Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE2015 becomes even more like Premiership football where t

245

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    AveryLP said:

    So Fisher "predicts" Con 307 Lab 284 LD 30 - does anyone see such a Parliament lasting five years?

    If the LibDems either rejoin the Tories in coalition or offer support on a policy by policy basis, the Tories will be able to rely on DUP/UUP support as they have no love for Labour. The mood music at PMQs for months from the DUP is that Cameron can rely on their support.
    Post referendum defeat, Salmond will be looking to buy devo-max from anyone who'll offer.

    I see the SNP returning to their roots as tartan tories and signing up to a five year coalition with the Conservatives and Lib Dems.

    The reward for the Lib Dems will be get all the pinkoes offloaded from newly merged SCon and SNP party.

    There. Sorted.

    Even Stuart Dickson and malcolmg would not be minded to object. Pork though may find himself in a dilemma.

    I cannot believe that over 50% of the Scottish population are mentally insane and will vote NO.
    Tell me you are going to canvas for "Yes"!

    Just vote YES
    Pity.....your diplomatic skills will be sadly wasted then.....

    I can be diplomatic when necessary , but it is hard work. I prefer a spade to be called a spade.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    JohnLoony said:

    The Daily Mail says that the Rutland earthquake was "3.2 out of 10" on the Richter scale. What's all this "out of 10" rubbish? Are they really that stupid?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2607005/I-thought-house-falling-Minor-earthquake-hits-Midlands-shaking-homes-knocking-objects-shelves.html

    Yes
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Socrates said:

    RobD said:

    woody662 said:

    Axelrod has previously worked with popular world statesman Barack Obama. Has he any record of applying dusters to excrement though?

    Obama wasn't a world statesman in 2008!
    He didn't win by all that much either, which given the toxicity of the outgoing Bush administration and the indifferent quality of the McCain campaign suggests that Obama's campaign team didn't do a great deal to enhance his chances.

    He did better than any Democrat candidate for nearly 50 years.

    Really? ECVs:

    379 - Clinton (1996)
    370 - Clinton (1992)
    365 - Obama (2008)
    332 - Obama (2012)
    297 - Carter (1976).

    Now do the popular vote numbers.

    8.5% margin - Clinton (1996)
    7.2% margin - Obama (2008)
    5.5% margin - Clinton (1992)
    3.9% margin - Obama (2012)
    2.1% margin - Carter (1976)

    It's not how many votes you receive, it what the difference is between the competing parties, and where they're cast that counts. Obama won lots more votes than Roosevelt in 1936 or Johnson in 1964; so what? He's had more cast against him than any candidate in history too.

    There's a mythology building up about how Obama swept all before him; he didn't. Both wins were just short of the median in post-war elections in ECV terms, which is the only one that matters.
    Sorry David, but this is a very poor reading of American politics. Presidential elections have fundamentally changed since the immediate post-war period. The civil rights movement began a process that transformed the parties from being broad coalitions with huge ideological variety to a right wing party and a left wing party. It actually took thirty years for the process to fully play out, but since 2000 the electoral map has barely changed, and it won't be very different next time either, regardless of the candidates.

    David is also ignoring the percentage of the vote that Obama secured: it was far greater than Clinton got, or Carter, or Kennedy, or Johnson or any other Democrat for decades.

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @AveryLP

    Both the East and the South of Ukraine, despite past voting habits, are united with the West at being appalled at the violation of their sovereignty by Russia:

    http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117357/despite-pro-soviet-protests-majority-ukrainians-lean-toward-europe

    This follows their dislike of the traditional pro-Russian position after Yanukovych started killing unarmed protesters on Kiev's streets, clearly with the clearance of the Kremlin.

    In addition, young people across the entire country are much, much more pro-Western than their elders. There is thus absolutely no reason why we should concede the East to being a Russian fief.

    In addition, Putin's political standing has been hugely enhanced by this whole deal. We should have closed the Bosphorus to Russian ships and enacted tough sanctions on gas exports. It would have hit our wallets in Europe a little, but not too much, while it would have caused a major recession in Russia, and the guy would have backed off after his poll ratings tumble for leading Russia into a mess.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    OK PBers:

    I am going to be replacing Vanilla in about a week, so long as I can find an appropriate replacement (that doesn't require me to devote tens of hours of time to systems maintenance). [Likewise, I'm not going to roll my own, however tempting that might be...]

    Could people post links to sites where they think the comments are done particularly well, so I can take a look.

    Thanks
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    AveryLP said:

    Socrates said:

    Incidentally, the Ukraine deal looks reasonable (and if it holds will be a lot better than the wild sabre-rattling that Socrates was urging on us) - let's hope it works out. The devil will be in the regionalisation detail.

    The "regionalisation" deal, from the limited details that have emerged so far, seems to entail the right of Russia to have powerful puppets as governors of Eastern and Southern Ukraine, so they have a veto over Ukraine's future, and can prevent them from acting as a sovereign nation. It also appears that that the West has conceded that Russia will be allowed to get away with the annexation of foreign territory, in a move that sends a clear message to other major undemocratic powers that we won't stand up for smaller countries. In addition, the militants in Eastern Ukraine are refusing to stand down, even though they are controlled by the Kremlin, suggesting that the end game hasn't even started yet.

    You can use words like "sabre-rattling" to stir up emotion all you want, but all I have ever argued is that we should have a clear penalties for the most basic breach of international law - invading and annexing land from your neighbours. It amazes me how you can think it is reasonable to invade Iraq based on far more ambiguous legal grounds, but think even a tough economic response to a worse breach is something to be sanguine over.
    The only feasible outcome to the current crisis is to split the Ukraine, at least de facto if not de jure, into East and West nations.

    The Russian leaning oblasts (including the South) will trundle on looking East under the patronage of Russia.

    The West will become an EU subsidy junky.

