever placed in the bookies was £500, followed by £250 a few weeks later, on Brexit. The odds were 5/2 and 2/1, although I cannot remember which way around. I won. At no point was I asked for ID. What is the threshold at which they ask for ID?
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
I thought the Gambling Commission regulated licence holders (i.e. bookies) rather than punters?
They also do the equivalent of monitoring insider trading for betting. Its a grey area, so being part of NU10K or whatever he will face an investigation, some joshing from his colleagues and nothing else.
Would he not have to be in a position to actually affect the outcome to be in real trouble, rather than simply aware of something that may or may not be announced in the future?
This situation sounds like a groom in a stable knowing who’s the lame horse and who’s the strong horse before a race.
(1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)cheats at gambling
Examples are given but they are not defined as comprehensive, so it comes down to an interpretation of cheating.
Phil Iveys edge sorting is the biggest test case so far where he was found to be a cheat in civil court and it did create a lower bar for what is considered cheating:
"This could be one of the most significant judgments in criminal law for many years, if as the Supreme Court suggest, a new test for dishonesty is applied. Since Ghosh juries have been told that defendants are only guilty if the dishonest conduct involved in the offence was dishonest by the standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people and also that they must have realised that ordinary honest people would regard their behaviour as dishonest. If this second limb of the test is to disappear, it might make convictions for dishonesty related offences easier to obtain, particularly in the more complex cases, such as those involving financial fraud.”
Fascinating case and well worth a read if your are interested in betting (or cheating!)
I think the crucial point was that the gambler and his assistant contrived the situation so that they had an edge, rather than the house, in what was otherwise a game of chance. They were not merely passively observing the cards (which would be the case with card-counting, another technique which casinos have to watch out for but which, I believe, is lawful.)
Reluctantly, I have to come to the conclusions their Lordships were right.
Here’s an interesting story, what do we think given the headlines Sunak got for missing the end of the D-Day commemorations?
“US vice president Kamala Harris will attend the international Ukraine peace summit in Switzerland this weekend, where she will meet with Volodymyr Zelensky and address world leaders.
Ms Harris, who will spend less than 24 hours at the gathering in Lucerne, will be standing in for president Joe Biden at the event. The president will be just ending his participation at the G7 summit in Italy and returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Los Angeles.”
“Returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser” is code for “tucked up in bed with a horlicks” isn’t it?
Ha possibly. I suspect that there’s only so many days they can keep him ‘awake and alert’ before he needs some time to recover.
The different media environment in the US, with partisan ‘news’ channels, probably means that this won’t cut through in the same way as does in the UK. Fox News will run all day with it, but they’re preaching to the choir of conservatives who already dislike the guy.
On the substance of the summit, I think there’s a real opportunity for Ukraine in the coming months, with evidence of Russian air defences being short in both numbers and capability, and vulnerable to being taken out by small drones. If Ukraine can achieve air superiority, they have a real opportunity to gain significant ground over the summer.
I wondered whether the cash from Russian assets will help cover the risk of a Trump win. Presumably he won’t mind selling them arms in return for that cash.
Interesting point, it does take away a lot of the US Conservative arguments against funding Ukraine (over domestic priorities), if the funding is coming from frozen Russian assets rather than the US Treasury.
As I predicted, the last lot of funding was passed with the argument that the vast majority of the money was going to US defence contractors, and supporting tens of thousands of American jobs in Republican States and Districts. There’s several new ammunition factories under construction in the States at the moment.
It was never about the money. Destroying Russia’s military capability, in return for spending a tiny proportion of US GDP, is an incredibly good deal for the USA.
If it succeeds. And that is a big if.
If the price is the end of the dollar as universal international trade currency for the world, as it increasingly seems to be, it is a catastrophe for the US. Doubly so, given its current national debt and budget deficit.
Being world reserve currency brings huge advantages. Principally the ability to run up debt without debauching your currency because other countries need to hold vast dollar reserves in order to buy essentials like oil and conduct industrial trade. End that and the tide goes out in a big way for the US.
Secondly being world reserve currency enables you to tilt the terms of international trade in your favour and ruinously sanction those who wont play ball.
Folding to Putin won't help the USA in that regard.
It’s not going to stop China and Saudi from agreeing to buy oil priced in Yuan, that’s for sure.
More diplomatic pressure on China and India, who are washing the Russian O&G back into the global markets having bought it at a discount, is what’s required.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
That's amazing. I had no idea such things existed. 😊
The "BBC" is a nationalised news and gossip reseller, in which they repeat the words of party officials and foreign news services and then talk for a bit.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
Good luck getting big stakes cash bets accepted in a bookies without id being tracked.
The largest cash bet I ever placed in the bookies was £500, followed by £250 a few weeks later, on Brexit. The odds were 5/2 and 2/1, although I cannot remember which way around. I won. At no point was I asked for ID. What is the threshold at which they ask for ID?
It will vary a lot. Here is one egregious example.
"Having had his account closed by William Hill, Edwards placed a £52 football accumulator using his debit card in one of the operator’s shops. However, when he went to collect his £74 winnings, he claims he was told he was not allowed to enter the building as he had not provided the information asked of him when affordability checks were imposed online."
Got my first political leaflet today, from the Welsh Liberal Democrats. Labour are going to win this seat handsomely, so not sure why they bothered really.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
That's amazing. I had no idea such things existed. 😊
The "BBC" is a nationalised news and gossip reseller, in which they repeat the words of party officials and foreign news services and then talk for a bit.
It's interesting that they could not remember any of the big wins here - Mr Smithson's new car fund for example.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
OK, Labour are going to win and probably win big. What I think is now most interesting about the election is how much will Farage splitting the Tory vote
1. Affect the number of Tories returned, maybe putting them third. 2. Affect the number of MPs for other parties, LibDem, Green, Reform etc 3. Affect which Tories are left after the dust settles. This will determine whether we get a Tory party that can recover or one that goes hard right.
The Conservatives have benefitted for decades by the anti-tory vote being split. If Reform are more than a flash in the pan this could be a reaaly big change. I would think that it would be a difficult job to work this out from the polling, but it would be interesting to know.
Unless the survivors are very skewed, the remnant in Parliament is less important than the remnant in the country.
If the Reform-curious right have more than a third of the MPs, they can get one of their own through to the membership vote. Indeed, a bit less than a third will do the job. That's not certain, but it seems plausible.
And whilst the membership don't have to vote for the loopiest right winger they are offered, it will require remarkable self-restraint.
If the final round ends up as (say) Cleverly-Badenoch, that's bad but not too bad. But Braverman-someone else, that only ends in one, disastrous way.
And yet, history, memory and identity are powerful things for people. Ultimately, I'm a dripping wet one nation conservative. I've not voted for them for a while, I think this government is a disaster, everything they say and do screams "why don't you (go away) and join the Liberals?"
But that's still a step too far.
Yes, but it would be interesting to have some idea of which Tories would survive. For example Suella looks fairly safe, whereas Jeremy Hunt doesn't, so chalk up one for the Faragist wing of the Tory party and lose a centrist potential leader. It must be possible to run some maths on individual constituency polls with assumptions on Reform percentages. I for one would be fascinated to see those results, but I suspect it's too difficult.
