Last elections held in 2009, when a 99.98% turnout was reported and the Workers' Party won 606 seats.
Kim Fat Wun, the Leader of the WP, is standing for re-election in Constituency 111, his Mount Paektu seat.
The North Korean state-run media have been promoting participation in the election by broadcasting a newly commissioned poem entitled, "We Go to Polling Station".
What do we think, PBers?
Will Kim Fat Wun hold on? Will the Workers' Party get a seats majority or are we expecting a hung parliament?
I will be watching the early results to work out the swings. Then I will project the new seat distribution for PB.
A limiter on the amount we could borrow strikes me as rather a good thing, yes? Especially considering the imminent danger of a Labour govt.
Well...
Goodness, if you want to get me started on one of my 'specialist subjects' I could witter for hours.
Without going into too much detail, there are a number of very interesting commentators, like Jim Grant, who believe the long-term and inevitable consequence of massive amounts of QE (aka 'money printing') will be a return to the gold standard.
Regarding the gold standard, last weekend a friend of mine put forward a interesting conspiracy theory. Apparently there hasn't been an audit of the gold reserves held at Fort Knox for fifteen years - does it really hold as much gold as is claimed?
That's not a new conspiracy theory, and there is certainly circumstantial evidence that at least one person - and quite possibly many people - are lying about their gold reserves.
The evidence is this:
If you look at the amount of gold traded in the world every day, and compare it to the amount available for trading (i.e. not in peoples' jewellry or in central bank deposits) the it would appear that the equivalent of every bar of gold available is traded every 30 days or so. This is an incredibly high volume compared to other commodities.
Therefore - either (a) gold traders speculate an order of magnitude more than other speculators (b) there is more gold in existence than people realise (the Montezuma's Gold hypothesis) or (c) some of the gold that people think is in central banks / Fort Knox is not
Personally, my money is on (a), and I think it is largely the consequence of the existence of gold ETFs.
Interpol "concerned" passengers were allowed to board Malaysian 777 with stolen passports...
If they were to express their burning desire to find the bloke who didn't check the passports correctly and stove the guy's head in with his own severed cock it wouldn't sound very professional.
Put their "concerned" phrase down as a victim of 'marketing speak' and our dull bland world.
YG in case not already mentioned: Con 32%, Lab 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 14%; APP -20
All much as usual. Some eyebrow-raising secondaries - a big leap in approval (-32 to -20) and a big jump for Miliband (-34 to -28) and a giant Labour lead in Scotland (52-23). These tend to vary by sample more than the headline figures and are best taken with caution. Other findings generally pro-Ukraine but not wanting military action.
Hmm, if that Scottish score was borne out in the election (which, obviously, in all likelihood, it wouldn't), that would be the first time EVER that Labour have gone over 50% in Scotland. Previous high is 49.9% in 1966.
Although that's probably out of the question, there is a distinct chance of them getting their best voteshare in Scotland since the 1960s - they scored 45.6% in 1997, so they only need a bump of less than 4% from 2010 to top that. If they manage to split the lost Lib Dem votes equally between themselves and the SNP, they might just manage it. That would be quite the turn-up after all the talk of Scottish Labour being in historic meltdown.
It's a sub-sample, 177 respondents. If you're a betting man I'd be happy frame a bet around Labour's vote share in Scotland in the 2015 GE.
I wasn't basing it on that subsample, in fact I said that I didn't expect the results of that subsample to be borne out :P But I've been thinking Labour might get their best Scottish result since the 60s for a while. If they get an overall majority (as I expect), then they actually will only need a swing to them in Scotland which is LESS than the UK-wide swing, in order to top their 1997 Scotland result.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
Legal tender has a very narrow and technical meaning in the settlement of debts.
( Scottish banknotes are not legal tender in England & Wales and legally can be refused)
I once witnessed someone lose a case of champagne on the Scottish banknotes/legal tender issue.
In practice, they are honoured by the Bank of England as a courtesy, though there's on reason for that to continue after independence.
It's actually a little bit more complex than that: RBS, Lloyds HBoS, and the Clydesdale Bank (owned by National Bank of Australia, IIRC) each issue their own banknotes. However, for each £1 they issue of their own notes, their are requires to deposit £1 with the Bank of England, interest free.