    A race will then ensue, for the benefit of all Ukrainians, as to which side will prevail in an economic war. Russia will make the early running but eventually the free market, rule of law and democratic processes of the West will prevail.

    In twenty years we can look forward to the re-unification of The Ukraine as the walls come tumbling down. But that will only happen when Moscow is converted to the cause not Kiev.

    And in the interim there will be a deal not to advance NATO beyond its current borders. The minimal sanctions imposed on Russia to date will be abandoned in a fanfare of mutual self-congratulation once the deal is struck.
    That is pretty much how I see it. If the standard of living noticeably increases faster in the western half then the eastern part will gradually want to reintegrate and the structure will be in place to allow that to happen.

    The problem will be developing a viable economy. At the moment the Ukraine struggle to pay their gas bill. Their economy has a long way to go.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    @david_herdson - "Yet Obama only did OK"

    That is "OK" as in got more votes than any presidential candidate in history and a higher percentage of the vote than any Democrat since the 1940s.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Cheers, Mr. 1000.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    So Fisher "predicts" Con 307 Lab 284 LD 30 - does anyone see such a Parliament lasting five years?

    More betting opportunities! Yay!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Socrates said:



    Now do the popular vote numbers.

    8.5% margin - Clinton (1996)
    7.2% margin - Obama (2008)
    5.5% margin - Clinton (1992)
    3.9% margin - Obama (2012)
    2.1% margin - Carter (1976)

    It's not how many votes you receive, it what the difference is between the competing parties, and where they're cast that counts. Obama won lots more votes than Roosevelt in 1936 or Johnson in 1964; so what? He's had more cast against him than any candidate in history too.

    There's a mythology building up about how Obama swept all before him; he didn't. Both wins were just short of the median in post-war elections in ECV terms, which is the only one that matters.
    Sorry David, but this is a very poor reading of American politics. Presidential elections have fundamentally changed since the immediate post-war period. The civil rights movement began a process that transformed the parties from being broad coalitions with huge ideological variety to a right wing party and a left wing party. It actually took thirty years for the process to fully play out, but since 2000 the electoral map has barely changed, and it won't be very different next time either, regardless of the candidates.
    I don't agree with that. The reason the presidential electoral map's not changed much is that the candidates on offer were either divisive or uninspiring (Obama was inspiring to many in 2008 but he was also divisive, for example). I fully agree that Civil Rights marked a watershed and has seen the South transform from Blue to Red but the right candidate can still surmount that; it's just that not since Reagan has any candidate been able to reach out so far beyond their own base.

    Civil Rights was also only a third of the way into the post-war era; the majority of elections have been since then. Now, admittedly, Obama did do well as a Democrat in that context but still not as well as Clinton (and Perot's interventions weren't particularly critical there).

    I go back to my original point: in 2008, the landscape was very favourable to the Democrats given Bush and the economy. McCain was no charismatic rival. Yet Obama only did OK. OK was good enough but I just don't think that his campaign should be lauded as an exceptional example when the figures - to me - don't back that up.
    There does seem to be a tendency in US politics to attribute success in elections to technological wizadry, the skills of spin doctors, or radical new forms of campaigning.

    In truth, the perceived state of the economy and attitudes towards the President make most contests quite predictable.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Charles said:

    Whether this Axelrod is any good is yet to be seen, I knew Lynton Crosby was good because of the way tim regul;arly attacked him.

    Given the improving economy, EdM's patent weaknesses and Labour's general lack of any meaningful alternative narrative to government policy the Tories *should* win a handy overall majority next year. Crosby should only be judged against that. To the best of my knowledge, which is not that great on this admittedly, he has never run a successful FPTP election campaign.

    You keep saying this.

    But that assumes that voters make judgement on a rational basis.

    If the rapid, en masse, and seemingly firm (to date) "anti-Tory" switch by LD10 voters then you can only draw 3 conclusions:

    (1) Anti-Tory tribal voting (I would argue "non rational" in the sense that it is emotional rather than fact bases) occurs - and therefore Labour's lack of alternative narrative doesn't matter
    (2) Ed is either regarded positively by him, or his "patent weakness" isn't important
    (3) Economics is not a primary motivating factor for their vote

    It's probably a combination of these - but in any event there's no basis for the claim that the Tories "should" win. It's not enough to do a good job - you need to convince truculent voters to support you as well.

    Charles - my suspicion is that the Tories have a tribal vote too.

    But I do agree that you need to persuade voters to support you. That is Crosby's job, isn't it? If he can't do it when so much is in his favour we should conclude he's not very good, shouldn't we?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    David Axelrod is a man not a magician. And Ed Miliband is no Barack Obama.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    AEP's siren calls against deflation have got a little wearing over the last 5 years but there are some interesting facts in this article which are worth a look: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10774013/Eight-EU-states-in-deflation-as-calls-grow-for-QE-in-Sweden.html

    The UK has the highest inflation rate in the EU, almost certainly because of QE. This higher inflation rate is probably a good thing given the level of indebtedness our households had in 2008.

    Not for the first time by luck or judgement Osborne has the UK economy pretty much perfectly placed and it will facilitate the normalisation of our economy in due course which will involve earlier increases in interest rates than the rest of the EU. Which will also be a good thing.

    As someone who has always been hostile to QE this is thought provoking.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    rcs1000 said:

    OK PBers:

    I am going to be replacing Vanilla in about a week, so long as I can find an appropriate replacement (that doesn't require me to devote tens of hours of time to systems maintenance). [Likewise, I'm not going to roll my own, however tempting that might be...]

    Could people post links to sites where they think the comments are done particularly well, so I can take a look.