If Reform win 17% overall, it won't be 17% everywhere. It will be far lower in Wales (Valleys maybe excepted), Scotland, London, university seats, Merseyside, and well-heeled constituencies.
Conversely, there will be seats in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent, Durham, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, where they'd be hitting the 30-40% mark.
Looking back to Ukip in 2015, on 14% nationally, I think they exceeded 40% only in Clacton where their candidate was the incumbent MP. They had a lot of low 30s results, by and large in places where the non-incumbent parties' voted folded in their favour, but they were not very close in most of those seats - an extra 7% swing would have delivered 6 seats on a bad day, 11 on a good day, imo.
Here’s an interesting story, what do we think given the headlines Sunak got for missing the end of the D-Day commemorations?
“US vice president Kamala Harris will attend the international Ukraine peace summit in Switzerland this weekend, where she will meet with Volodymyr Zelensky and address world leaders.
Ms Harris, who will spend less than 24 hours at the gathering in Lucerne, will be standing in for president Joe Biden at the event. The president will be just ending his participation at the G7 summit in Italy and returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Los Angeles.”
“Returning to the United States to attend a fundraiser” is code for “tucked up in bed with a horlicks” isn’t it?
Ha possibly. I suspect that there’s only so many days they can keep him ‘awake and alert’ before he needs some time to recover.
The different media environment in the US, with partisan ‘news’ channels, probably means that this won’t cut through in the same way as does in the UK. Fox News will run all day with it, but they’re preaching to the choir of conservatives who already dislike the guy.
On the substance of the summit, I think there’s a real opportunity for Ukraine in the coming months, with evidence of Russian air defences being short in both numbers and capability, and vulnerable to being taken out by small drones. If Ukraine can achieve air superiority, they have a real opportunity to gain significant ground over the summer.
I wondered whether the cash from Russian assets will help cover the risk of a Trump win. Presumably he won’t mind selling them arms in return for that cash.
Interesting point, it does take away a lot of the US Conservative arguments against funding Ukraine (over domestic priorities), if the funding is coming from frozen Russian assets rather than the US Treasury.
As I predicted, the last lot of funding was passed with the argument that the vast majority of the money was going to US defence contractors, and supporting tens of thousands of American jobs in Republican States and Districts. There’s several new ammunition factories under construction in the States at the moment.
It was never about the money. Destroying Russia’s military capability, in return for spending a tiny proportion of US GDP, is an incredibly good deal for the USA.
If it succeeds. And that is a big if.
If the price is the end of the dollar as universal international trade currency for the world, as it increasingly seems to be, it is a catastrophe for the US. Doubly so, given its current national debt and budget deficit.
Being world reserve currency brings huge advantages. Principally the ability to run up debt without debauching your currency because other countries need to hold vast dollar reserves in order to buy essentials like oil and conduct industrial trade. End that and the tide goes out in a big way for the US.
Secondly being world reserve currency enables you to tilt the terms of international trade in your favour and ruinously sanction those who wont play ball.
Folding to Putin won't help the USA in that regard.
It’s not going to stop China and Saudi from agreeing to buy oil priced in Yuan, that’s for sure.
More diplomatic pressure on China and India, who are washing the Russian O&G back into the global markets having bought it at a discount, is what’s required.
How do you do that. All applying such pressure will do is reinforce de Dollarisation.
China, India etc. are not doing this out of love for Russia, they are doing this because they watched Russias dollar assets being frozen (and now starting to be confiscated) and thought "My God, if we annoy the USA, this will happen to us. We need to do something about this"
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
I thought the Gambling Commission regulated licence holders (i.e. bookies) rather than punters?
They also do the equivalent of monitoring insider trading for betting. Its a grey area, so being part of NU10K or whatever he will face an investigation, some joshing from his colleagues and nothing else.
Would he not have to be in a position to actually affect the outcome to be in real trouble, rather than simply aware of something that may or may not be announced in the future?
This situation sounds like a groom in a stable knowing who’s the lame horse and who’s the strong horse before a race.
(1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)cheats at gambling
Examples are given but they are not defined as comprehensive, so it comes down to an interpretation of cheating.
Phil Iveys edge sorting is the biggest test case so far where he was found to be a cheat in civil court and it did create a lower bar for what is considered cheating:
"This could be one of the most significant judgments in criminal law for many years, if as the Supreme Court suggest, a new test for dishonesty is applied. Since Ghosh juries have been told that defendants are only guilty if the dishonest conduct involved in the offence was dishonest by the standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people and also that they must have realised that ordinary honest people would regard their behaviour as dishonest. If this second limb of the test is to disappear, it might make convictions for dishonesty related offences easier to obtain, particularly in the more complex cases, such as those involving financial fraud.”
Fascinating case and well worth a read if your are interested in betting (or cheating!)
I think the crucial point was that the gambler and his assistant contrived the situation so that they had an edge, rather than the house, in what was otherwise a game of chance. They were not merely passively observing the cards (which would be the case with card-counting, another technique which casinos have to watch out for but which, I believe, is lawful.)
Reluctantly, I have to come to the conclusions their Lordships were right.
Contrived vs requested. Caveat emptor imo, Ivey shouldn't have a duty of care to protect a casino from bad decisions.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I'd add if it goes, Norfolk will almost certainly be blueless
For balance I disagree with the hope of the destruction of the conservative party not least because there is a place for a centre right party in our politics
I broke the story of Sunak debacle over DDay and am very angry to this day and I said I would vote Lib Dem in protest
With the postal votes about to arrive I told my wife, who said that nothing could bring her to vote for that 'Clown' Ed Davey after watching him foolng around on water and the role he played in the Post Office disgrace not least because she knows Alan Bates and was a customer at his post office here in Llandudno
She is not generally political, but we spoke about our votes and both agreed Sunak has failed and the conservatives are in a desperate state but far more worrying is the rise of Farage which horrifies us
To us it is important that the conservatives out poll Reform, and we have agreed that we will vote for the conservative candidate though it will have no effect on labour regaining the seat
I know Ed Davey and his antics are popular on here but certainly not reflected by my wife's opinion
Morning Big G.
I get your argument, I'm a refugee from the sea left of Labour but if I were in the neighbouring constituency of Romsey and Southampton North I would probably vote for Caroline Nokes on the grounds that at least she's moderate and the stronger the moderate wing of the Parliamentary Conservative Party is post election, the less likely they will put a Reform-lite candidate to the members.
However in Bangor Aberconwy you've got Robin Millar, he's not on the moderate wing, he's on the stoke the culture wars, anti free speech, Faragist wing of your party. He seems to be on the different side of the Conservative Party to you. Why would you want to vote for him to get back to Westminster?
Thank you for your query
Robin Miller was canvassed by me to vote out Johnson and he made a poor attempt at justifying Johnson to remain in post
He is going to lose no matter, so he will not return to parliament and it is why my wife and my two votes will not alter the result but in a very small way will contribute hopefully to the conservatives outpolling Reform
I think some on here, rather than attacking me, need to understand that this was a decision made jointly by my wife and I after considering the consequences of voting for the conservatives who we both agree will not form the next government anytime soon
I think it's very dangerous to make assumptions about how other people will vote, and so conclude that it's "safe" to vote a certain way.