I am not surprised. After all, the notes issued in Scotland is still part of the whole money supply. So, therefore, there has to be some controls.
Effectively, they are swapping one English note for one Scottish.
Then why is it not legal tender here ? I think that is more to do with avoiding "hassle" than any major legal point.
YG in case not already mentioned: Con 32%, Lab 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 14%; APP -20
All much as usual. Some eyebrow-raising secondaries - a big leap in approval (-32 to -20) and a big jump for Miliband (-34 to -28) and a giant Labour lead in Scotland (52-23). These tend to vary by sample more than the headline figures and are best taken with caution. Other findings generally pro-Ukraine but not wanting military action.
Hmm, if that Scottish score was borne out in the election (which, obviously, in all likelihood, it wouldn't), that would be the first time EVER that Labour have gone over 50% in Scotland. Previous high is 49.9% in 1966.
Although that's probably out of the question, there is a distinct chance of them getting their best voteshare in Scotland since the 1960s - they scored 45.6% in 1997, so they only need a bump of less than 4% from 2010 to top that. If they manage to split the lost Lib Dem votes equally between themselves and the SNP, they might just manage it. That would be quite the turn-up after all the talk of Scottish Labour being in historic meltdown.
It's a sub-sample, 177 respondents. If you're a betting man I'd be happy frame a bet around Labour's vote share in Scotland in the 2015 GE.
I wasn't basing it on that subsample, in fact I said that I didn't expect the results of that subsample to be borne out :P But I've been thinking Labour might get their best Scottish result since the 60s for a while. If they get an overall majority (as I expect), then they actually will only need a swing to them in Scotland which is LESS than the UK-wide swing, in order to top their 1997 Scotland result.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
I think it's possible that even if Labour increase their vote UK wide it could still fall in Scotland. Gordon Brown certainly helped them up here in a way that I doubt Ed Milliband does.
YG in case not already mentioned: Con 32%, Lab 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 14%; APP -20
All much as usual. Some eyebrow-raising secondaries - a big leap in approval (-32 to -20) and a big jump for Miliband (-34 to -28) and a giant Labour lead in Scotland (52-23). These tend to vary by sample more than the headline figures and are best taken with caution. Other findings generally pro-Ukraine but not wanting military action.
Hmm, if that Scottish score was borne out in the election (which, obviously, in all likelihood, it wouldn't), that would be the first time EVER that Labour have gone over 50% in Scotland. Previous high is 49.9% in 1966.
Although that's probably out of the question, there is a distinct chance of them getting their best voteshare in Scotland since the 1960s - they scored 45.6% in 1997, so they only need a bump of less than 4% from 2010 to top that. If they manage to split the lost Lib Dem votes equally between themselves and the SNP, they might just manage it. That would be quite the turn-up after all the talk of Scottish Labour being in historic meltdown.
It's a sub-sample, 177 respondents. If you're a betting man I'd be happy frame a bet around Labour's vote share in Scotland in the 2015 GE.
I wasn't basing it on that subsample, in fact I said that I didn't expect the results of that subsample to be borne out :P But I've been thinking Labour might get their best Scottish result since the 60s for a while. If they get an overall majority (as I expect), then they actually will only need a swing to them in Scotland which is LESS than the UK-wide swing, in order to top their 1997 Scotland result.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
The Labour Scottish VI share in all Populus polls in February plus the 2 so far in March sample size over 1,200 is 36% which is down on 2010 GE
YG in case not already mentioned: Con 32%, Lab 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 14%; APP -20
All much as usual. Some eyebrow-raising secondaries - a big leap in approval (-32 to -20) and a big jump for Miliband (-34 to -28) and a giant Labour lead in Scotland (52-23). These tend to vary by sample more than the headline figures and are best taken with caution. Other findings generally pro-Ukraine but not wanting military action.
Hmm, if that Scottish score was borne out in the election (which, obviously, in all likelihood, it wouldn't), that would be the first time EVER that Labour have gone over 50% in Scotland. Previous high is 49.9% in 1966.