    Thanks

    I vist a forum on phpBB which seems to work well for what it does, although on the site I use people raise any old subject (within the site parameters) which may or may not engender discussion. Seems to work very well; I'm not sure how it would with the pb format, though.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited April 2014
    @DavidL

    Kudos to you for reconsidering your views. I feel I have been alone on this board in vocally supporting QE and a higher inflation level, to much ridicule. A similar thing happened when I said it would be a smart idea to invest in London property a couple years ago. I feel in a similar position on Ukraine right now. However, after the Eurozone disaster proved I was correct on the currency and the very serious establishment consensus wrong, I feel a lot less qualms about making my case strongly.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited April 2014
    AveryLP said:

    Can't comment on Axelrod but can re Arnie Graf - he was brought in for a specific purpose, to advise PPCs, especially new ones with little profile, on how to engage with local opinion-leaders to get themselves on the map. He was well-liked and it was sensible advice as far as it went. Some PPCs did it, others didn't, but the time for that was more the last 12 months rather than the next 12.

    Last thread: thanks to the late-night commentators who advised on the German "medical envelopes" after I went to bed. I've put down compresses with a query and noted William Glenn's suggestion for the proof-reader to consider. (A new poster I think - welcome!)

    Nick

    I was going to suggest the correct translation might be "colostomy bag".

    Otherwise this link might yield some visual clues: http://german.alibaba.com/goods/medical-envelopes.html
    @NickPalmer

    Try looking here: it's an Anglo-German company (with websites in both languages) that is the German market leader in bandages and compression therapy. You may find something appropriate. It's probably something obscure like orthopaedic stocking.

    http://www.bsnmedical.com/
  • This isn't really "Axelrod versus Crosby". They will perform very different roles over the next 12 months.

    Crosby is a "dark arts" man, who is intimately involved in the polling, in the organisation, and in the targeting strategy. Axelrod is being paid for much more high level strategic advice - the big picture messages (and I'm not sure how many hours it will really involve per month - not a lot, I suspect).

    They are both important roles, but very different roles.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    Socrates said:

    @DavidL

    Kudos to you for reconsidering your views. I feel I have been alone on this board in vocally supporting QE and a higher inflation level, to much ridicule. A similar thing happened when I said it would be a smart idea to invest in London property a couple years ago. I feel in a similar position on Ukraine right now. However, after the Eurozone disaster proved I was correct on the currency and the very serious establishment consensus wrong, I feel a lot less qualms about making my case strongly.

    QE is driving the housing bubble in the south, it has kept interest rates artificially low with disastrous consequences for our pensions and, more insiduously, it has allowed our government to keep borrowing at truly dangerous rates for longer than they otherwise could. That pandora box having been opened future politicians will return to the sweety jar.

    All of these are bad things, some seriously bad. But given the car crash of 2008 there were no good options. I now think that without QE the monetary shock to the economy would have been worse than Howe's in 81 with similar consequences for employment, some parts of the banking system would not have survived and the recession would have been even deeper.

    QE is not cost free by any means but things could have been even worse. Would they have started getting better sooner? Have we simply deferred pain and allowed damaging behaviour to continue? Difficult to say but the EU countries suggest not.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. T, indeed. If Yes wins then, south of the border, it's springtime for the Conservatives in terms of the General Election.

    Labour loses 40 seats *and* the election becomes about who'd be toughest on Scotland:
    a) A party founded in Scotland whose previous leader and chancellor were both Scottish and who had most of the seats on Scotland?
    b) A party, rightly or wrongly, seen as treating Scotland as a poll tax testing ground with 1 seat there?

    It's not rocket science. George Osborne's reputation as being a bit cold and heartless will be a positive advantage. You could trust Osborne to be tough negotiating with the Scots. But Miliband, the Copenhagen-Crybaby?

    I'm not quite sure whether I think Yes or No likelier to win at the moment.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    DavidL said:

    AEP's siren calls against deflation have got a little wearing over the last 5 years but there are some interesting facts in this article which are worth a look: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10774013/Eight-EU-states-in-deflation-as-calls-grow-for-QE-in-Sweden.html

    The UK has the highest inflation rate in the EU, almost certainly because of QE. This higher inflation rate is probably a good thing given the level of indebtedness our households had in 2008.

    Not for the first time by luck or judgement Osborne has the UK economy pretty much perfectly placed and it will facilitate the normalisation of our economy in due course which will involve earlier increases in interest rates than the rest of the EU. Which will also be a good thing.

    As someone who has always been hostile to QE this is thought provoking.

    Interest rate increases are going to be very painful for very many people. GO will be hoping against hope that his man at the BoE can delay them until after the GE.

  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    Sensibly that might be part of their agenda.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    Are you saying that there are White Walkers north of the border, SeanT?
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited April 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    OK PBers:

    I am going to be replacing Vanilla in about a week, so long as I can find an appropriate replacement (that doesn't require me to devote tens of hours of time to systems maintenance). [Likewise, I'm not going to roll my own, however tempting that might be...]

    Could people post links to sites where they think the comments are done particularly well, so I can take a look.

    Thanks

    Disqus has an option to sort by 'newest'.

    http://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466213-sorting-comments

    Wasn't the lack of that the prompt for you switching to Vanilla?

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014

    DavidL said:

    AEP's siren calls against deflation have got a little wearing over the last 5 years but there are some interesting facts in this article which are worth a look: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10774013/Eight-EU-states-in-deflation-as-calls-grow-for-QE-in-Sweden.html

    The UK has the highest inflation rate in the EU, almost certainly because of QE. This higher inflation rate is probably a good thing given the level of indebtedness our households had in 2008.

    Not for the first time by luck or judgement Osborne has the UK economy pretty much perfectly placed and it will facilitate the normalisation of our economy in due course which will involve earlier increases in interest rates than the rest of the EU. Which will also be a good thing.

    As someone who has always been hostile to QE this is thought provoking.

    Interest rate increases are going to be very painful for very many people. GO will be hoping against hope that his man at the BoE can delay them until after the GE.

