I hope you will now think better and apologise for your recent remarks about Nigel Evans being charged.
Not at all , I made no presumptions of guilt re Mr Evans , indeed the opposite . What I have done on this board and elsewhere , has been to point out the inconsistency of those who presume(d) guilt of Lib Dems not charged with any crime whatsoever but ignored and did not discuss a case where someone had been charged .
You are quite right about Lib Dems not being charged. Here is one who was not
That story really is quite chilling, both for the alleged crimes and the cover-ups. I also like the way that the Daily Mail have managed to get PIE into the story...
I do not think so. Many migrants have degrees and good educations, even if starting in modest jobs. I think it more likely that it will be Poles working in the government services and small businesses that will become frustrated by our own lumpenproletariat.
I have employed another couple of Eastern european doctors this week, to work with our Spanish and Portuguese nurses. This is what the future looks like to me.
We are now in a political situation like the 1920s. FPTP is good for two-party systems, much less so for four-party ones - which is what we have now, seeing UKIP as an English party, and with apologies to the Greens (who do, after all, have an MP which UKIP doesn't).
I rarely agree with Sean Fear, so it's pleasant to be able to say that I do this morning: the electorate has moved to the right (as of course has the Labour party) and it has done so because race is now as important as class as a source of political cleavage in England. Globalisation means that non-graduate labour, at least, which has to be performed in this country (e.g. harvesting) will - where it cannot be mechanised - be performed by immigrants and increasingly by young, single immigrants who live in dormitories and intend to return home a.s.a.p.
The "proletariat" in any sense recognisable to Marx has removed out of Europe and the English-speaking world and won't be returning any time soon, if ever.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner.
Eastern Europe has a very sizable "lumpenproletariat", particularly places like Slovakia and Bulgaria.
Then of course there are the immigrants that regularly camp out around Marble Arch...
One of the reasons why the wealthier elite just don't "get" the concerns with immigration, is that they are mainly exposed to the most talented immigrants.
One unexpected feature of this Parliament has been a rightward shift among the electorate. Support for the Conservatives and UKIP has gone from 40% in 2010, to c. 46% now. That's due to the Conservatives gaining from the Lib Dems, and UKIP gaining from everybody.
Cameron said he had to get UKIP down to 5% to win. If he did that, he'd win an overall majority. I don't he think he will, but if he can get the UKIP vote down to c.8%, he's got a fighting chance of the Conservatives being the largest party.
That assumes all current UKIP voters are instinctively right wing. It could equally be the case that frothy UKIPers are actually more leftward-leaning, but are socially conservative and anti-immigration. Many UKIP posters on here believe a lot of the party's current vote is Old Labour, so it's possible that come election time they'll either go home or stay at home. If either happens an actual 8% UKIP vote next year is likely to do significant harm to the Tories.
2 out of 3 is better than 1 out of 3 or 0 out of 3.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner
Or maybe to give tax breaks (maybe even cash payments to the estate) to those who have serious illness and agree to terminate their lives early (with appropriate medical/legal safeguards built in.
The bigger challenge will come when the state has to start terminating the lives of those with dementia who will otherwise require 5, 10, 15 years of care provision at huge expense to the state.
Sounds radical, I know. But I strongly suspect that in 50 or 75 years time we will look back on current attitudes to assisted deaths/living on through dementia with astonishment.
Mr. Mark, dementia and increasing life expectancy will mean certain issues will become drastically more important. Sorting out power of attorney so it's simpler for relatives to handle the affairs of those unable to do it for themselves would be a prime example.
Mr. Dickson, sometimes odds are just wrong. Cf Rosberg.
I can see why the blues would be third, but to such an extent is quite contrary to the polling.
Well, somebody is clearly willing to lay CON at very long prices at Betfair. Perhaps they are privy to something we do not know?
The obvious thing to point out is that the sums involved are tiny (only 15 quid at 11.5), so it is hardly going to cripple anyone's personal finances, or make anyone a millionaire.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner
Or maybe to give tax breaks (maybe even cash payments to the estate) to those who have serious illness and agree to terminate their lives early (with appropriate medical/legal safeguards built in.
The bigger challenge will come when the state has to start terminating the lives of those with dementia who will otherwise require 5, 10, 15 years of care provision at huge expense to the state.
Sounds radical, I know. But I strongly suspect that in 50 or 75 years time we will look back on current attitudes to assisted deaths/living on through dementia with astonishment.
Mr. Mark, dementia and increasing life expectancy will mean certain issues will become drastically more important. Sorting out power of attorney so it's simpler for relatives to handle the affairs of those unable to do it for themselves would be a prime example.
But the government keep telling us that we are all going to die young because of obesity.
That's quite a dive. However I'm sure the Yes price will balloon after yesterday's game changing Yougov. Or not.
The guy (if he exists) holding a 100k slip from Hills at 1/6 must be feeling great.
Yes is 3.75 -4 on my betfair. Those prices are wrong @StuartDickson
Nope. They were correct at the time of posting. Since then some tiny amounts have been made available at 3 and 3.75.
Blame low liquidity, not me!
Fair enough... Should really check the book percentage before you post, I'd like to be a layer of no at 1.33 and of yes at 2.84 on Betfair! 110% book, you're effectively backing no at 1.53 and yes at 4
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
True, makes you wonder why the tories oppose fair votes so much
It depends what you consider fair votes. Some people equate it with whatever their favourite system currently is, whereas I consider it to mean a system that treats all parties equally.
My own take on this swingback is that lab-con 2010 switchers have gone to ukip rather than back to labour. Hence the work by Goodwin that shows most kippers are working class old labour, and mike smithsons constant reminders of 2010cons being ukips major source of votes both being correct
But the government keep telling us that we are all going to die young because of obesity.
Governments would ideally like us to combat obesity so that we have healthy, medical-attention free working lives - until we drop down dead about a fortnight before we are due to draw our first pensions....
Mr. Mark, dementia and increasing life expectancy will mean certain issues will become drastically more important. Sorting out power of attorney so it's simpler for relatives to handle the affairs of those unable to do it for themselves would be a prime example.
But the government keep telling us that we are all going to die young because of obesity.
In fiscal terms, obesity, like smoking, is probably no bad thing.
In terms of basic decency, it seems more humane to me to let people smoke, drink, and eat themselves to death, as opposed to culling them in old age.
If UKIP do very well in the EU elections and Farage is given more media coverage during the general election campaign, I think it will be difficult for the Tories to regain people from UKIP.