Although that's probably out of the question, there is a distinct chance of them getting their best voteshare in Scotland since the 1960s - they scored 45.6% in 1997, so they only need a bump of less than 4% from 2010 to top that. If they manage to split the lost Lib Dem votes equally between themselves and the SNP, they might just manage it. That would be quite the turn-up after all the talk of Scottish Labour being in historic meltdown.
It's a sub-sample, 177 respondents. If you're a betting man I'd be happy frame a bet around Labour's vote share in Scotland in the 2015 GE.
I wasn't basing it on that subsample, in fact I said that I didn't expect the results of that subsample to be borne out :P But I've been thinking Labour might get their best Scottish result since the 60s for a while. If they get an overall majority (as I expect), then they actually will only need a swing to them in Scotland which is LESS than the UK-wide swing, in order to top their 1997 Scotland result.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
I think it's possible that even if Labour increase their vote UK wide it could still fall in Scotland. Gordon Brown certainly helped them up here in a way that I doubt Ed Milliband does.
Exactly why is hard to fathom mind you, other than the idea that they would vote for any donkey wearing a red rosette. There can be little other explanation for it, in the past to avoid Tories maybe but not in the last 6 or 7 years.
it highlighted all the votes that excluded ex pats and includes Holyrood voting
None of those votes involve breaking up the Union, which is the bit that might be ever so slightly illegal.
But Lo, a vision appeared unto the Prophet Eck, of great and terrible legal writings, but they were written such that no other may perceive of their presence, especially not Heretics, Unbelievers, or worse still, Englishmen!!
" ... if you want to get me started on one of my 'specialist subjects' I could witter for hours. "
Go for it, old chap, we would probably all learn something and many of us would find it very interesting. One of the great strengths of PB is that we have in our number so many subject experts (though, perhaps, fewer than formerly). Engineering, science, medicine, finance, some defence areas, history (all periods - though our medievalists are a bit scarce), as well as more esoteric matters such as Formula 1, computer gaming, the cinema, popular(?) music, oh, and shoes. Maybe, as a community we should make more use of such expertise. Perhaps not on the main board but is PB2 still going? If so is that a path would could try to develop.
Anyway, having you give us chapter and verse (as you see it) on a possible return to the Gold standard has to be more interesting than reading for the umpteenth time that anyone with a different view of the future of Scotland is an idiot, liar, Tory, coward or combination of some or all.
" ... if you want to get me started on one of my 'specialist subjects' I could witter for hours. "
Go for it, old chap, we would probably all learn something and many of us would find it very interesting. One of the great strengths of PB is that we have in our number so many subject experts (though, perhaps, fewer than formerly). Engineering, science, medicine, finance, some defence areas, history (all periods - though our medievalists are a bit scarce), as well as more esoteric matters such as Formula 1, computer gaming, the cinema, popular(?) music, oh, and shoes. Maybe, as a community we should make more use of such expertise. Perhaps not on the main board but is PB2 still going? If so is that a path would could try to develop.
Anyway, having you give us chapter and verse (as you see it) on a possible return to the Gold standard has to be more interesting than reading for the umpteenth time that anyone with a different view of the future of Scotland is an idiot, liar, Tory, coward or combination of some or all.
That's exactly what I wanted to ask Robert to do but I didn't want to trouble him and PB as a whole. As I'm no longer in a minority of one (on this at least!) may I second the request?
These are the UKIP "targets" for swings of up to 5% for this year's Euro election. (I'm going to expand it a bit shortly because one of UKIP's most promising areas - Boston - is just outside the range at 5.04%):
I wasn't basing it on that subsample, in fact I said that I didn't expect the results of that subsample to be borne out :P But I've been thinking Labour might get their best Scottish result since the 60s for a while. If they get an overall majority (as I expect), then they actually will only need a swing to them in Scotland which is LESS than the UK-wide swing, in order to top their 1997 Scotland result.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
Well, I said on here more than a year ago that even if the referendum goes No, I'd expect the SNP to increase their share at the next GE. You already have a sizeable tranche of (mainly Labour) other party voters not keen on independence lending them their vote for Holyrood on a perception of comparative competence. With indy off the agenda for an indefinite period I can only see these voters being massively reassured. I also predict any real level of increased devolution will be kicked into the long grass after a No vote. I imagine the voters who strongly prefer Devo Max to any other option will be pretty pissed off with the parties doing the kicking. Whether they go SNP, Green or to a revitalised alternative Left is another question.