    Interest rate increases are going to be very positive for very many people who will start to get a real return on their savings. The younger, more highly mortgaged always make the most noise and of course completely dominate the news rooms with inevitable consequences but the picture is more nuanced than it is commonly portrayed. That said you are probably right.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    "medizinische Umschläge"

    Literal translation is "medicinal wrap". - This can mean either a bandage or a compress, unfortunately without seeing the sentence it is hard to know which is applicable in this context.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    At least most of the factions in Game of Thrones are not aware how dangerous things have gotten in the North. Labour have little excuse.

    On topic, Labour don't really need much of a strategy in order to win in 2015, they have been extremely fortunate how events have lined up in their favour, so the steady the ship aspect is probably the most crucial thing he can do for them. If the leadership starts being more confident and, possibly, more unified, then they'll walk home and the man will be hailed a genius.
  • SeanT & Morris, the lack of support that Lab are giving to the No campaign is bewildering. If Douglas Alexander and all the Lab campaign team are the best campaigners that they can muster (no reason to doubt that), then why are they not fully engaged with the No campaign which is months away rather than the GE next year? Dougie is actually Scottish! Losing the referendum is far more important to the long term prospects of the Labour party than losing GE2015. Yet they are under funding the No campaign. Bizarre. But this is a mistake I am happy about.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    Sean you are spot on. Few in Scottish Labour remotely believe that a YES vote is conceivable let alone possible or likely. Meanwhile their own former supporters are flocking to YES and we are getting close to the point it gets beyond any way back. It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    SeanT said:

    Socrates said:

    @DavidL

    Kudos to you for reconsidering your views. I feel I have been alone on this board in vocally supporting QE and a higher inflation level, to much ridicule. A similar thing happened when I said it would be a smart idea to invest in London property a couple years ago. I feel in a similar position on Ukraine right now. However, after the Eurozone disaster proved I was correct on the currency and the very serious establishment consensus wrong, I feel a lot less qualms about making my case strongly.

    *cough*

    I noted the beginnings of the London property boom, three years ago, here on pb. That was a year after I bought my Camden flat.

    Asking prices in Camden rose by 7%... last month.

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-13/london-home-prices-rise-to-record-as-supply-shortage-lift-values

    The test for any pb prognosticator is not to predict rising London house prices, an imbecile can do that. It is to predict a London property crash. Will it happen? It surely must. The insanity cannot continue...

    Nice 2 bed flat in St John's Wood:

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44978306.html

    £3.4 million.

    The bubble is about to pop. Isn't it?
    No. Probably not for some time. The UK becomes an ever more attractive place to invest and London is where foreigners want to be. Until that flow of billions is reversed the market is underpinned. I don't see any indicators of reversal at the moment, if anything the reverse as other areas get more problematic.

    The current rate of growth is excessive but growth will continue for quite a while, at least in London.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    The bubble is about to pop. Isn't it?

    It should, but I just don't see what is going to make that happen very soon. Huge supply is on the way, but it seems to take a great deal of time to get going.

    The Mail has an interesting article on property today with some good stats. For example, Stamp duty means that nobody wants to sell and move on. It is destroying liquidity in the housing market.

    Another stat is that estate agents have on average about half the property available for sale that they had last September. 50 properties versus 100.

    Before the budget I argued that ozzie should do something about stamp duty - this is now becoming more pressing.

    How the tories can claim they are the party of the aspirational when this tax destroys aspiration is a mystery to me.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    AveryLP said:

    So Fisher "predicts" Con 307 Lab 284 LD 30 - does anyone see such a Parliament lasting five years?

    If the LibDems either rejoin the Tories in coalition or offer support on a policy by policy basis, the Tories will be able to rely on DUP/UUP support as they have no love for Labour. The mood music at PMQs for months from the DUP is that Cameron can rely on their support.
    Post referendum defeat, Salmond will be looking to buy devo-max from anyone who'll offer.

    I see the SNP returning to their roots as tartan tories and signing up to a five year coalition with the Conservatives and Lib Dems.

    The reward for the Lib Dems will be get all the pinkoes offloaded from newly merged SCon and SNP party.

    There. Sorted.

    Even Stuart Dickson and malcolmg would not be minded to object. Pork though may find himself in a dilemma.

    I cannot believe that over 50% of the Scottish population are mentally insane and will vote NO.
    Tell me you are going to canvas for "Yes"!

    Just vote YES
    Pity.....your diplomatic skills will be sadly wasted then.....

    I can be diplomatic when necessary , but it is hard work. I prefer a spade to be called a spade.
    Malcolm my dear fellow Scottish person, too frequently you call a spade an effing bloody shovel which is why you regularly upset many of our southern cousins!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited April 2014
    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    I've often said Ed Miliband is like ""Hodor"

    Instead of shouting "Hodor" he shouts

    "Cost of Living Crisis" in the past it was "Cutting too far too fast"
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    @SeanT - The London property market dropped precipitously five or six years back if I remember. At that time one of my fellow directors picked up a four bedroomed, four storey house in Tufnell Park - fully habitable, but in need of a bit of work - for £650,000. He's added about £1 million to that since.

    The thing about 0207 London, at least, is that when there is a fall the bounce-back is always pretty swift - so opportunities are fleeting but the rewards are huge. It's great swathes of 0208 and the surrounds that are always worst and longest hit.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    The UK becomes an ever more attractive place to invest and London is where foreigners want to be.

    We are now realising that the UK's unparalleled reputation for upholding the rights of the property owner is actually extremely valuable and will continue to be.

    Could the government do more to shift the burden of property taxation on to those foreigners and away from its own people?

    It surely could.
  • On topic, Mike is this your way of saying of David Alexrod = AVB?