I seem to recall a 'Conservative election strategy' piece where the Conservatives included minimising UKIP's media coverage during the general election campaign, with no explanation of how they could achieve that!
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner
Or maybe to give tax breaks (maybe even cash payments to the estate) to those who have serious illness and agree to terminate their lives early (with appropriate medical/legal safeguards built in.
The bigger challenge will come when the state has to start terminating the lives of those with dementia who will otherwise require 5, 10, 15 years of care provision at huge expense to the state.
Sounds radical, I know. But I strongly suspect that in 50 or 75 years time we will look back on current attitudes to assisted deaths/living on through dementia with astonishment.
There is some very interesting work going on in the field. It's still early, but indications are that it may be able to push back the onset by up to 20 years. The lady who invented the technology is a f**king genius. If it delivers on what I suspect - and the trials (in another field) are incredible then she deserves any and every prize that is going.
My own take on this swingback is that lab-con 2010 switchers have gone to ukip rather than back to labour. Hence the work by Goodwin that shows most kippers are working class old labour, and mike smithsons constant reminders of 2010cons being ukips major source of votes both being correct
1. Disgruntled ex-Tory 2. Economic swing voters i.e. everyone around the median 3. Bitter ex-Labour.
If Ukip fall for how it's being spun then they won't aim at the right bulls eye which is somewhere around (2) imo.
Mr. Maaarsh, I think, even now Rosberg's odds are a little too long.
Hamilton's victory in Bahrain was great but I think some have overplayed it. For a start, the soft tyres went off, so Rosberg wasn't able to properly compete for the last few laps. Rosberg did have a 0.2-0.3s (perhaps less given the tyres went off at the end) per lap advantage *and* DRS. However, Hamilton had track position.
The DRS was not a magic overtaking wand this time round, and whilst helpful did not provide any straightforward passes to a driver/car that would not have got ahead anyway.
I would not count Rosberg out by any stretch. Monaco will be very interesting, in particular. Last year Rosberg beat Hamilton in both qualifying and the race. It's also probably the most similar track to double points Abu Dhabi, which could end up determining the winner of the title [Rosberg beat Hamilton on both qualifying and the race there last year].
Hamilton *is* the favourite, but I expect it to go down to the final race.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner
Or maybe to give tax breaks (maybe even cash payments to the estate) to those who have serious illness and agree to terminate their lives early (with appropriate medical/legal safeguards built in.
The bigger challenge will come when the state has to start terminating the lives of those with dementia who will otherwise require 5, 10, 15 years of care provision at huge expense to the state.
Sounds radical, I know. But I strongly suspect that in 50 or 75 years time we will look back on current attitudes to assisted deaths/living on through dementia with astonishment.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Mr. Maaarsh, I think, even now Rosberg's odds are a little too long.
Hamilton's victory in Bahrain was great but I think some have overplayed it. For a start, the soft tyres went off, so Rosberg wasn't able to properly compete for the last few laps. Rosberg did have a 0.2-0.3s (perhaps less given the tyres went off at the end) per lap advantage *and* DRS. However, Hamilton had track position.
The DRS was not a magic overtaking wand this time round, and whilst helpful did not provide any straightforward passes to a driver/car that would not have got ahead anyway.
I would not count Rosberg out by any stretch. Monaco will be very interesting, in particular. Last year Rosberg beat Hamilton in both qualifying and the race. It's also probably the most similar track to double points Abu Dhabi, which could end up determining the winner of the title [Rosberg beat Hamilton on both qualifying and the race there last year].
Hamilton *is* the favourite, but I expect it to go down to the final race.
The softs were worth more than 0.2-0.3, and Rosberg should have been 5 seconds clear by the time they went off. No one seriously believes Rosberg would have won with roles reversed. He's a perfectly competent driver, but he is not as good as Hamilton and the only way he will win is if Hamilton has 2 more DNFs than he does over the course of the season.
Mr. Mark, dementia and increasing life expectancy will mean certain issues will become drastically more important. Sorting out power of attorney so it's simpler for relatives to handle the affairs of those unable to do it for themselves would be a prime example.
But the government keep telling us that we are all going to die young because of obesity.
In fiscal terms, obesity, like smoking, is probably no bad thing.
In terms of basic decency, it seems more humane to me to let people smoke, drink, and eat themselves to death, as opposed to culling them in old age.
Or even letting them linger on as drooling vegetables in nursing homes.
Still my Dad taught me to follow the smart money and the smartest money around is in the rich old families. So if Mr. Charles reckons there is cause for hope in pushing back the onset of dementia to beyond the point when our bodies would have conked out from other causes then I am prepared to be optimistic.
I do not think so. Many migrants have degrees and good educations, even if starting in modest jobs. I think it more likely that it will be Poles working in the government services and small businesses that will become frustrated by our own lumpenproletariat.
I have employed another couple of Eastern european doctors this week, to work with our Spanish and Portuguese nurses. This is what the future looks like to me.
We are now in a political situation like the 1920s. FPTP is good for two-party systems, much less so for four-party ones - which is what we have now, seeing UKIP as an English party, and with apologies to the Greens (who do, after all, have an MP which UKIP doesn't).
I rarely agree with Sean Fear, so it's pleasant to be able to say that I do this morning: the electorate has moved to the right (as of course has the Labour party) and it has done so because race is now as important as class as a source of political cleavage in England. Globalisation means that non-graduate labour, at least, which has to be performed in this country (e.g. harvesting) will - where it cannot be mechanised - be performed by immigrants and increasingly by young, single immigrants who live in dormitories and intend to return home a.s.a.p.
The "proletariat" in any sense recognisable to Marx has removed out of Europe and the English-speaking world and won't be returning any time soon, if ever.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner.
Eastern Europe has a very sizable "lumpenproletariat", particularly places like Slovakia and Bulgaria.
Then of course there are the immigrants that regularly camp out around Marble Arch...
One of the reasons why the wealthier elite just don't "get" the concerns with immigration, is that they are mainly exposed to the most talented immigrants.
Worth noting the current domination of the Mercs is a big plus for Rosberg over Hamilton. Lewis will win more races this year either way, but he'd have a much better safety margin for mechanical failures if other cars were taking points off Nico.