I tend to think the Brown factor in Scotland at the 2010 GE can be overstated, but I have to accept that it was there to an extent if only because I've seen numbers of Labour voters say it was a factor for them. Miliband seems to have made no positive impact north of the border.
""Whilst it is too soon to speculate about any connection between these stolen passports and the missing plane, it is clearly of great concern that any passenger was able to board an international flight using a stolen passport listed in Interpol's databases," Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said."
"Interpol says at least two of the passports were registered in its lost or stolen database, but the database was not checked by staff before the flight."
"You already have a sizeable tranche of (mainly Labour) other party voters not keen on independence lending them their vote for Holyrood on a perception of comparative competence. With indy off the agenda for an indefinite period I can only see these voters being massively reassured."
I agree with the analysis, but I think there is a countervailing consideration. Salmond is asking these people to vote against their party. If they don't, they will be voting against him. They'll think twice about the SNP and Holyrood as a result.
I don't know what the overall effect will be, basically. But it certainly has the potential to "mix up" the situation quiet considerably.
A serious disagreement between has emerged, with Malaysia Airline stating:
"Director of commercial operations at Malaysia Airlines, Hugh Dunleavy, said: "As far as we're aware, every one of the people on board that aircraft had a visa to go to China.
"Which means those passports were in the possession of the Chinese embassy before those visas were issued."
But apparently this isn't correct:
"Reports say the two men using stolen passports had purchased tickets together and were flying on to Europe from Beijing, meaning they did not have to apply for a Chinese visa and undergo further checks."
it highlighted all the votes that excluded ex pats and includes Holyrood voting
None of those votes involve breaking up the Union, which is the bit that might be ever so slightly illegal.
But Lo, a vision appeared unto the Prophet Eck, of great and terrible legal writings, but they were written such that no other may perceive of their presence, especially not Heretics, Unbelievers, or worse still, Englishmen!!
Just desperation, would you like to bet on your "illegal" viewpoint. I would not be adverse to making some easy money.
PS I do not expect you to put your money where your mouth is.
it highlighted all the votes that excluded ex pats and includes Holyrood voting
None of those votes involve breaking up the Union, which is the bit that might be ever so slightly illegal.
But Lo, a vision appeared unto the Prophet Eck, of great and terrible legal writings, but they were written such that no other may perceive of their presence, especially not Heretics, Unbelievers, or worse still, Englishmen!!
Just desperation, would you like to bet on your "illegal" viewpoint. I would not be adverse to making some easy money.
PS I do not expect you to put your money where your mouth is.
Scott, Have you got lost again, why are you hiding
Yes. Even if it turns out that these false credentials had nothing to do with the crash, I can see such checks becoming much more rigorous in the near future.
Yesterday I asked how common it was for people to travel under false credentials. According to some at least, it is frighteningly common.
it highlighted all the votes that excluded ex pats and includes Holyrood voting
None of those votes involve breaking up the Union, which is the bit that might be ever so slightly illegal.
But Lo, a vision appeared unto the Prophet Eck, of great and terrible legal writings, but they were written such that no other may perceive of their presence, especially not Heretics, Unbelievers, or worse still, Englishmen!!
So Scott, as we see when you are called out for telling lies, you run and hide, desperate stuff. Some puerile insults against Alex Salmond to try and hide your embarrassment at trying to justify obvious lies, ever the NO Hoper way..
" ... if you want to get me started on one of my 'specialist subjects' I could witter for hours. "
Go for it, old chap, we would probably all learn something and many of us would find it very interesting. One of the great strengths of PB is that we have in our number so many subject experts (though, perhaps, fewer than formerly). Engineering, science, medicine, finance, some defence areas, history (all periods - though our medievalists are a bit scarce), as well as more esoteric matters such as Formula 1, computer gaming, the cinema, popular(?) music, oh, and shoes. Maybe, as a community we should make more use of such expertise. Perhaps not on the main board but is PB2 still going? If so is that a path would could try to develop.
Perhaps start up a business? Say where we offer occasionally informed opinions on anything and everything----call them, say, "opinion-o-grams" (cf kiss-o-grams and strip-o-grams). OGH and Robert could handle the tax questions (for the business that is).