    (Sorry Southam and Scrapheap)
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited April 2014

    Incidentally, the Ukraine deal looks reasonable (and if it holds will be a lot better than the wild sabre-rattling that Socrates was urging on us) - let's hope it works out. The devil will be in the regionalisation detail.

    That would have been the consensus view of Munich, too.
    Trouble is that the "Pro-Russian Protesters" refuse to leave any of their conquered buildings or holdings. That will make the Ukranian authorities react. Meanwhile Russia will say that the protesters are not invading Russians, and that the Ukranians are declaring war on their own people. Then Putin will say, "we cannot stand idly by while ethnic Russians are being persecuted". The dice will be tossed and there will be little that the West can do about it.

    I give it another fortnight to fully develop; in time for my 80th birthday.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915

    Financier said:

    Quite often USA consumer marketing people are not very successful when transferring their skill sets to Europe and the UK. They tend to treat Europe and even the UK as a collection of federal states and our various states of devolution could confound him.

    It depends.

    If they are based here, the good ones quickly pick up the nuances and bring fresh ideas to the party.

    Those who fly in for a couple of days to dispense their wisdom are frequently counter productive and can face strong internal resistance.

    Axelrod will not be based here, but will be flying in for a couple of days at a time.

    Experience elsewhere suggests that when "experts" or "consultants" are brought in a for a few days at a time they make no difference at best and nasty boo-boos at worst.
    The three great fibs:

    * The cheque is in the post
    * Of course I'll still respect you in the morning
    * I'm from head office and I'm here to help.....

    And ... "My drink must have been spiked"
    Alan where have you been my coalition kinsman? Hardly seen you on here for ages? Have you been building a bunker big enough to take you, Tavish, Willie and Alistair come the 25th May? We need a Scottish LibDem perspective on here more frequently given those who are predicting there will soon be more Pandas in Scotland than LibDem MPs never mind Tory ones!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    As a grandparent whose house is paid for and who has some savings I'd be quite happy to see a rise in interest rates and to a lesser extent house prices, although I'm not too bothered about the latter, since I've no intention of selling.

    HOWEVER I have grandchildren who are "pairing off" and also paying off student loans ….. yes there's been some help but I'm not a rich man ….. who are beginning to look for homes and it does seem to me that overall I'd rather see them housed and settled than have much more myself.

    And I suspect I'm not alone.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    taffys said:



    We are now realising that the UK's unparalleled reputation for upholding the rights of the property owner is actually extremely valuable and will continue to be.

    The EU harmonisation of Justice and Home Affairs ends that. HMG is due to sign up on July 22.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260182/the-next-tory-plot-to-embarrass-david-cameron-on-europe-is-already-taking-shape/
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Ye Gods; they do exist! LOL
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    taffys said:

    The bubble is about to pop. Isn't it?

    It should, but I just don't see what is going to make that happen very soon. Huge supply is on the way, but it seems to take a great deal of time to get going.

    The Mail has an interesting article on property today with some good stats. For example, Stamp duty means that nobody wants to sell and move on. It is destroying liquidity in the housing market.

    Another stat is that estate agents have on average about half the property available for sale that they had last September. 50 properties versus 100.

    Before the budget I argued that ozzie should do something about stamp duty - this is now becoming more pressing.

    How the tories can claim they are the party of the aspirational when this tax destroys aspiration is a mystery to me.

    Why would the Chancellor want to add fuel to the fire and lose a nice little earner? Stamp duty is really only a major issue in London and the SE. In most property markets most properties are either not affected or it is a minor irritation.

    In London, in contrast, GO has taken several steps to close loopholes and ensure that the foreign seller pays his share to the Treasury.

    The lack of housing stock is interesting but if you are sitting on a £1M gain, like SO's director, stamp duty is entirely bearable. I suspect too many think that by sitting tight they continue to gain in a rising market.

  • I just met someone called William Hill.

    What are the odds?

    I'll get my coat
  • As a grandparent whose house is paid for and who has some savings I'd be quite happy to see a rise in interest rates and to a lesser extent house prices, although I'm not too bothered about the latter, since I've no intention of selling.

    HOWEVER I have grandchildren who are "pairing off" and also paying off student loans ….. yes there's been some help but I'm not a rich man ….. who are beginning to look for homes and it does seem to me that overall I'd rather see them housed and settled than have much more myself.

    And I suspect I'm not alone.

    I suppose it depends whether there are more electors in functional families or dysfunctional ones...

  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789

    @SeanT - The London property market dropped precipitously five or six years back if I remember. At that time one of my fellow directors picked up a four bedroomed, four storey house in Tufnell Park - fully habitable, but in need of a bit of work - for £650,000. He's added about £1 million to that since.

    The thing about 0207 London, at least, is that when there is a fall the bounce-back is always pretty swift - so opportunities are fleeting but the rewards are huge. It's great swathes of 0208 and the surrounds that are always worst and longest hit.

    There is no such thing as 0207 and 0208 London. The code for London is 020.

    There are leading 8s in inner London and leading 3s.

    There is no boundary between the two and a mix all over.

    The code for London is simply 020.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    SeanT said:

    SeanT & Morris, the lack of support that Lab are giving to the No campaign is bewildering. If Douglas Alexander and all the Lab campaign team are the best campaigners that they can muster (no reason to doubt that), then why are they not fully engaged with the No campaign which is months away rather than the GE next year? Dougie is actually Scottish! Losing the referendum is far more important to the long term prospects of the Labour party than losing GE2015. Yet they are under funding the No campaign. Bizarre. But this is a mistake I am happy about.

    Thus their immobility. They consciously want NO to win, yet subconsciously they want YES to win. The psychic struggle produces complete paralysis.
    If this has not already appeared in a blog post...perhaps it should.....