The way posters spin these figures to their tribe's advantage makes me chuckle. Roughly, the polls show that a little over a third of the voters are prepared to go for Labour, just under a third of them want Conservative, and the rest either don't know or go for the minor parties. So, pretty much, on any given day, two thirds of people polled don't want Labour involved, and two thirds don't want the Tories involved. Fair play to the two main parties, though, as they will crow, come May 2015, when real votes have been cast, that "The People have Spoken", and they've got the mandate (probably with the Lib Dems as kingmakers) to save the country from the last lot. Truth is none of the parties are very appetising, and with luck, the Press war on MPs Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll lifestyles might take a few of them down.
More hairshirts from you. What is it about some PBers who seek to tell others how to live their lives? We need more MPs who live interesting lives, not fewer.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Never mind campaign, they should just legislate for PR. Beating Lab in the popular vote looks achievable and should be enough to keep them in government, and failing that they could probably hold onto power by bringing UKIP into the tent.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
PR means permenant coalition government, something the kippers and turnip taliban would hate. Personally I would not mind our politics becoming more like continental europe, but would not expect Dave or Ed to think the same.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Never mind campaign, they should just legislate for PR. Beating Lab in the popular vote looks achievable and should be enough to keep them in government, and failing that they could probably hold onto power by bringing UKIP into the tent.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
Mr. Maaarsh, the softs had nowhere near the advantage that was expected, as proven by the middle stint where Hamilton was about 0.3s per lap faster.
Go and read the radio transcripts, or look at any other driver making the switch. Hamilton ws told to make the tyres go very long and minimise the stint on the hards, so he was not showing anywhere near the true pace advantage they had when on 'max attack' which is the advantage Nico had. The fact he failed to make good on that advantage and they went off is neither here nor there when analysing those first 5 laps.
If you think a quarter second advantage was enough to let Nico stay within half a second in the middle sector like he did, then you are grossly underestimating the extent to which this is still an aero formula.
The way posters spin these figures to their tribe's advantage makes me chuckle. Roughly, the polls show that a little over a third of the voters are prepared to go for Labour, just under a third of them want Conservative, and the rest either don't know or go for the minor parties. So, pretty much, on any given day, two thirds of people polled don't want Labour involved, and two thirds don't want the Tories involved. Fair play to the two main parties, though, as they will crow, come May 2015, when real votes have been cast, that "The People have Spoken", and they've got the mandate (probably with the Lib Dems as kingmakers) to save the country from the last lot. Truth is none of the parties are very appetising, and with luck, the Press war on MPs Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll lifestyles might take a few of them down.
More hairshirts from you. What is it about some PBers who seek to tell others how to live their lives? We need more MPs who live interesting lives, not fewer.
Bob, it would help though if they kept their hands out of the till and put in a shift or two at work in among the "sex,drugs & Rock'nRoll"
Nico cooked his tyres after 8 laps precisely because he was driving them in a nearly qualy style, when the advantage was over 2 seconds for many cars. Lewis's softs lasted 20 laps (and would have gone further if not for the safety car) because he was nursing them from lap one.
PR means permenant coalition government, something the kippers and turnip taliban would hate. Personally I would not mind our politics becoming more like continental europe, but would not expect Dave or Ed to think the same.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Never mind campaign, they should just legislate for PR. Beating Lab in the popular vote looks achievable and should be enough to keep them in government, and failing that they could probably hold onto power by bringing UKIP into the tent.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
I'm pretty sure most right wingers would prefer a UKIP-Conservative coalition over Cameroon majority governments.
PR means permenant coalition government, something the kippers and turnip taliban would hate. Personally I would not mind our politics becoming more like continental europe, but would not expect Dave or Ed to think the same.
Permanent coalition government where some of the coalitions are Con-UKIP. I don't see why that would bother the Turnip Taliban, and I definitely don't see why it would bother UKIP. What do you think they'd rather do, spend the next 25 years grinding away three seats at a time with a bunch of dodgy bar-charts, or have a fighting chance of going directly to government?
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
By that definition, I'd venture that almost everyone has been a victim of sexual harassment. If a girl at work strokes your knee and you are married and not interested, that is an unwanted sexual advance. Is she still guilty of harassment if she stops once you make clear it's not going to happen?
We simply do not get British doctors and nurses applying for jobs in the right numbers to appoint.
The answer to shanty towns at Marble Arch is strong policing and strict benefit eligibility.
Oh, because Eastern European nations with incredibly heavy-handed policing of Roma, and virtually no welfare state to speak of, don't have problems with travellers' squatting?
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
By that definition, I'd venture that almost everyone has been a victim of sexual harassment. If a girl at work strokes your knee and you are married and not interested, that is an unwanted sexual advance. Is she still guilty of harassment if she stops once you make clear it's not going to happen?
Unless you have an existing romantic connection with them, stroking the knee of a colleague at the workplace is completely inappropriate behaviour.
Except the Con+UKIP vote is less than 50%; assuming that going into alliance with the kippers does not lose any Cameronites.. More likely a permenant Lab/LD/Green government. Suits me.
PR means permenant coalition government, something the kippers and turnip taliban would hate. Personally I would not mind our politics becoming more like continental europe, but would not expect Dave or Ed to think the same.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Never mind campaign, they should just legislate for PR. Beating Lab in the popular vote looks achievable and should be enough to keep them in government, and failing that they could probably hold onto power by bringing UKIP into the tent.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
I'm pretty sure most right wingers would prefer a UKIP-Conservative coalition over Cameroon majority governments.
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Despite governments all over the world trying this for the best part of a century, no government has yet demonstrated the ability to do "bring in just the people we need" competently.
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
Research from the US suggests sexual abuse of males is far more widespread than people acknowledged:
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Despite governments all over the world trying this for the best part of a century, no government has yet demonstrated the ability to do "bring in just the people we need" competently.
This is a fallacious argument entirely. You may as well say "no government in history has yet demonstrated the ability to spend public money efficiently competently". It's accurate, but ultimately meaningless.
"We simply do not get British doctors and nurses applying for jobs in the right numbers to appoint."
Why is that? I am sure you are correct and I don't think its anything to do with you being in the Midlands as down here in darkest Sussex the hospital doctors I have seen over the past couple of years have been, a Kiwi, an Australian, a Chinese chap, a fellow from India and a young Hispanic Lady. All good people, who seemed to know what they were doing (though I wish the Lady could work out what is going wrong with my eyes and that she would stop wearing such low cut tops). Our medical schools are full, the posts clearly exist, so where are the newly qualified UK doctors going?