I vote in the hope that other people will agree with me, even though I am not naive enough to expect it. If everyone else in your seat agrees with you, then you will return an individual as a Tory MP to Westminster, which is not an outcome you profess to want, and make a Conservative government more likely, which is also an outcome you say that you don't want.
This is not a serious way to approach choosing how to vote.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Cost of living in Dubai can be high. I have a 1,500sqft 2.5 bed apartment that costs £2k a month in rent. Houses, even if you own them, come with hideous utility bills and are in gated communities with service charges. If you have seven figures you can get something pretty decent though. PM me if you want to discuss.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
Got my first political leaflet today, from the Welsh Liberal Democrats. Labour are going to win this seat handsomely, so not sure why they bothered really.
I got my first political leaflet of the election this week, for Labour in a safe Labour seat. (Almost any seat with a current Labour MP must be a safe Labour seat.) Fewer leaflets than for the London elections.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Lib Dems will be working North Norfolk, or the Cambridgeshire seats.
I don't understand who could possibly have a problem with a loyal Conservative voting Conservative! Are people missing the wood for the trees here - lots of loyal Conservatives are voting against the government this time, but for various reasons some won't.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
The anti-gambling group that always gets the medias ear is run by a Labour bod, so I can well see a lot more restrictions under the guise of protecting the consumer. The current government were already pushing in that direction.
I’d tell a pollster I’m a don’t know, but probably vote Conservative through gritted teeth on the day. But, if the game really is up, and the party’s down in the low teens, I’ll vote Reform.
For me, Reform is a clear sell on the markets.
If they ever got close to government they'd make fall apart in months and make the Conservatives look supremely competent.
What I want is the selection of excellent and talented candidates and a future Conservative government that actually delivers on its manifesto.
Reform may win 1 seat (Clacton) and that's a maybe...
I think they have a good chance in Rotherham where the Brexit Party scored 17.2% in 2019, and UKIP 30.2% in 2015, and the Tories contrived to botch their nomination and so don't have a candidate this time.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Cost of living in Dubai can be high. I have a 1,500sqft 2.5 bed apartment that costs £2k a month in rent. Houses, even if you own them, come with hideous utility bills and are in gated communities with service charges. If you have seven figures you can get something pretty decent though. PM me if you want to discuss.
How much is electricity per kw/h and water per megalitre there?
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I'd add if it goes, Norfolk will almost certainly be blueless
Thanks Woolie.
I like Norfolk a lot and holiday there frequently. In fact we did try to move there but couldn't find anything suitable. I think we got our timing wrong and everything we liked was overpriced.
Yes, I'd have guessed it would have been one of the last redoubts of The Blues, even in a bad election, but I did think the danger might come from The Yellows in some places. I appreciate however from what you say that for Truss, it's the Red Army that's the danger.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Cost of living in Dubai can be high. I have a 1,500sqft 2.5 bed apartment that costs £2k a month in rent. Houses, even if you own them, come with hideous utility bills and are in gated communities with service charges. If you have seven figures you can get something pretty decent though. PM me if you want to discuss.
Thanks, I might do if it looks like an option. I do have a couple of friends who are over there already, and for similar reasons.
Moving from 40% CGT to 0% CGT would save me about 600k, as I say the problem is if you're spending 100k a year and not working, it's sort of revenue neutral in the end. So it's either a) live somewhere cheaper for 5 years or b) move somewhere outside the UK I can still work. Currently considering my options.
I quite like the idea of doing something deadly boring for one year, like the Isle of Man, just for the tax residency, then getting the Elite Thailand visa and living out there on a grand or two a month and using it as a base to travel and go on a middle-aged gap (five) years(s).
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
Well, judging by what he himself said, there must be some left in there.
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
If your government is all about growth, growth, growth, whacking up CGT will have a negative impact on that.
Is there a better way to achieve massive capital flight, than taxing capital gains as income?
Well, it's one of a number of options that Reeves has, so we'll have to see what she goes for.
At the end of the day, some way has to be found to pay to keep the vast legions of elderly and disabled alive, and we've reached the limits of what's tolerable to rinse from earned incomes: I think they're right to rule out income tax and NI rises. So the money will have to be screwed out of wealth instead. The only question is how?
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Cost of living in Dubai can be high. I have a 1,500sqft 2.5 bed apartment that costs £2k a month in rent. Houses, even if you own them, come with hideous utility bills and are in gated communities with service charges. If you have seven figures you can get something pretty decent though. PM me if you want to discuss.
How much is electricity per kw/h and water per megalitre there?
Good question, which I shall try and answer later as my wife gets the bills. From memory about £100 a month for both, from local state-owned monopoly. There’s also a “Municipality Fee”, basically council tax, which is around another £100 and is added to the utility bill.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
After 14 years out of power they will have 500 other things to do first, even if they would be interested in doing this.
I’d tell a pollster I’m a don’t know, but probably vote Conservative through gritted teeth on the day. But, if the game really is up, and the party’s down in the low teens, I’ll vote Reform.
For me, Reform is a clear sell on the markets.
If they ever got close to government they'd make fall apart in months and make the Conservatives look supremely competent.
What I want is the selection of excellent and talented candidates and a future Conservative government that actually delivers on its manifesto.
Reform may win 1 seat (Clacton) and that's a maybe...
I think they have a good chance in Rotherham where the Brexit Party scored 17.2% in 2019, and UKIP 30.2% in 2015, and the Tories contrived to botch their nomination and so don't have a candidate this time.
Looking at the local election numbers, the constituency has become a little more Labour and LLG than 2010-19. Labour also have a favourable national wind. Against that is the appearance of Greens this time. If Reform beat Labour by around 70% among 2019 Conservatives, they are in winnable territory.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I'd add if it goes, Norfolk will almost certainly be blueless
Thanks Woolie.
I like Norfolk a lot and holiday there frequently. In fact we did try to move there but couldn't find anything suitable. I think we got our timing wrong and everything we liked was overpriced.
Yes, I'd have guessed it would have been one of the last redoubts of The Blues, even in a bad election, but I did think the danger might come from The Yellows in some places. I appreciate however from what you say that for Truss, it's the Red Army that's the danger.
Yet to see any interesting odds though.
Yellows in North Norfolk certainly, if they are to challenge at all elsewhere then Broadland and Fakenham or South Norfolk, but I think with Labour at high tide and competitive in both they will merely be throwing everything at North Norfolk. In general terms each time, the Norwichs (freak 2010 result aside), NW, SW and Mid Norfolks and Gt Yarmouth are Lab v Con, North Norfolk Ld v Con and Broadland/Fakenham and South Norfolk Con vs one or the other but more usually Lab
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
Well, judging by what he himself said, there must be some left in there.
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
I am struggling to think on one that is on the left of the party, staunchly anti-Brexit, etc and isn't standing down. I think its just a get out for Rory, I would vote if unicorns existed.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
After 14 years out of power they will have 500 other things to do first, even if they would be interested in doing this.