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    SeanT said:

    SeanT & Morris, the lack of support that Lab are giving to the No campaign is bewildering. If Douglas Alexander and all the Lab campaign team are the best campaigners that they can muster (no reason to doubt that), then why are they not fully engaged with the No campaign which is months away rather than the GE next year? Dougie is actually Scottish! Losing the referendum is far more important to the long term prospects of the Labour party than losing GE2015. Yet they are under funding the No campaign. Bizarre. But this is a mistake I am happy about.

    I think there are deep subconscious forces at work here.

    A lot of Labour people are instinctively anti-British, that is to say they abhor and dislike many things we see as quintessentially British - the monarchy, the flag, the army, the history of rampant conquest, the Empire, posh men in top hats, Eton, the anthem, the City of London, the Royal Navy, our nuclear deterrent, the lion and the unicorn, duffing up the French, eating loads of beef.

    Note how, whenever lefties are challenged to produce something good about Britain, it is the NHS they adduce. That's all they can think of. The NHS.

    Therefore, many of them consciously or subconsciously WANT the YES voters to win, as they believe it will be a final deathblow to Britain's delusions of grandeur, and a kick in the nuts for Tories. They secretly hate Britishness and they are desperate to see it broken into pieces.

    However they are also smart enough to realise that a YES vote is, very clearly, an existential threat to Labour down south.

    Thus their immobility. They consciously want NO to win, yet subconsciously they want YES to win. The psychic struggle produces complete paralysis.
    Thats a bloody good analysis SeanT. Well done. We will make a Kipper of you yet.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Socrates said:

    @AveryLP

    Both the East and the South of Ukraine, despite past voting habits, are united with the West at being appalled at the violation of their sovereignty by Russia:

    http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117357/despite-pro-soviet-protests-majority-ukrainians-lean-toward-europe

    This follows their dislike of the traditional pro-Russian position after Yanukovych started killing unarmed protesters on Kiev's streets, clearly with the clearance of the Kremlin.

    In addition, young people across the entire country are much, much more pro-Western than their elders. There is thus absolutely no reason why we should concede the East to being a Russian fief.

    In addition, Putin's political standing has been hugely enhanced by this whole deal. We should have closed the Bosphorus to Russian ships and enacted tough sanctions on gas exports. It would have hit our wallets in Europe a little, but not too much, while it would have caused a major recession in Russia, and the guy would have backed off after his poll ratings tumble for leading Russia into a mess.

    Socrates

    That is the second time you have posted that wide-eyed idealist article by Masha Snegurochka. She should be left in peace to earn her PhD from Columbia University on academic merit rather than be allowed to tout for a green card in public by publishing neo-Con nonsense.

    Go to Eastern Ukraine and you will undoubtedly find youngsters wearing Nike trainers and pro-Western Tee shirts as they swap the latest pirated western songs through vk.com. But their parents will be looking at employment prospects, housing and heating costs, social benefits and pensions. The Ukraine is bankrupt and finding shelter under Mother Russia holds out the prospect of an immediate increase in living standards. This is what drove the Crimeans and it is what will be driving the populations of East and South Ukraine. Before you become a democratic libertarian you need to heat your home.

    And even the minority, who remained unconvinced by earthly necessities, will find protest and dissent impossible, The core of the former Soviet Union is not a free democratic society particularly out in the sticks. You vote the way you are told by the local powers and oligarchs or end up on the street with broken bones suffering for your idealism.

    There is nothing that can be done militarily or with economic sanctions to stop Putin. The West just needs to recognise the realpolitik and find a way of bringing Russia in rather than forcing division. This requires patience, skilled diplomacy and long-term vision.

    The eventual outcome of the Ukrainian crisis will be agreement. But it won't be based on your, nor Masha's, idealistic concept of a free and integral western looking Ukraine.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    SeanT said:

    SeanT & Morris, the lack of support that Lab are giving to the No campaign is bewildering. If Douglas Alexander and all the Lab campaign team are the best campaigners that they can muster (no reason to doubt that), then why are they not fully engaged with the No campaign which is months away rather than the GE next year? Dougie is actually Scottish! Losing the referendum is far more important to the long term prospects of the Labour party than losing GE2015. Yet they are under funding the No campaign. Bizarre. But this is a mistake I am happy about.

    I think there are deep subconscious forces at work here.

    A lot of Labour people are instinctively anti-British, that is to say they abhor and dislike many things we see as quintessentially British - the monarchy, the flag, the army, the history of rampant conquest, the Empire, posh men in top hats, Eton, the anthem, the City of London, the Royal Navy, our nuclear deterrent, the lion and the unicorn, duffing up the French, eating loads of beef.

    Note how, whenever lefties are challenged to produce something good about Britain, it is the NHS they adduce. That's all they can think of. The NHS.

    Therefore, many of them consciously or subconsciously WANT the YES voters to win, as they believe it will be a final deathblow to Britain's delusions of grandeur, and a kick in the nuts for Tories. They secretly hate Britishness and they are desperate to see it broken into pieces.

    However they are also smart enough to realise that a YES vote is, very clearly, an existential threat to Labour down south.

    Thus their immobility. They consciously want NO to win, yet subconsciously they want YES to win. The psychic struggle produces complete paralysis.
    Scottish Labour assiduously promoted the view in the 1980s and 1990s that it was illegitimate for a Conservative government to apply it's policies to Scotland, because most Scots voted against the Conservatives. And that view has now threatens to bite Labour on the arse.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Not best placed, but at least he seems to care enough to want to seriously try. Miliband might also, but he clearly does not have his party fully behind him on it.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    With regard to the change from Vanilla.Why is PB responding to a bunch of NIMBY critics when the rational,silent majority are silent?
    Those who seek change need to point to better alternatives.It is simply no good to say FPTP does not work without being able to make the case for an an alternative voting system.
    If you recall,this current system for all its' faults replaced others even worse which generated even more complaints.
    Why swop something that has broken for something that is even more broken?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Pete, it must be said Vanilla seems better behaved today.