Mr. Tokyo, as Trajan found, when you have the backing of tens of thousands of heavily armed men, you do not require the approval of Nick Clegg to become emperor.
Mr. Socrates, cheers for that link. On a related but distinct note I learnt at university, to my amazement, that women spend probably even more time ogling men than the other way around.
I do not think so. Many migrants have degrees and good educations, even if starting in modest jobs. I think it more likely that it will be Poles working in the government services and small businesses that will become frustrated by our own lumpenproletariat.
I have employed another couple of Eastern european doctors this week, to work with our Spanish and Portuguese nurses. This is what the future looks like to me.
We are now in a political situation like the 1920s. FPTP is good for two-party systems, much less so for four-party ones - which is what we have now, seeing UKIP as an English party, and with apologies to the Greens (who do, after all, have an MP which UKIP doesn't).
I rarely agree with Sean Fear, so it's pleasant to be able to say that I do this morning: the electorate has moved to the right (as of course has the Labour party) and it has done so because race is now as important as class as a source of political cleavage in England. Globalisation means that non-graduate labour, at least, which has to be performed in this country (e.g. harvesting) will - where it cannot be mechanised - be performed by immigrants and increasingly by young, single immigrants who live in dormitories and intend to return home a.s.a.p.
The "proletariat" in any sense recognisable to Marx has removed out of Europe and the English-speaking world and won't be returning any time soon, if ever.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner.
Eastern Europe has a very sizable "lumpenproletariat", particularly places like Slovakia and Bulgaria.
Then of course there are the immigrants that regularly camp out around Marble Arch...
One of the reasons why the wealthier elite just don't "get" the concerns with immigration, is that they are mainly exposed to the most talented immigrants.
You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
But we see why with these Sexminster allegations why various gropers were not dealt with in the past. Media and politics are full of these behaviours, and hospitals too...
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
By that definition, I'd venture that almost everyone has been a victim of sexual harassment. If a girl at work strokes your knee and you are married and not interested, that is an unwanted sexual advance. Is she still guilty of harassment if she stops once you make clear it's not going to happen?
Except the Con+UKIP vote is less than 50%; assuming that going into alliance with the kippers does not lose any Cameronites.. More likely a permenant Lab/LD/Green government. Suits me.
Except people's current voting intention is based on FPTP. In a PR system, people would be much more willing to support smaller parties.
Plus, given how wacko the British Greens are, it would be sheer entertainment to see them in government.
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Despite governments all over the world trying this for the best part of a century, no government has yet demonstrated the ability to do "bring in just the people we need" competently.
This is a fallacious argument entirely. You may as well say "no government in history has yet demonstrated the ability to spend public money efficiently competently". It's accurate, but ultimately meaningless.
That's not true. A lot of countries run education systems and healthcare systems reasonably competently and efficiently.
However, there are other things, like agriculture, large-scale retail and labour market micro-management that they always screw up whenever they try it.
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
It all depends what the "one off pass" is. Touching their arm and asking them what they're doing later is perfectly reasonable. Pinching their ass is inappropriate harassment. Putting your hand down their trousers certainly is. I think if a senior colleague did the last one to me I would instinctively punch him.
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
It all depends what the "one off pass" is. Touching their arm and asking them what they're doing later is perfectly reasonable. Pinching their ass is inappropriate harassment. Putting your hand down their trousers certainly is. I think if a senior colleague did the last one to me I would instinctively punch him.
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Despite governments all over the world trying this for the best part of a century, no government has yet demonstrated the ability to do "bring in just the people we need" competently.
This is a fallacious argument entirely. You may as well say "no government in history has yet demonstrated the ability to spend public money efficiently competently". It's accurate, but ultimately meaningless.
That's not true. A lot of countries run education systems and healthcare systems reasonably competently and efficiently.
However, there are other things, like agriculture, large-scale retail and labour market micro-management that they always screw up whenever they try it.
And countries like Canada have brought in the people they need competently and efficiently. Even doing selection somewhat competently would make for a more optimum policy of "getting the people we need", without those we don't, than just having an open door.
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
But we see why with these Sexminster allegations why various gropers were not dealt with in the past. Media and politics are full of these behaviours, and hospitals too...
Interesting and not much referred to little stat: "A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
By that definition, I'd venture that almost everyone has been a victim of sexual harassment. If a girl at work strokes your knee and you are married and not interested, that is an unwanted sexual advance. Is she still guilty of harassment if she stops once you make clear it's not going to happen?
Can I humbly suggest that in the workplace it's probably better to go for a less forward method than putting your hands on someone.
The figures don't surprise me, and in the hierarchical and factional world of politics it's a problem. It's one thing if it's a colleague, quite another when it's a superior.
The basic reason for the lack of British doctors and Nurses is a systematic failure over the decades to train enough domestically.
Around 30% of UK trained doctors are not working in British medicine 2 years post qualification. Some emigrate, some quit medicine for other reasons and 70% of graduates are now female and often wanting part time work.
Eyes attract a greater than average number of UK graduates, go to a less popular speciality such as psychiatry and 95% taking postgraduate posts are taken by overseas doctors.
"We simply do not get British doctors and nurses applying for jobs in the right numbers to appoint."
Why is that? I am sure you are correct and I don't think its anything to do with you being in the Midlands as down here in darkest Sussex the hospital doctors I have seen over the past couple of years have been, a Kiwi, an Australian, a Chinese chap, a fellow from India and a young Hispanic Lady. All good people, who seemed to know what they were doing (though I wish the Lady could work out what is going wrong with my eyes and that she would stop wearing such low cut tops). Our medical schools are full, the posts clearly exist, so where are the newly qualified UK doctors going?
Mr. Maaarsh, I think, even now Rosberg's odds are a little too long.
Hamilton's victory in Bahrain was great but I think some have overplayed it. For a start, the soft tyres went off, so Rosberg wasn't able to properly compete for the last few laps. Rosberg did have a 0.2-0.3s (perhaps less given the tyres went off at the end) per lap advantage *and* DRS. However, Hamilton had track position.
The DRS was not a magic overtaking wand this time round, and whilst helpful did not provide any straightforward passes to a driver/car that would not have got ahead anyway.
I would not count Rosberg out by any stretch. Monaco will be very interesting, in particular. Last year Rosberg beat Hamilton in both qualifying and the race. It's also probably the most similar track to double points Abu Dhabi, which could end up determining the winner of the title [Rosberg beat Hamilton on both qualifying and the race there last year].