Comments
Never mind, I will do it now. 606 for WP !
The evidence is this:
If you look at the amount of gold traded in the world every day, and compare it to the amount available for trading (i.e. not in peoples' jewellry or in central bank deposits) the it would appear that the equivalent of every bar of gold available is traded every 30 days or so. This is an incredibly high volume compared to other commodities.
Therefore - either
(a) gold traders speculate an order of magnitude more than other speculators
(b) there is more gold in existence than people realise (the Montezuma's Gold hypothesis)
or
(c) some of the gold that people think is in central banks / Fort Knox is not
Personally, my money is on (a), and I think it is largely the consequence of the existence of gold ETFs.
Put their "concerned" phrase down as a victim of 'marketing speak' and our dull bland world.
What do you expect to happen (if Scotland doesn't go independent)? That isn't a sarcastic question, I'm genuinely interested to know Scottish posters' opinions on this because Scottish politics is so extraordinarily volatile and hard to read for anyone who doesn't follow it really closely.
Effectively, they are swapping one English note for one Scottish.
Then why is it not legal tender here ? I think that is more to do with avoiding "hassle" than any major legal point.
But Lo, a vision appeared unto the Prophet Eck, of great and terrible legal writings, but they were written such that no other may perceive of their presence, especially not Heretics, Unbelievers, or worse still, Englishmen!!
Go for it, old chap, we would probably all learn something and many of us would find it very interesting. One of the great strengths of PB is that we have in our number so many subject experts (though, perhaps, fewer than formerly). Engineering, science, medicine, finance, some defence areas, history (all periods - though our medievalists are a bit scarce), as well as more esoteric matters such as Formula 1, computer gaming, the cinema, popular(?) music, oh, and shoes. Maybe, as a community we should make more use of such expertise. Perhaps not on the main board but is PB2 still going? If so is that a path would could try to develop.
Anyway, having you give us chapter and verse (as you see it) on a possible return to the Gold standard has to be more interesting than reading for the umpteenth time that anyone with a different view of the future of Scotland is an idiot, liar, Tory, coward or combination of some or all.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGZycGkwUDI2dG9jdVlaek9nTUpnYnc#gid=0
The party is "defending" 9 council areas where they came first in 2009:
Hartlepool
Hull
Dudley
Newcastle-under-Lyme
Stoke-on-Trent
North Devon
Plymouth
Torbay
Torridge
I tend to think the Brown factor in Scotland at the 2010 GE can be overstated, but I have to accept that it was there to an extent if only because I've seen numbers of Labour voters say it was a factor for them. Miliband seems to have made no positive impact north of the border.
"Interpol says at least two of the passports were registered in its lost or stolen database, but the database was not checked by staff before the flight."
http://news.sky.com/story/1222740/live-updates-search-for-malaysia-airlines-plane
I agree with the analysis, but I think there is a countervailing consideration. Salmond is asking these people to vote against their party. If they don't, they will be voting against him. They'll think twice about the SNP and Holyrood as a result.
I don't know what the overall effect will be, basically. But it certainly has the potential to "mix up" the situation quiet considerably.
"Director of commercial operations at Malaysia Airlines, Hugh Dunleavy, said: "As far as we're aware, every one of the people on board that aircraft had a visa to go to China.
"Which means those passports were in the possession of the Chinese embassy before those visas were issued."
But apparently this isn't correct:
"Reports say the two men using stolen passports had purchased tickets together and were flying on to Europe from Beijing, meaning they did not have to apply for a Chinese visa and undergo further checks."
PS I do not expect you to put your money where your mouth is.
http://www.interpol.int/News-and-media/News/2014/N2014-038
It's a busy area of sea, and there'll be lots of floating debris to confuse searchers.
Yesterday I asked how common it was for people to travel under false credentials. According to some at least, it is frighteningly common.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/6015308#menu77
I usually get my aviation news from pprune.org
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-26504286
Probably wise.....damned if he does, damned if he doesn't....
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/suspected-aircraft-fragments-found-says-vietnam-ministry-website
reports coming in of discovery of 'tail fin'...
What odds and stakes are you offering?