Whacking tax on gambling and making gambling companies do a lot more affordability checks such that you basically can't get any big bets on is easy policy (they can just cut and paste all the stuff the anti-gambling / ex-problem gambler bod's organisation bangs on about) and doesn't cost the government anything.
Its busy work for a junior minister. And seems very in keeping with I think what we will see from a Starmer government, lots more quangos, government knows best, more "nanny stating". And a lot of it is free or low cost in the short term e.g. idiotic smoking ban, forcing that fans on football club boards.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Sell everything now and take a 28% hit?
20% hit, but yes, also an option. 28% is the rate for property. Which is why 20% -> 40% is such a bitter pill to swallow. 20 to 25%, maybe, but it's simply not in my economic interest to remain in the UK with CGT taxed under income tax rules.
As Francis says downthread, capital flight will be quick and fast if it happens. I have friends in the same wealth bracket - entrepreneurs looking to sell their first business, crypto bros, people who got lucky and bought NVDA - who have already done, or are looking to do something similar.
Dubai is popular with some of my friends, but I'm not a "Dubai person" tbh.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Sell everything now and take a 28% hit?
20% hit, but yes, also an option. 28% is the rate for property. Which is why 20% -> 40% is such a bitter pill to swallow. 20 to 25%, maybe, but it's simply not in my economic interest to remain in the UK with CGT taxed under income tax rules.
As Francis says downthread, capital flight will be quick and fast if it happens. I have friends in the same wealth bracket - entrepreneurs looking to sell their first business, crypto bros, people who got lucky and bought NVDA - who have already done, or are looking to do something similar.
Dubai is popular with some of my friends, but I'm not a "Dubai person" tbh.
You can be “resident” in Dubai, and live elsewhere a lot of the time, as long as it’s not in the UK if you’re a UK citizen.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
Well, judging by what he himself said, there must be some left in there.
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
I am struggling to think on one that is on the left of the party, staunchly anti-Brexit, etc and isn't standing down. I think its just a get out for Rory, I would vote if unicorns existed.
You may be right. I was toying with the idea of emailing my Tory candidate with a few questions, but probably not worth the effort.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
If your government is all about growth, growth, growth, whacking up CGT will have a negative impact on that.
Is there a better way to achieve massive capital flight, than taxing capital gains as income?
Well, it's one of a number of options that Reeves has, so we'll have to see what she goes for.
At the end of the day, some way has to be found to pay to keep the vast legions of elderly and disabled alive, and we've reached the limits of what's tolerable to rinse from earned incomes: I think they're right to rule out income tax and NI rises. So the money will have to be screwed out of wealth instead. The only question is how?
Well the logical answer is Land, since you can't take that overseas. but when were governments ever logical?
The Conservatives might well be destroyed. But I'm it's place might rise a further right party with all the "bad" bits of the far right and no moderating forces whatsoever.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I'd add if it goes, Norfolk will almost certainly be blueless
Thanks Woolie.
I like Norfolk a lot and holiday there frequently. In fact we did try to move there but couldn't find anything suitable. I think we got our timing wrong and everything we liked was overpriced.
Yes, I'd have guessed it would have been one of the last redoubts of The Blues, even in a bad election, but I did think the danger might come from The Yellows in some places. I appreciate however from what you say that for Truss, it's the Red Army that's the danger.
Yet to see any interesting odds though.
Yellows in North Norfolk certainly, if they are to challenge at all elsewhere then Broadland and Fakenham or South Norfolk, but I think with Labour at high tide and competitive in both they will merely be throwing everything at North Norfolk. In general terms each time, the Norwichs (freak 2010 result aside), NW, SW and Mid Norfolks and Gt Yarmouth are Lab v Con, North Norfolk Ld v Con and Broadland/Fakenham and South Norfolk Con vs one or the other but more usually Lab
Thanks Woolie, that's very helpful.
Btw, I have been told that the Yellows and Greens are strongly supported in the Carrow Rd area. Can you confirm?
I’d tell a pollster I’m a don’t know, but probably vote Conservative through gritted teeth on the day. But, if the game really is up, and the party’s down in the low teens, I’ll vote Reform.
For me, Reform is a clear sell on the markets.
If they ever got close to government they'd make fall apart in months and make the Conservatives look supremely competent.
What I want is the selection of excellent and talented candidates and a future Conservative government that actually delivers on its manifesto.
Reform may win 1 seat (Clacton) and that's a maybe...
I think they have a good chance in Rotherham where the Brexit Party scored 17.2% in 2019, and UKIP 30.2% in 2015, and the Tories contrived to botch their nomination and so don't have a candidate this time.
And Barnsley and Doncaster. That part of South Yorks is fertile for Reform/Farage. If they do win seats other than Clacton and Skegness I expect it to happen there.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
Erhh that's not true. I was a professional gambler for nearly 10 years and didn't pay a penny in tax on my gambling winnings. There was a test case in law which solidified this.
Back in the day there was all that do you want to pay the tax on the bet or the winnings. If I remember correctly Brown abolished that and the tax went on the operator. The operators then all registered in tax havens and Osborne implemented a new law that said they had to pay tax on revenue from UK residents regardless of where the bookie was located.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Lib Dems will be working North Norfolk, or the Cambridgeshire seats.
Traditionally (well, last century) rural Norfolk had a big Labour vote, due to the strength of the Agricultural Workers Union in the County.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
Well, judging by what he himself said, there must be some left in there.
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
I am struggling to think on one that is on the left of the party, staunchly anti-Brexit, etc and isn't standing down. I think its just a get out for Rory, I would vote if unicorns existed.
Is anybody allowed to be anti-Brexit if you're a Tory MP though?
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Zero chancecof LD breakthrough here, at their height in 2010 they got 21%. It's rural, agricultural with three small market towns, two of which are classically Tory and Thetford is where Lab strength is highest. If it drops it will be Tories staying home and the Indy (a former Turnip Taliban) taking a few %. Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I'd add if it goes, Norfolk will almost certainly be blueless
Thanks Woolie.
I like Norfolk a lot and holiday there frequently. In fact we did try to move there but couldn't find anything suitable. I think we got our timing wrong and everything we liked was overpriced.
Yes, I'd have guessed it would have been one of the last redoubts of The Blues, even in a bad election, but I did think the danger might come from The Yellows in some places. I appreciate however from what you say that for Truss, it's the Red Army that's the danger.
Yet to see any interesting odds though.
Yellows in North Norfolk certainly, if they are to challenge at all elsewhere then Broadland and Fakenham or South Norfolk, but I think with Labour at high tide and competitive in both they will merely be throwing everything at North Norfolk. In general terms each time, the Norwichs (freak 2010 result aside), NW, SW and Mid Norfolks and Gt Yarmouth are Lab v Con, North Norfolk Ld v Con and Broadland/Fakenham and South Norfolk Con vs one or the other but more usually Lab
Thanks Woolie, that's very helpful.
Btw, I have been told that the Yellows and Greens are strongly supported around the Carrow Rd areas. Can you confirm?