Hamilton *is* the favourite, but I expect it to go down to the final race.
I'd suggest that with Hamilton's odds there's a certain amount of him being a public driver being priced into it.
Hamilton DNFing twice more than Rosberg, I could see that tbh. Hamilton's not as reckless as he was in his earlier seasons but is still willing to take a few more risks.
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
It all depends what the "one off pass" is. Touching their arm and asking them what they're doing later is perfectly reasonable. Pinching their ass is inappropriate harassment. Putting your hand down their trousers certainly is. I think if a senior colleague did the last one to me I would instinctively punch him.
What if it was a Her?
That put her hand down my trousers in the office? I'd probably just push her away and then make a complaint to HR.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
It is only harrassment if it is persistent and unwanted. A one off pass at a colleague with no coercion etc is not harrassment.
It all depends what the "one off pass" is. Touching their arm and asking them what they're doing later is perfectly reasonable. Pinching their ass is inappropriate harassment. Putting your hand down their trousers certainly is. I think if a senior colleague did the last one to me I would instinctively punch him.
What if it was a Her?
That put her hand down my trousers in the office? I'd probably just push her away and then make a complaint to HR.
Make sure she takes her hand out of your trousers first!
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
Despite governments all over the world trying this for the best part of a century, no government has yet demonstrated the ability to do "bring in just the people we need" competently.
This is a fallacious argument entirely. You may as well say "no government in history has yet demonstrated the ability to spend public money efficiently competently". It's accurate, but ultimately meaningless.
That's not true. A lot of countries run education systems and healthcare systems reasonably competently and efficiently.
However, there are other things, like agriculture, large-scale retail and labour market micro-management that they always screw up whenever they try it.
And countries like Canada have brought in the people they need competently and efficiently. Even doing selection somewhat competently would make for a more optimum policy of "getting the people we need", without those we don't, than just having an open door.
Googling up the Canadian immigration system it seems like the parties all agree that they should expand immigration, but the visa processing staff keep going on strike, preventing companies from getting people they need to do their jobs, and preventing students from taking the courses that Canadian universities want to sell them.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
Is that right? I was taught that the distances were measured to Hyde Park corner, the other end of Park Lane. Neither of which seem likely, to be honest, because at the time such a tradition was likely to have been established neither place was really in London.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
Is that right? I was taught that the distances were measured to Hyde Park corner, the other end of Park Lane. Neither of which seem likely, to be honest, because at the time such a tradition was likely to have been established neither place was really in London.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
At a glance, 1959 I believe (49.7%)
So next year really could be different.
Possibly, there were a few near or very near misses, so if it comes in at 49% then while symbolic it wouldn't be that different from 51% in analytical terms.
If it came in well below it'd be really different.
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
Is that right? I was taught that the distances were measured to Hyde Park corner, the other end of Park Lane. Neither of which seem likely, to be honest, because at the time such a tradition was likely to have been established neither place was really in London.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
It's about a mile or so from Buckingham Palace, closer to Mayfair and Belgravia. My point, though, was not meant to be taken literally. Those camped there are not hidden from view. In fact, even in many of the wealthiest parts of London you are not very far from poverty, some of it among Britain's worst. Whether the wealthy choose to notice is another issue entirely though.
I also seem to recall Mike Smithson or Shadsy naming a couple of vast NO bets placed at miniscule odds. I can imagine that an awful lot of people who place significant NO bets last year are kicking themselves at their own stupidity.
Me: £1k undated cheque placed with PtP.
turnip: Cover the bet with similar but with value of £1.5k.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
At a glance, 1959 I believe (49.7%)
So next year really could be different.
Possibly, there were a few near or very near misses, so if it comes in at 49% then while symbolic it wouldn't be that different from 51% in analytical terms.
If it came in well below it'd be really different.
Symbolically, not getting at least 50% for the first time in 56 years would be a pretty big thing, wouldn't it? The end of the progressive majority and all that.
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
Is that right? I was taught that the distances were measured to Hyde Park corner, the other end of Park Lane. Neither of which seem likely, to be honest, because at the time such a tradition was likely to have been established neither place was really in London.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
If it came below 50% it would not mean a UKIP/Conservative majority vote. There would be circa 5% for the other nationalist and minor parties.
Pure PR would not deliver what the kippers want.
A conservative majority govrernment under FPTP would have a euro referendum though. That is their best chance to achieve their objective. They seem determined to never leave an opportunity unmissed though.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
At a glance, 1959 I believe (49.7%)
So next year really could be different.
Possibly, there were a few near or very near misses, so if it comes in at 49% then while symbolic it wouldn't be that different from 51% in analytical terms.
If it came in well below it'd be really different.
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
Is that right? I was taught that the distances were measured to Hyde Park corner, the other end of Park Lane. Neither of which seem likely, to be honest, because at the time such a tradition was likely to have been established neither place was really in London.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
The BBC reckons charing cross (the site of one of the crosses where Queen Eleanor's body rested on her way to burial).
Charing Cross it is; Marble Arch is the centre of the Romanian Begging Establishment.
I don't think even that is correct. I thought all distances were measured from Trafalgar Square, not because of Nelson's column, but for Eleanor's Cross which was originally situated there and a Victorian copy now stands outside Charring Cross.
There is a brass plaque directly behind the statue of Charles' I stating this fact - it precedes Marble Arch by 600 years, which I'd imagine was a field in the middle of nowhere at the time.
> You can't get much closer to the heart of the Establishment than Marble Arch.
Trivia for the day - all distances "to London" on signposts around the country are measured to Marble Arch.
I must correct you there MM - distances to and from London are measured from Charing Cross, which admittedly is only around 1.5 miles from Marble Arch as the crow flies, not that we get many crows here in The Smoke.
The basic reason for the lack of British doctors and Nurses is a systematic failure over the decades to train enough domestically.
Around 30% of UK trained doctors are not working in British medicine 2 years post qualification. Some emigrate, some quit medicine for other reasons and 70% of graduates are now female and often wanting part time work.
Eyes attract a greater than average number of UK graduates, go to a less popular speciality such as psychiatry and 95% taking postgraduate posts are taken by overseas doctors.
"We simply do not get British doctors and nurses applying for jobs in the right numbers to appoint."