    In recent days, though, it signed me out and in at each refresh, wouldn't let me log-in, ate a post or two and was quite tedious.

    I hope it's working properly for good, as changing the comment system must be irksome for all involved, but if people can't log in and get logged out and so forth the system would have to change.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Why would the Chancellor want to add fuel to the fire and lose a nice little earner?

    For me, simply allowing the next generation to become generation rent with no hope of buying a property is fundamentally anti-tory.

    The chancellor could at least have abolished the lower threshold of stamp duty so that nobody paying up to 250,000 for a cupboard in Luton need pay it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    AveryLP said:

    So Fisher "predicts" Con 307 Lab 284 LD 30 - does anyone see such a Parliament lasting five years?

    If the LibDems either rejoin the Tories in coalition or offer support on a policy by policy basis, the Tories will be able to rely on DUP/UUP support as they have no love for Labour. The mood music at PMQs for months from the DUP is that Cameron can rely on their support.
    Post referendum defeat, Salmond will be looking to buy devo-max from anyone who'll offer.

    I see the SNP returning to their roots as tartan tories and signing up to a five year coalition with the Conservatives and Lib Dems.

    The reward for the Lib Dems will be get all the pinkoes offloaded from newly merged SCon and SNP party.

    There. Sorted.

    Even Stuart Dickson and malcolmg would not be minded to object. Pork though may find himself in a dilemma.

    I cannot believe that over 50% of the Scottish population are mentally insane and will vote NO.
    Tell me you are going to canvas for "Yes"!

    Just vote YES
    Pity.....your diplomatic skills will be sadly wasted then.....

    I can be diplomatic when necessary , but it is hard work. I prefer a spade to be called a spade.
    Malcolm my dear fellow Scottish person, too frequently you call a spade an effing bloody shovel which is why you regularly upset many of our southern cousins!
    Easterross, have to keep them on their toes, get them out of their bubble mentality , they do not seem to be able to listen to reality.
    I am hoping Mike will do a thread/report on his recent visit and what his thoughts are having been involved in the reality of the referendum discussion.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Bloody hell - GBP USD 1.67/8, GBP EUR 1.21

    Never realised the currency was so strong at the moment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Agree with other posters here, Scottish independence is a massive existential threat to Labour.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    £50 for a Mercedes to win at evens please :)
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited April 2014
    @AveryLP

    I did not link the article for the views of the author, but in the referencing of two separate polls showing that Ukrainians in the East and South are overwhelmingly against Russian intervention. That is actual firm evidence that your claims they are just all looking for shelter from Mother Russia is just incorrect.

    I am all for sensible realpolitik, rooted in pragmatic realities. However, those that often argue for realpolitik are often completely out of touch with the modern pragmatic realities, instead relying on romanticist imagery about the wild East. There is plenty we could have done and could still do to make for a far better end game. However, it would take leaders far more willing to stick their necks out rather than the current supine lot.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited April 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    OK PBers:

    I am going to be replacing Vanilla in about a week, so long as I can find an appropriate replacement (that doesn't require me to devote tens of hours of time to systems maintenance). [Likewise, I'm not going to roll my own, however tempting that might be...]

    Could people post links to sites where they think the comments are done particularly well, so I can take a look.

    Thanks

    I think you're looking for flat rather than threaded comments.

    Have you considered returning to Wordpress, with a hosted package (they do the server admin)?

    I believe Guido uses Wordpress.com.

    http://store.wordpress.com/plans/

    http://en.support.wordpress.com/comments/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    re QE

    I think it's worth noting that QE has two serious negative effects:

    1. It delays deleveraging. We'd all agree the US, the UK, Spain, and Ireland had excessive levels of private sector debt going into the financial crisis. QE kept costs of borrowing down, and has meant that US firms and consumers have really not delevered at all in the last five years. US private sector debt-to-GDP is the same level now it was before the crisis - the only difference is that interest rates are lower, and therefore the economy is much more sensitive to a rise in rates. By contrast, the economies of Spain and Ireland were hammered during the GFC and the Eurozone crisis, and in the latter case, have unemployment approaching 30%. But both Spain and Ireland have seen significant private sector deleveraging - by more than 30% of GDP in each case. (Germany has also seen private sector debt fall.) We in the UK have managed to see the private sector delever somewhat during QE, so we've managed to do better than anyone, really.

    2. It causes asset price bubbles. London property being a prime example. When interest rates are low and are expected to remain low for extended periods, owning real assets with low nominal yields becomes a sensible strategy: expect interest rates below 2% for a long time, it's OK to buy that two bedroom flat for £3m, with a nominal rental yield of 1.8%.

    Like all things, this is a matter of "choosing your poison". QE prevented the serious drop in economic activity seen in Spain and Ireland. But on the other hand, can you solve a debt crisis long-term by adding more debt?

    I think the next economic crisis we will see (beyond the continued unravelling of China... where private sector debt-to-GDP, including shadow banking, is now the highest in the world at c. 250% of GDP), will be in the after shocks of QE.

    As an aside, stamp duty falls on the purchaser of property, and therefore cannot discourage people from selling their property, only from buying new ones.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited April 2014
    Bloody hell - GBP USD 1.67/8, GBP EUR 1.21

    How can the London property market be in a bubble when it is paying off so handsomely for foreigners. Especially wealthy BRICS buyers

    Big Currency appreciation + Big Capital appreciation + good Rental income if you feel the need in a rock hard currency

    Ker-ching.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Morning everyone - thanks for the F1 Morris, for what it's worth I'm 24 quid up for the season.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    rcs1000 said:

    OK PBers:

    I am going to be replacing Vanilla in about a week, so long as I can find an appropriate replacement (that doesn't require me to devote tens of hours of time to systems maintenance). [Likewise, I'm not going to roll my own, however tempting that might be...]