Lol. Yes prime territory! Actually the Greens took Thorpe Hamlet ward in May where Carrow Road is situated
I actually think this is kind of correct - a consistent approach in that direction, done competently over a number of years, may have worked reasonably.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
All the sort of Tories that are the right sort for Rory either left / got pushed out like him.
Well, judging by what he himself said, there must be some left in there.
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
I am struggling to think on one that is on the left of the party, staunchly anti-Brexit, etc and isn't standing down. I think its just a get out for Rory, I would vote if unicorns existed.
Is anybody allowed to be anti-Brexit if you're a Tory MP though?
Well that was it wasn't it, Boris got them all to sign up to getting Brexit done, which purged more of the anti-Brexit Tory element. Of those that remained, people like May aren't keen on Brexit, but nobody would describe her as socially liberal in the way Cameron was. She is still right of the party on lots of things.
All the Rory the Tory types like Dominic Grieve, Ed Vaizey etc are long gone.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
I thought the Gambling Commission regulated licence holders (i.e. bookies) rather than punters?
They also do the equivalent of monitoring insider trading for betting. Its a grey area, so being part of NU10K or whatever he will face an investigation, some joshing from his colleagues and nothing else.
Would he not have to be in a position to actually affect the outcome to be in real trouble, rather than simply aware of something that may or may not be announced in the future?
This situation sounds like a groom in a stable knowing who’s the lame horse and who’s the strong horse before a race.
(1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)cheats at gambling
Examples are given but they are not defined as comprehensive, so it comes down to an interpretation of cheating.
Phil Iveys edge sorting is the biggest test case so far where he was found to be a cheat in civil court and it did create a lower bar for what is considered cheating:
"This could be one of the most significant judgments in criminal law for many years, if as the Supreme Court suggest, a new test for dishonesty is applied. Since Ghosh juries have been told that defendants are only guilty if the dishonest conduct involved in the offence was dishonest by the standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people and also that they must have realised that ordinary honest people would regard their behaviour as dishonest. If this second limb of the test is to disappear, it might make convictions for dishonesty related offences easier to obtain, particularly in the more complex cases, such as those involving financial fraud.”
Fascinating case and well worth a read if your are interested in betting (or cheating!)
I think the crucial point was that the gambler and his assistant contrived the situation so that they had an edge, rather than the house, in what was otherwise a game of chance. They were not merely passively observing the cards (which would be the case with card-counting, another technique which casinos have to watch out for but which, I believe, is lawful.)
Reluctantly, I have to come to the conclusions their Lordships were right.
Contrived vs requested. Caveat emptor imo, Ivey shouldn't have a duty of care to protect a casino from bad decisions.
Interesting, None, but not sure I agree. He got the Casino to handle the cards by subterfuge.
"The far right has struggled to make an electoral impact in the UK, over many elections and many incarnations: Reform UK, the Brexit Party, UKIP, and earlier iterations."
None of those are or were far right, with the possible exception of the post-Farage UKIP. Thatcherite liberalism with vague 'populist' rhetoric is not far right anymore than the Green Party is far left.
Tbh honest, I always struggle with the separation of far right (or left) and hard right (or left). Some people use far where others use hard, and I can never remember which is actually the most accepted way around.
A sentence on where the actual views and policies, and where relevant the actual actions (eg Meloni) of far right X differ from extreme right Y and centre right Z, to say nothing of centre left W etc sheds more light than any number of labels.
I agree that the distinction between hard right and far right (or vv for left) over political violence is a useful one. Or in other terms between lawful evil and unlawful evil.
I don't think Farage is a fascist, nor for that matter Corbyn is an anti-semite, but each of them at the very least fails to condemn it, and at worst tacitly endorses it. Farage being a fan of Putin and Trump for example, and unwilling to criticise the links of many of his candidates to the fascist right.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Lib Dems will be working North Norfolk, or the Cambridgeshire seats.
Traditionally (well, last century) rural Norfolk had a big Labour vote, due to the strength of the Agricultural Workers Union in the County.
Yes. I remember watching one of those elections on BBC Parliament. Must have been 1964. A major theme was that they'd be needing to wait to know whether there was a Labour majority or not, until the rural East Anglian marginals were declared. Which struck me as how things change.
I’d tell a pollster I’m a don’t know, but probably vote Conservative through gritted teeth on the day. But, if the game really is up, and the party’s down in the low teens, I’ll vote Reform.
For me, Reform is a clear sell on the markets.
If they ever got close to government they'd make fall apart in months and make the Conservatives look supremely competent.
What I want is the selection of excellent and talented candidates and a future Conservative government that actually delivers on its manifesto.
Reform may win 1 seat (Clacton) and that's a maybe...
I think they have a good chance in Rotherham where the Brexit Party scored 17.2% in 2019, and UKIP 30.2% in 2015, and the Tories contrived to botch their nomination and so don't have a candidate this time.
And Barnsley and Doncaster. That part of South Yorks is fertile for Reform/Farage. If they do win seats other than Clacton and Skegness I expect it to happen there.
Ed rather glad Reform aren't standing in Donny North, a complete collapse of the blues might make Yvettes seat interesting though
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
Erhh that's not true. I was a professional gambler for nearly 10 years and didn't pay a penny in tax on my gambling winnings. There was a test case in law which solidified this.
Back in the day there was all that do you want to pay the tax on the bet or the winnings. If I remember correctly Brown abolished that and the tax went on the operator. The operators then all registered in tax havens and Osborne implemented a new law that said they had to pay tax on revenue from UK residents regardless of where the bookie was located.
Why don't we implement this for all companies selling into the UK?
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Lib Dems will be working North Norfolk, or the Cambridgeshire seats.
Traditionally (well, last century) rural Norfolk had a big Labour vote, due to the strength of the Agricultural Workers Union in the County.
Yes. I remember watching one of those elections on BBC Parliament. Must have been 1964. A major theme was that they'd be needing to wait to know whether there was a Labour majority or not, until the rural East Anglian marginals were declared. Which struck me as how things change.
Yeah I'd say up until around the 1974 elections the agricultural labourer vote and its legacy was a critical factor in the greatest county on Earth
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
Erhh that's not true. I was a professional gambler for nearly 10 years and didn't pay a penny in tax on my gambling winnings. There was a test case in law which solidified this.
Both the above are broadly correct. Key to eek's statement is "as a trade". HMRC consider most "advantage betting" as not constituting a trade, however expert, systematic or habitual. So the vast majority of UK punters are not liable to income or capital taxes through betting regardless of win/loss/turnover.
But it is certainly possible through either choice or circumstance to be betting as a trade
Choice - set up a ltd co that bets and it will pay the usual taxes. Also can impacts bookies who also bet personally.
Circumstance - Make most of your money in the related betting sector, providing a service:
"Some ‘professional gamblers’ do carry on a trade, for example, where they receive appearance money for appearing on television programmes. They are providing a service to a customer (the television production company) for reward. Whether their gambling winnings are proceeds of that trade would depend upon the facts."
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
Erhh that's not true. I was a professional gambler for nearly 10 years and didn't pay a penny in tax on my gambling winnings. There was a test case in law which solidified this.