Why is that? I am sure you are correct and I don't think its anything to do with you being in the Midlands as down here in darkest Sussex the hospital doctors I have seen over the past couple of years have been, a Kiwi, an Australian, a Chinese chap, a fellow from India and a young Hispanic Lady. All good people, who seemed to know what they were doing (though I wish the Lady could work out what is going wrong with my eyes and that she would stop wearing such low cut tops). Our medical schools are full, the posts clearly exist, so where are the newly qualified UK doctors going?
Thanks for that, Doc It would seem that something has gone horribly wrong in the last decade or so. I am sure I remember stories in the press in the early 2000s about the number of people coming out of medical school was increasing but there were not enough advanced training places for them.
The gender split you mention is also interesting. From my sadly depleted memory I think the average of graduation for new doctors is about 24, could it be that the holy grail of equality is actually harmful to society as a whole? As for 30% of newly qualified doctors dropping out of British Medicine inside 2 years, maybe there is an argument for introducing higher student fees (possibly even full cost) which gets written-off pro-rata on the number of years of service and advanced qualifications gained within the NHS.
We have a ComRes opinion poll in The Independent on Sunday tomorrow, shared with the Sunday Mirror. I don’t want to give anything away, but a record has been broken.
Several European countries do just that. In Greece for example it is compulsory for males to do military service and for all newly qualified doctors to do 18 months rural service (this being the shortage area in Greece).
Bursaries that are written off after 5 years work in the NHS would possibly work. One problem is that it is increasingly difficult to train doctors particularly in technical specialities such as surgery and intrrventional medical specialities like Cardiology. The reduced doctors hours and fragmentation of provision are real challenges to training. Surgical trainees qualifying as Consultants have now typically done a third of the number of cases that their peers would have done twenty years ago.
The fiasco of MTAS/MMC devised under Patricia Hewitt not only failed to address the issue but made things worse.
On the positive side, my EU colleagues have a professionalism and work ethic that shames most locals, so a positive influence on British medicine.
The basic reason for the lack of British doctors and Nurses is a systematic failure over the decades to train enough domestically.
Around 30% of UK trained doctors are not working in British medicine 2 years post qualification. Some emigrate, some quit medicine for other reasons and 70% of graduates are now female and often wanting part time work.
Eyes attract a greater than average number of UK graduates, go to a less popular speciality such as psychiatry and 95% taking postgraduate posts are taken by overseas doctors.
"We simply do not get British doctors and nurses applying for jobs in the right numbers to appoint."
Why is that? I am
Thanks for that, Doc It would seem that something has gone horribly wrong in the last decade or so. I am sure I remember stories in the press in the early 2000s about the number of people coming out of medical school was increasing but there were not enough advanced training places for them.
The gender split you mention is also interesting. From my sadly depleted memory I think the average of graduation for new doctors is about 24, could it be that the holy grail of equality is actually harmful to society as a whole? As for 30% of newly qualified doctors dropping out of British Medicine inside 2 years, maybe there is an argument for introducing higher student fees (possibly even full cost) which gets written-off pro-rata on the number of years of service and advanced qualifications gained within the NHS.
Was Charring Cross the place from which all journey's were measured? Well, it certainly existed long before Marble Arch and Hyde Park Corner (there was a village of Charring in 1290, when Eleanor's body was supposed to have rested there). Furthermore, the Metropolitan Police, founded in 1829, measured distances from there, which speaks of an earlier tradition.
However, until the coming of the railways London was still centred on The City and it would seem to make little sense to choose a spot a mile or so to its west as the measuring point.
Observations from the front line of the independence debate.
If the only area in Scotland voting was Bridge of Don this would be a massacre. I reckon we were averaging 80% no this morning even assuming those who did not or would not say were yes.
Quite a number who had voted SNP in local elections or the last Scottish election are voting no.
Salmond is personally unpopular, sturgeon less so.
Most of those in my group were Labour Party members including a local councillor.
The area we were canvassing was very mixed with Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Tory in roughly that order There were very few undecideds and even less when you took out those probably voting yes.
PR means permenant coalition government, something the kippers and turnip taliban would hate. Personally I would not mind our politics becoming more like continental europe, but would not expect Dave or Ed to think the same.
It's going to be a strange election, since Labour don't actually need to 'win' in terms of vote share or anywhere near it. They were only a couple of seats short of attempting a rainbow coalition last time even though the Tories got 7% more than them.
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
That's FPP for you. It's not as unfair as Ukip possibly polling 13% and winning not even a single seat. If the Tories don't like it, they should campaign for PR.
Never mind campaign, they should just legislate for PR. Beating Lab in the popular vote looks achievable and should be enough to keep them in government, and failing that they could probably hold onto power by bringing UKIP into the tent.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
I don't think UKIP would complain about having 90 seats, and the ability to influence government.
On current polling, a Con/UKIP government would be as achievable as a Lab/Lib Dem one, under PR.
We have a ComRes opinion poll in The Independent on Sunday tomorrow, shared with the Sunday Mirror. I don’t want to give anything away, but a record has been broken.
blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/04/12/poll-alert-42
Download the official Twitter app here
Sent from my iPhone
Ooh. Cleverly tantalising. UKIP in 2nd? Nah.
LDs at a new record low? Quite possible.
Lowest ever combined score for the two big parties? Very possible but boring.
Biggest favourability gain for a Party/Party leader (UKIP)?
We have a ComRes opinion poll in The Independent on Sunday tomorrow, shared with the Sunday Mirror. I don’t want to give anything away, but a record has been broken.
blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/04/12/poll-alert-42
Download the official Twitter app here
Sent from my iPhone
You're a tease TSE. Let me guess .... swingback has arrived big time and the Tories have >50% of the vote.
Couple of thoughts from a scan of recents pots. In my youth, in the mid 50's, science graduates could avoid National Service by becoming teachers. We had one teaching us physics and he was by no means our best teacher! In later life if come across someone else who did it, too.
In the small town where I live the two-partner practice has recently advertised for a GP, one of the partners having decided he was going to do locums and any opther bits which didn't require him to relate to a CCG. It's been very difficult to recruit a replacement who wanted to stay …. gather they could have taken on one or two who woho effectively do a long-term locum ……. but now we have. On, I gather, a six month trial, but I don't think that's unreasonable.
And I thought Charing Cross was the source of road numbering, not distance.
Mr. Mark, dementia and increasing life expectancy will mean certain issues will become drastically more important. Sorting out power of attorney so it's simpler for relatives to handle the affairs of those unable to do it for themselves would be a prime example.
But the government keep telling us that we are all going to die young because of obesity.
In fiscal terms, obesity, like smoking, is probably no bad thing.
In terms of basic decency, it seems more humane to me to let people smoke, drink, and eat themselves to death, as opposed to culling them in old age.
Or even letting them linger on as drooling vegetables in nursing homes.
Still my Dad taught me to follow the smart money and the smartest money around is in the rich old families. So if Mr. Charles reckons there is cause for hope in pushing back the onset of dementia to beyond the point when our bodies would have conked out from other causes then I am prepared to be optimistic.
Google solaneuzumab, look at the issues with it, think how great it would be is someone had solved those problems and how much a stake in the company that achieved that might be worth
The way posters spin these figures to their tribe's advantage makes me chuckle. Roughly, the polls show that a little over a third of the voters are prepared to go for Labour, just under a third of them want Conservative, and the rest either don't know or go for the minor parties. So, pretty much, on any given day, two thirds of people polled don't want Labour involved, and two thirds don't want the Tories involved. Fair play to the two main parties, though, as they will crow, come May 2015, when real votes have been cast, that "The People have Spoken", and they've got the mandate (probably with the Lib Dems as kingmakers) to save the country from the last lot. Truth is none of the parties are very appetising, and with luck, the Press war on MPs Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll lifestyles might take a few of them down.
More hairshirts from you. What is it about some PBers who seek to tell others how to live their lives? We need more MPs who live interesting lives, not fewer.
The way posters spin these figures to their tribe's advantage makes me chuckle. Roughly, the polls show that a little over a third of the voters are prepared to go for Labour, just under a third of them want Conservative, and the rest either don't know or go for the minor parties. So, pretty much, on any given day, two thirds of people polled don't want Labour involved, and two thirds don't want the Tories involved. Fair play to the two main parties, though, as they will crow, come May 2015, when real votes have been cast, that "The People have Spoken", and they've got the mandate (probably with the Lib Dems as kingmakers) to save the country from the last lot. Truth is none of the parties are very appetising, and with luck, the Press war on MPs Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll lifestyles might take a few of them down.
More hairshirts from you. What is it about some PBers who seek to tell others how to live their lives? We need more MPs who live interesting lives, not fewer.
I suspect TFS doesn't care how they live.
He just doesn't want to pay for their lifestyle
Isn't BobaFett a Labour supporter?
Oh, the irony, whining about those who wish tell us what to do.
When was the last time that the Labour and LD vote combined dipped below 50%? Was it 1992? It could well happen in 2015, but that would mean a very big UKIP vote in all likelihood, which would then probably mean a Labour government. Thus, a big swing to the right could put EdM in Downing Street. And the Tories support FPTP!!!???
At a glance, 1959 I believe (49.7%)
So next year really could be different.
Possibly, there were a few near or very near misses, so if it comes in at 49% then while symbolic it wouldn't be that different from 51% in analytical terms.
If it came in well below it'd be really different.
Symbolically, not getting at least 50% for the first time in 56 years would be a pretty big thing, wouldn't it? The end of the progressive majority and all that.
I'd say it's probable that the combined Labour/Lib Dem vote share will be under 50% in 2015. Currently, it's about 47%.
Reason for OGH to be cheerful ...... Burnley are assured of promotion to the Promised Land today if they defeat Middlesbrough at home and Derby draw or lose against Huddersfield.
Comments
Then of course there are the immigrants that regularly camp out around Marble Arch...
One of the reasons why the wealthier elite just don't "get" the concerns with immigration, is that they are mainly exposed to the most talented immigrants.
Blame low liquidity, not me!
Come on the high rollers!
The bigger challenge will come when the state has to start terminating the lives of those with dementia who will otherwise require 5, 10, 15 years of care provision at huge expense to the state.
Sounds radical, I know. But I strongly suspect that in 50 or 75 years time we will look back on current attitudes to assisted deaths/living on through dementia with astonishment.
The obvious thing to point out is that the sums involved are tiny (only 15 quid at 11.5), so it is hardly going to cripple anyone's personal finances, or make anyone a millionaire.
It'll probably be like Logan's Run.
In terms of basic decency, it seems more humane to me to let people smoke, drink, and eat themselves to death, as opposed to culling them in old age.
2. Economic swing voters i.e. everyone around the median
3. Bitter ex-Labour.
If Ukip fall for how it's being spun then they won't aim at the right bulls eye which is somewhere around (2) imo.
Hamilton's victory in Bahrain was great but I think some have overplayed it. For a start, the soft tyres went off, so Rosberg wasn't able to properly compete for the last few laps. Rosberg did have a 0.2-0.3s (perhaps less given the tyres went off at the end) per lap advantage *and* DRS. However, Hamilton had track position.
The DRS was not a magic overtaking wand this time round, and whilst helpful did not provide any straightforward passes to a driver/car that would not have got ahead anyway.
I would not count Rosberg out by any stretch. Monaco will be very interesting, in particular. Last year Rosberg beat Hamilton in both qualifying and the race. It's also probably the most similar track to double points Abu Dhabi, which could end up determining the winner of the title [Rosberg beat Hamilton on both qualifying and the race there last year].
Hamilton *is* the favourite, but I expect it to go down to the final race.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-4_Euthanasia_Program
Still my Dad taught me to follow the smart money and the smartest money around is in the rich old families. So if Mr. Charles reckons there is cause for hope in pushing back the onset of dementia to beyond the point when our bodies would have conked out from other causes then I am prepared to be optimistic.
The answer to shanty towns at Marble Arch is strong policing and strict benefit eligibility.
Come on Dave, do you want to be PM 14 months from now or not?
"A Channel 4 News investigation this week reported that a third of the young men and women working in Parliament said they had suffered sexual harassment.
It said young men were more likely to be sexually harassed than women, with 40% of the men interviewed saying they had received unwanted sexual advances."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27000537
Harman, of course, takes the opportunity to bash the 'male hierarchy'.
"She added: "I think the truth is that an awareness of how a male hierarchy can deal with often young women in a junior position is not a unique problem for Westminster."
If she weren't such a sisterhood zealot she might consider that both men and women are being harassed...
I had a piece for next Tues/Wed along the same lines.
It generally showed what you found.
My overall conclusion is that in 2015, the winning party for the third general election in a row, poll around 35/36 per cent.
And long term, I don't think is going to be a sustainable form of government/voting system.