Back in the day there was all that do you want to pay the tax on the bet or the winnings. If I remember correctly Brown abolished that and the tax went on the operator. The operators then all registered in tax havens and Osborne implemented a new law that said they had to pay tax on revenue from UK residents regardless of where the bookie was located.
Why don't we implement this for all companies selling into the UK?
I imagine it is impossible to do so. You can do this with gambling companies because they need a dedicated licence to operate in the UK market. It is also worth nothing that even with this law there are still plenty of offshore gambling providers who will take you money and aren't paying the tax, it is just the big companies like Bet365, Entain, Flutter, can't get away with it as they have physical presence, well known brands etc.
5 solid pages of stiff, centrist, earnest PB dad-waffle, entirely devoid of wit, insight, or notable intelligence. Not a single decent joke or sparkling observation, and introduced by one of the dullest headers in recent PB history
*returns to Isaac Babel’s Odessan stories*
Serious question, assuming Labour decide to wallop capital gains tax up to 40% or more, where best to spend the next 5 years?
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
In property it will reinforce the move to small property companies rather than personal ownership.
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
The fact I need to move if CGT rises to income tax bands (40%+) might be indicative of a bigger problem for me personally. We're talking seven figures - a bit too big to comfortably fit in an ISA.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
Sell everything now and take a 28% hit?
20% hit, but yes, also an option. 28% is the rate for property. Which is why 20% -> 40% is such a bitter pill to swallow. 20 to 25%, maybe, but it's simply not in my economic interest to remain in the UK with CGT taxed under income tax rules.
As Francis says downthread, capital flight will be quick and fast if it happens. I have friends in the same wealth bracket - entrepreneurs looking to sell their first business, crypto bros, people who got lucky and bought NVDA - who have already done, or are looking to do something similar.
Dubai is popular with some of my friends, but I'm not a "Dubai person" tbh.
You can be “resident” in Dubai, and live elsewhere a lot of the time, as long as it’s not in the UK if you’re a UK citizen.
Interesting, I will have to look into that.
My current thoughts are I have the choice between handing over 600k to the exchequer next year or going on a 5 year middle aged gap year. Selfish, I know, but I think most people would do the same when faced with a similar question.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
I feel similar. I also have a realistic Tory/LD choice and it is actually pretty easy for me. Made more simple by the failure of the current Tory MP to deliver over the last few years.
But personally if the election destroys the Tory party and the right splinters off and joins Farage and the one nation Tories leave and join with the Lib Dem’s I will be fine with that outcome. The ‘broad church’ approach to political parties has proved to be pretty divisive. The extremes lie in wait for their host party to get into power and then cause disruption from the sides. Personally I think this is a moment where we could get real change, through a fundamental adjustment in British politics. If that results in more smaller parties and a more representative way of electing MPs I think that would build a better U.K. The current system has failed.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
I thought the Gambling Commission regulated licence holders (i.e. bookies) rather than punters?
They also do the equivalent of monitoring insider trading for betting. Its a grey area, so being part of NU10K or whatever he will face an investigation, some joshing from his colleagues and nothing else.
Would he not have to be in a position to actually affect the outcome to be in real trouble, rather than simply aware of something that may or may not be announced in the future?
This situation sounds like a groom in a stable knowing who’s the lame horse and who’s the strong horse before a race.
(1)A person commits an offence if he— (a)cheats at gambling
Examples are given but they are not defined as comprehensive, so it comes down to an interpretation of cheating.
Phil Iveys edge sorting is the biggest test case so far where he was found to be a cheat in civil court and it did create a lower bar for what is considered cheating:
"This could be one of the most significant judgments in criminal law for many years, if as the Supreme Court suggest, a new test for dishonesty is applied. Since Ghosh juries have been told that defendants are only guilty if the dishonest conduct involved in the offence was dishonest by the standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people and also that they must have realised that ordinary honest people would regard their behaviour as dishonest. If this second limb of the test is to disappear, it might make convictions for dishonesty related offences easier to obtain, particularly in the more complex cases, such as those involving financial fraud.”
Fascinating case and well worth a read if your are interested in betting (or cheating!)
I think the crucial point was that the gambler and his assistant contrived the situation so that they had an edge, rather than the house, in what was otherwise a game of chance. They were not merely passively observing the cards (which would be the case with card-counting, another technique which casinos have to watch out for but which, I believe, is lawful.)
Reluctantly, I have to come to the conclusions their Lordships were right.
Contrived vs requested. Caveat emptor imo, Ivey shouldn't have a duty of care to protect a casino from bad decisions.
Interesting, None, but not sure I agree. He got the Casino to handle the cards by subterfuge.
Smart, but cheating, I think.
I would be happy to accept that on the condition that casinos are equally guilty of cheating if they don't explain each advantage they have over the clients to such potential clients and ask them are you really sure you want to carry on knowing this at each stage.
Electoral Calculus has got the seat down as a Labour gain, but not by much. Isn't an LD gain more likely in that neck of the woods? Anyone know which is likely to present the greater challenge?
I'd have thought her personal reputation was such that she would lose against the office cat if it stood but if neither Labour nor the LDs step strategically aside her chances of returning to the House to reinvigorate the Conservative Party must be quite good.
Lib Dems will be working North Norfolk, or the Cambridgeshire seats.
The realistic LD gains in eastern England are South Cambs, St Neots, Ely, North Norfolk, Harpenden and Chelmsford. They were a clear second in the abolished Hitchin and Harpenden seat last time, but Hitchin ought to flip to Labour. Assuming no significant recovery in the Tory position and at least some tactical voting from Labour supporters, they should bag all of those.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
So because there is so little to attack that is actually in the Labour manifesto, you make up things to attack which are not. Understood.
That’s already the case if you bet as your trade - but the consequence of that is that loses are also allowed to be deducted as an allowed expense
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
Erhh that's not true. I was a professional gambler for nearly 10 years and didn't pay a penny in tax on my gambling winnings. There was a test case in law which solidified this.
Both the above are broadly correct. Key to eek's statement is "as a trade". HMRC consider most "advantage betting" as not constituting a trade, however expert, systematic or habitual. So the vast majority of UK punters are not liable to income or capital taxes through betting regardless of win/loss/turnover.
But it is certainly possible through either choice or circumstance to be betting as a trade
Choice - set up a ltd co that bets and it will pay the usual taxes. Also can impacts bookies who also bet personally.
Circumstance - Make most of your money in the related betting sector, providing a service:
"Some ‘professional gamblers’ do carry on a trade, for example, where they receive appearance money for appearing on television programmes. They are providing a service to a customer (the television production company) for reward. Whether their gambling winnings are proceeds of that trade would depend upon the facts."
Sure, I bet Star Lizard will be liable for tax. I know people plenty who got endorsements etc, yes they set up a limited company for that, but not the actual gambling, that was all still tax free. At one point I also had a business that was gambling related, and paid my taxes on that / HMRC have looked at my situation. Never have they asked for any tax on my actual gambling winnings.
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
After 14 years out of power they will have 500 other things to do first, even if they would be interested in doing this.
Whacking tax on gambling and making gambling companies do a lot more affordability checks such that you basically can't get any big bets on is easy policy (they can just cut and paste all the stuff the anti-gambling / ex-problem gambler bod's organisation bangs on about) and doesn't cost the government anything.
Its busy work for a junior minister. And seems very in keeping with I think what we will see from a Starmer government, lots more quangos, government knows best, more "nanny stating". And a lot of it is free or low cost in the short term e.g. idiotic smoking ban, forcing that fans on football club boards.
I love the listing of Conservative policies as reasons not to vote Labour.
The Conservatives might well be destroyed. But I'm it's place might rise a further right party with all the "bad" bits of the far right and no moderating forces whatsoever.
But as BigG highlights by his decision to vote Conservative there are a lot of always Tory votes even now. Let the brand shift to the right and far right policies will be attracting votes from people who think the right wing fascist policies are temporary
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
I feel similar. I also have a realistic Tory/LD choice and it is actually pretty easy for me. Made more simple by the failure of the current Tory MP to deliver over the last few years.
But personally if the election destroys the Tory party and the right splinters off and joins Farage and the one nation Tories leave and join with the Lib Dem’s I will be fine with that outcome. The ‘broad church’ approach to political parties has proved to be pretty divisive. The extremes lie in wait for their host party to get into power and then cause disruption from the sides. Personally I think this is a moment where we could get real change, through a fundamental adjustment in British politics. If that results in more smaller parties and a more representative way of electing MPs I think that would build a better U.K. The current system has failed.
There's no point debating with Farage. He is what he is, he'll get the vote he gets. He's a vibe - a brainstem feeling of resentment about smoking in pubs and classic cars and silver service. You might as well debate a Hamlet ad from the 80s."
Because saying “shut up, you racist bore”, rather than challenging what they say, never attracts more people to fringe candidates. Slow hand clap for Mr O’Hara.
No no. That will never work.
You need to shout - “shut up, you fascist gammon. There are no problems and if there were, you must shut up and enjoy the pain.”
Apologies if already posted, but there's an article on the BBC website about political betting where they talk to some guy called "Mike Smithson" who apparently created a website called "politicalbetting.com".
The Gambling Commission is making inquires into Craig Williams, a Conservative Party election candidate and former aide to Rishi Sunak, amid claims he placed a £100 bet on the date of the election days before the PM announced it.
...
It is understood the watchdog wrote to all licensed bookmakers this week requesting information on anyone who stood to gain more than £199 by betting on a July election in the UK.
That's us lot in the database.
This is why one should bet in high-street betting shops. Our authoritarian pensionerism 2020s will do its level best to eliminate gambling and we should bet prolifically in betting shops to send a message to these nanny-state botherers that gambling is great fun and none of their bloody business.
I'm afraid that a Starmer government will try to put income tax on betting winnings. Just the sort of thing they'd do. Would tick a lot of boxes for them at the same time.
After 14 years out of power they will have 500 other things to do first, even if they would be interested in doing this.
Whacking tax on gambling and making gambling companies do a lot more affordability checks such that you basically can't get any big bets on is easy policy (they can just cut and paste all the stuff the anti-gambling / ex-problem gambler bod's organisation bangs on about) and doesn't cost the government anything.
Its busy work for a junior minister. And seems very in keeping with I think what we will see from a Starmer government, lots more quangos, government knows best, more "nanny stating". And a lot of it is free or low cost in the short term e.g. idiotic smoking ban, forcing that fans on football club boards.
I love the listing of Conservative policies as reasons not to vote Labour.
Its not a reason not to vote Labour, but it is another reason the Tories are going to get blasted. Its big state stuff to end up with a situation where they will be demanding a 50 year old provides ID for buying ciggies. Its the same shit idea from both of them.
Interesting article and broadly speaking I agree. I have been genuinely asking Tory voters what positive reasons there are to vote Tory for the last few weeks. ...
Rory Stewart said he would vote Tory if his Tory candidate was of the right sort.
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
I feel similar. I also have a realistic Tory/LD choice and it is actually pretty easy for me. Made more simple by the failure of the current Tory MP to deliver over the last few years.
But personally if the election destroys the Tory party and the right splinters off and joins Farage and the one nation Tories leave and join with the Lib Dem’s I will be fine with that outcome. The ‘broad church’ approach to political parties has proved to be pretty divisive. The extremes lie in wait for their host party to get into power and then cause disruption from the sides. Personally I think this is a moment where we could get real change, through a fundamental adjustment in British politics. If that results in more smaller parties and a more representative way of electing MPs I think that would build a better U.K. The current system has failed.
If the result is a far-right splinter party and a reasonable centre-right party, that will be OK.
But obviously it won't be good if the Tories maintain their position as the main party of the right, but are taken over (even more) by the loony right. Because in that case they may benefit from the usual swing of the pendulum in the two-party system.
Comments
He'll be sorely missed (not).
Find a beach worth settling into for five years (Mauritius?) or try to do the digital nomad thing and move around every six months?
Try "Person of Interest" on Amazon prime.
10 years old. Prescient.
It's really unbelievable for mid-June, and has been pretty grotty for most of the month.
The Tories really do deserve to be punished.
I know that I will dislike a Labour government intensely, and that if the Conservatives come back in the future, they will reverse nothing that I disliked about Labour.
For example Suella looks fairly safe, whereas Jeremy Hunt doesn't, so chalk up one for the Faragist wing of the Tory party and lose a centrist potential leader.
It must be possible to run some maths on individual constituency polls with assumptions on Reform percentages. I for one would be fascinated to see those results, but I suspect it's too difficult.
If the price is the end of the dollar as universal international trade currency for the world, as it increasingly seems to be, it is a catastrophe for the US. Doubly so, given its current national debt and budget deficit.
Being world reserve currency brings huge advantages. Principally the ability to run up debt without debauching your currency because other countries need to hold vast dollar reserves in order to buy essentials like oil and conduct industrial trade. End that and the tide goes out in a big way for the US.
Secondly being world reserve currency enables you to tilt the terms of international trade in your favour and ruinously sanction those who wont play ball.
This sums it up.
https://x.com/BJalus/status/1564557452733206529?lang=en
Oldies
Northern working class - especially young and male
How much credit the Conservatives should get for that is debateable.
Edit: Actually three - the other is GenXers who got on the housing ladder early enough.
Housing status, as usual, being the big determinant of financial well being.
One of the perks of being in a safe seat, I know my vote won’t make any difference to the result!
Flipping from one to the other is expensive, though there are various allowances which may help.
If they are after more CGT, one option is to reform taxation of corporate property vehicles, and possibly trusts - maybe including historic trusts.
I can also (maybe) see something being done wrt to UK citizens abroad.
When Boris Johnson abandoned his US citizenship, he reportedly received tax bill of £50k - CGT on a main residence.
But it may be the new Govt will need time to work through all the wrinkles.
In the meantime, make sure your investment is in the ISA before the election.
Conversely, there will be seats in Lincolnshire, Essex, Kent, Durham, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, where they'd be hitting the 30-40% mark.
I think the crucial point was that the gambler and his assistant contrived the situation so that they had an edge, rather than the house, in what was otherwise a game of chance. They were not merely passively observing the cards (which would be the case with card-counting, another technique which casinos have to watch out for but which, I believe, is lawful.)