PR by 2025
If you think a quarter second advantage was enough to let Nico stay within half a second in the middle sector like he did, then you are grossly underestimating the extent to which this is still an aero formula.
If we're going to abandon FPTP we might as well go for a system of proven excellence: the adoptive imperial system of Rome during the 2nd century AD.
Mr. Maaarsh, a fair point, but we'll see over the season who is right.
Wigan to beat Arsenal tonight, around 6/1
Sheffield United to beat Hull around 4/1
Steven Gerrard to score first tomorrow at 8/1
I've also had 10 quid on an accumulator, Palace, Fulham, Southampton, Stoke, Everton and Spurs to all win, returns £611 with Bet365
I'd love to spend time chatting about electoral reform and voting systems, but I have to go outfit shopping with some females.
Wish me luck, as Captain Oates said, I maybe some time.
at work strokes your knee and you are married and not interested, that is an unwanted sexual advance. Is she still guilty of harassment if she stops once you make clear it's not going to happen?
If we have shortages in specific occupations, then we can have a work permit system for bringing in just those we need. That's no reason to allow unlimited migration.
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/coerced-sex.aspx
Why is that? I am sure you are correct and I don't think its anything to do with you being in the Midlands as down here in darkest Sussex the hospital doctors I have seen over the past couple of years have been, a Kiwi, an Australian, a Chinese chap, a fellow from India and a young Hispanic Lady. All good people, who seemed to know what they were doing (though I wish the Lady could work out what is going wrong with my eyes and that she would stop wearing such low cut tops). Our medical schools are full, the posts clearly exist, so where are the newly qualified UK doctors going?
Mr. Socrates, cheers for that link. On a related but distinct note I learnt at university, to my amazement, that women spend probably even more time ogling men than the other way around.
But we see why with these Sexminster allegations why various gropers were not dealt with in the past. Media and politics are full of these behaviours, and hospitals too...
Plus, given how wacko the British Greens are, it would be sheer entertainment to see them in government.
Oman.
However, there are other things, like agriculture, large-scale retail and labour market micro-management that they always screw up whenever they try it.
The figures don't surprise me, and in the hierarchical and factional world of politics it's a problem. It's one thing if it's a colleague, quite another when it's a superior.
Around 30% of UK trained doctors are not working in British medicine 2 years post qualification. Some emigrate, some quit medicine for other reasons and 70% of graduates are now female and often wanting part time work.
Eyes attract a greater than average number of UK graduates, go to a less popular speciality such as psychiatry and 95% taking postgraduate posts are taken by overseas doctors.
Hamilton DNFing twice more than Rosberg, I could see that tbh. Hamilton's not as reckless as he was in his earlier seasons but is still willing to take a few more risks.
Mr. Observer's comment that you can't get much closer to the Heart of the establishment than Marble Arch strikes me as total nonsense. No matter how you define the Establishment the Western End of Oxford Street ain't its heart or even, in London terms, near it.
Knuckle-draggers think that "London" runs Scotland. And as to the weather lets ask tumbleweed....
:info-ops;on-manoeuvres.-caveat:
The BBC reckons charing cross (the site of one of the crosses where Queen Eleanor's body rested on her way to burial).
If it came in well below it'd be really different.
turnip: Cover the bet with similar but with value of £1.5k.
:grow-a-pair-scotland:
2 or more 5/6
1 or fewer 5/6
Pure PR would not deliver what the kippers want.
A conservative majority govrernment under FPTP would have a euro referendum though. That is their best chance to achieve their objective. They seem determined to never leave an opportunity unmissed though.
As a pro EU LD, I can live with that.
There is a brass plaque directly behind the statue of Charles' I stating this fact - it precedes Marble Arch by 600 years, which I'd imagine was a field in the middle of nowhere at the time.
The gender split you mention is also interesting. From my sadly depleted memory I think the average of graduation for new doctors is about 24, could it be that the holy grail of equality is actually harmful to society as a whole? As for 30% of newly qualified doctors dropping out of British Medicine inside 2 years, maybe there is an argument for introducing higher student fees (possibly even full cost) which gets written-off pro-rata on the number of years of service and advanced qualifications gained within the NHS.
http://news.sky.com/story/1241246/most-voters-want-farage-in-leaders-debate
A poll finds more than half of Britons think the PM will look like a coward if he refuses to let the UKIP leader participate
blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/04/12/poll-alert-42
Download the official Twitter app here
Sent from my iPhone
Bursaries that are written off after 5 years work in the NHS would possibly work. One problem is that it is increasingly difficult to train doctors particularly in technical specialities such as surgery and intrrventional medical specialities like Cardiology. The reduced doctors hours and fragmentation of provision are real challenges to training. Surgical trainees qualifying as Consultants have now typically done a third of the number of cases that their peers would have done twenty years ago.
The fiasco of MTAS/MMC devised under Patricia Hewitt not only failed to address the issue but made things worse.
On the positive side, my EU colleagues have a professionalism and work ethic that shames most locals, so a positive influence on British medicine.
However, until the coming of the railways London was still centred on The City and it would seem to make little sense to choose a spot a mile or so to its west as the measuring point.
If the only area in Scotland voting was Bridge of Don this would be a massacre. I reckon we were averaging 80% no this morning even assuming those who did not or would not say were yes.
Quite a number who had voted SNP in local elections or the last Scottish election are voting no.
Salmond is personally unpopular, sturgeon less so.
Most of those in my group were Labour Party members including a local councillor.
The area we were canvassing was very mixed with Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Tory in roughly that order There were very few undecideds and even less when you took out those probably voting yes.
On current polling, a Con/UKIP government would be as achievable as a Lab/Lib Dem one, under PR.
You're a tease TSE.
Let me guess .... swingback has arrived big time and the Tories have >50% of the vote.
In my youth, in the mid 50's, science graduates could avoid National Service by becoming teachers. We had one teaching us physics and he was by no means our best teacher! In later life if come across someone else who did it, too.
In the small town where I live the two-partner practice has recently advertised for a GP, one of the partners having decided he was going to do locums and any opther bits which didn't require him to relate to a CCG. It's been very difficult to recruit a replacement who wanted to stay …. gather they could have taken on one or two who woho effectively do a long-term locum ……. but now we have.
On, I gather, a six month trial, but I don't think that's unreasonable.
And I thought Charing Cross was the source of road numbering, not distance.
He just doesn't want to pay for their lifestyle
Oh, the irony, whining about those who wish tell us what to do.