Reluctantly, I have to come to the conclusions their Lordships were right.
More diplomatic pressure on China and India, who are washing the Russian O&G back into the global markets having bought it at a discount, is what’s required.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/punters-barred-from-betting-shops-after-failing-to-meet-affordability-demands-a7QaX2U32oeq/
"Having had his account closed by William Hill, Edwards placed a £52 football accumulator using his debit card in one of the operator’s shops. However, when he went to collect his £74 winnings, he claims he was told he was not allowed to enter the building as he had not provided the information asked of him when affordability checks were imposed online."
Or how asymmetric information is in politics.
Ultimately, I'm a classic example of homo economicus - I make the decisions that maximise my own personal financial gain.
I have friends who have already moved to Dubai in anticipation of it. Dubai isn't my scene, plus the cost of living there quickly eats up a lot of the benefits of being in a lower tax jurisdiction.
China, India etc. are not doing this out of love for Russia, they are doing this because they watched Russias dollar assets being frozen (and now starting to be confiscated) and thought "My God, if we annoy the USA, this will happen to us. We need to do something about this"
Labour ran Gillian Shepherd close here in 97 but its trended ever more Tory since.
I vote in the hope that other people will agree with me, even though I am not naive enough to expect it. If everyone else in your seat agrees with you, then you will return an individual as a Tory MP to Westminster, which is not an outcome you profess to want, and make a Conservative government more likely, which is also an outcome you say that you don't want.
This is not a serious way to approach choosing how to vote.
umichvoter 🏳️🌈
@umichvoter
🚨 Joe Biden has now taken the lead in Michigan
For the first time in nearly 3 months, he leads in one of the
@VoteHubUS swing state averages
Explore more at http://polls.votehub.us
https://x.com/umichvoter/status/1801615008222040219
Given that realistically Labour is going to win a majority, and given the prospect of the loony right taking over the Tory party, I wondered whether that might be the right thing to do.
But more than halfway through the campaign, the "About" section of my Tory candidate's website just says "Biography coming soon..."
I live in a constituency that according to the [polls should be a Tory/Lib Dem marginal, but I have no idea where the Tory candidate places himself.
Perhaps if he came out strongly as a "one nation" Tory it really might be worth supporting him. There has been no Tory literature so far. As it is, I don't know, so I think I had better vote Lib Dem.
I like Norfolk a lot and holiday there frequently. In fact we did try to move there but couldn't find anything suitable. I think we got our timing wrong and everything we liked was overpriced.
Yes, I'd have guessed it would have been one of the last redoubts of The Blues, even in a bad election, but I did think the danger might come from The Yellows in some places. I appreciate however from what you say that for Truss, it's the Red Army that's the danger.
Yet to see any interesting odds though.
Moving from 40% CGT to 0% CGT would save me about 600k, as I say the problem is if you're spending 100k a year and not working, it's sort of revenue neutral in the end. So it's either a) live somewhere cheaper for 5 years or b) move somewhere outside the UK I can still work. Currently considering my options.
I quite like the idea of doing something deadly boring for one year, like the Isle of Man, just for the tax residency, then getting the Elite Thailand visa and living out there on a grand or two a month and using it as a base to travel and go on a middle-aged gap (five) years(s).
My complaint is that my Tory candidate isn't really saying anything to help me know where he stands.
At the end of the day, some way has to be found to pay to keep the vast legions of elderly and disabled alive, and we've reached the limits of what's tolerable to rinse from earned incomes: I think they're right to rule out income tax and NI rises. So the money will have to be screwed out of wealth instead. The only question is how?
54.
RIP SuperKev.
In general terms each time, the Norwichs (freak 2010 result aside), NW, SW and Mid Norfolks and Gt Yarmouth are Lab v Con, North Norfolk Ld v Con and Broadland/Fakenham and South Norfolk Con vs one or the other but more usually Lab
Its busy work for a junior minister. And seems very in keeping with I think what we will see from a Starmer government, lots more quangos, government knows best, more "nanny stating". And a lot of it is free or low cost in the short term e.g. idiotic smoking ban, forcing that fans on football club boards.
As Francis says downthread, capital flight will be quick and fast if it happens. I have friends in the same wealth bracket - entrepreneurs looking to sell their first business, crypto bros, people who got lucky and bought NVDA - who have already done, or are looking to do something similar.
Dubai is popular with some of my friends, but I'm not a "Dubai person" tbh.
Understood.
Hence it’s never going to happen because it’s better to let amateurs keep their winnings rather than allowing all loses to be deducted against tax
The Conservatives might well be destroyed. But I'm it's place might rise a further right party with all the "bad" bits of the far right and no moderating forces whatsoever.
Btw, I have been told that the Yellows and Greens are strongly supported in the Carrow Rd area. Can you confirm?
Back in the day there was all that do you want to pay the tax on the bet or the winnings. If I remember correctly Brown abolished that and the tax went on the operator. The operators then all registered in tax havens and Osborne implemented a new law that said they had to pay tax on revenue from UK residents regardless of where the bookie was located.
All the Rory the Tory types like Dominic Grieve, Ed Vaizey etc are long gone.
Smart, but cheating, I think.
I don't think Farage is a fascist, nor for that matter Corbyn is an anti-semite, but each of them at the very least fails to condemn it, and at worst tacitly endorses it. Farage being a fan of Putin and Trump for example, and unwilling to criticise the links of many of his candidates to the fascist right.
A major theme was that they'd be needing to wait to know whether there was a Labour majority or not, until the rural East Anglian marginals were declared.
Which struck me as how things change.
But it is certainly possible through either choice or circumstance to be betting as a trade
Choice - set up a ltd co that bets and it will pay the usual taxes. Also can impacts bookies who also bet personally.
Circumstance - Make most of your money in the related betting sector, providing a service:
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/business-income-manual/bim22017#:~:text=The fact that a taxpayer,on horses at starting prices.
"Some ‘professional gamblers’ do carry on a trade, for example, where they receive appearance money for appearing on television programmes. They are providing a service to a customer (the television production company) for reward. Whether their gambling winnings are proceeds of that trade would depend upon the facts."
My current thoughts are I have the choice between handing over 600k to the exchequer next year or going on a 5 year middle aged gap year. Selfish, I know, but I think most people would do the same when faced with a similar question.
But personally if the election destroys the Tory party and the right splinters off and joins Farage and the one nation Tories leave and join with the Lib Dem’s I will be fine with that outcome. The ‘broad church’ approach to political parties has proved to be pretty divisive. The extremes lie in wait for their host party to get into power and then cause disruption from the sides.
Personally I think this is a moment where we could get real change, through a fundamental adjustment in British politics. If that results in more smaller parties and a more representative way of electing MPs I think that would build a better U.K. The current system has failed.
You need to shout - “shut up, you fascist gammon. There are no problems and if there were, you must shut up and enjoy the pain.”
But obviously it won't be good if the Tories maintain their position as the main party of the right, but are taken over (even more) by the loony right. Because in that case they may benefit from the usual swing of the pendulum in the two-party system.