    Could people post links to sites where they think the comments are done particularly well, so I can take a look.

    Thanks

    I think you're looking for flat rather than threaded comments.

    Have you considered returning to Wordpress, with a hosted package (they do the server admin)?

    I believe Guido uses Wordpress.com.

    http://store.wordpress.com/plans/
    That's a very good idea. Thanks
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Whether this Axelrod is any good is yet to be seen, I knew Lynton Crosby was good because of the way tim regul;arly attacked him.

    Given the improving economy, EdM's patent weaknesses and Labour's general lack of any meaningful alternative narrative to government policy the Tories *should* win a handy overall majority next year. Crosby should only be judged against that. To the best of my knowledge, which is not that great on this admittedly, he has never run a successful FPTP election campaign.

    You keep saying this.

    But that assumes that voters make judgement on a rational basis.

    If the rapid, en masse, and seemingly firm (to date) "anti-Tory" switch by LD10 voters then you can only draw 3 conclusions:

    (1) Anti-Tory tribal voting (I would argue "non rational" in the sense that it is emotional rather than fact bases) occurs - and therefore Labour's lack of alternative narrative doesn't matter
    (2) Ed is either regarded positively by him, or his "patent weakness" isn't important
    (3) Economics is not a primary motivating factor for their vote

    It's probably a combination of these - but in any event there's no basis for the claim that the Tories "should" win. It's not enough to do a good job - you need to convince truculent voters to support you as well.

    Charles - my suspicion is that the Tories have a tribal vote too.

    But I do agree that you need to persuade voters to support you. That is Crosby's job, isn't it? If he can't do it when so much is in his favour we should conclude he's not very good, shouldn't we?
    No, not necessarily.

    You're argument is that the economy is going well therefore people *should* vote Tory.

    I think that a lot of people don't care/understand the economy and will vote against the Tories for completely unrelated reasons.

    Consequently your argument falls down because large parts of the British electorate are irrational and/or irresponsible.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Oops, I think it's actually 34 quid (24 was just last race)
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Switch back to Romney v Obama, and Axelrod was the Lynton Crosby in Obama's team.The campaign was criticised for being excessively negative.
    Switch forward to Miliband v Cameron and Miliband gets the inside knowledge on Crosby's every likely move and what is the best strategy to attack and undermine it with pre-emptive strikes.
    The personal attacks on Miliband will now get a nuclear response on Cameron.
  • YossariansChildYossariansChild Posts: 536
    edited April 2014
    On Topic. Axlerod is to my mind overrated. The key Obama campaign organiser was David Plouffe. He was the mastermind behind the Caucas strategy which won the nomination and his was the organising of the grass roots campaign in the general while Ax concentrated on national media.

    BTW Plouffe's book of the campaign "The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama's Historic Victory" is a cracking read.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    SeanT said:

    Socrates said:

    @DavidL

    Kudos to you for reconsidering your views. I feel I have been alone on this board in vocally supporting QE and a higher inflation level, to much ridicule. A similar thing happened when I said it would be a smart idea to invest in London property a couple years ago. I feel in a similar position on Ukraine right now. However, after the Eurozone disaster proved I was correct on the currency and the very serious establishment consensus wrong, I feel a lot less qualms about making my case strongly.

    *cough*

    I noted the beginnings of the London property boom, three years ago, here on pb. That was a year after I bought my Camden flat.

    Asking prices in Camden rose by 7%... last month.

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-13/london-home-prices-rise-to-record-as-supply-shortage-lift-values

    The test for any pb prognosticator is not to predict rising London house prices, an imbecile can do that. It is to predict a London property crash. Will it happen? It surely must. The insanity cannot continue...

    Nice 2 bed flat in St John's Wood:

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44978306.html

    £3.4 million.

    The bubble is about to pop. Isn't it?
    The market is very frothy, but it is not clear what would trigger a collapse. I am certainly cautious about increasing my equity exposure, and we have a very conservative stance from a asset coverage perspective as well.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    DavidL said:

    Socrates said:

    @DavidL

    Kudos to you for reconsidering your views. I feel I have been alone on this board in vocally supporting QE and a higher inflation level, to much ridicule. A similar thing happened when I said it would be a smart idea to invest in London property a couple years ago. I feel in a similar position on Ukraine right now. However, after the Eurozone disaster proved I was correct on the currency and the very serious establishment consensus wrong, I feel a lot less qualms about making my case strongly.

    QE is driving the housing bubble in the south, it has kept interest rates artificially low with disastrous consequences for our pensions and, more insiduously, it has allowed our government to keep borrowing at truly dangerous rates for longer than they otherwise could. That pandora box having been opened future politicians will return to the sweety jar.

    All of these are bad things, some seriously bad. But given the car crash of 2008 there were no good options. I now think that without QE the monetary shock to the economy would have been worse than Howe's in 81 with similar consequences for employment, some parts of the banking system would not have survived and the recession would have been even deeper.

    QE is not cost free by any means but things could have been even worse. Would they have started getting better sooner? Have we simply deferred pain and allowed damaging behaviour to continue? Difficult to say but the EU countries suggest not.

    1. All interest rates are "artificial" as long as you accept central bank control of them. QE is no more artificial than setting the base rate at 4%. But this artificial setting is far more sensible than leaving it to the volatility of the market.

    2. The London housing bubble is being driven by a combination of fundamentals, due to a booming population and a lack of supply, in addition to foreign money fleeing from the Eurozone crisis, Putin's kleptocracy and the tumult in the Arab world. It's being driven from the top end down, whereby mortgage borrowing doesn't really matter so much.

    3. It was the economic realities of the financial crash of 2007 and the Eurozone crisis that is disastrous for pensions. It is inevitable that the retrenchment after that interest rates should fall, hurting pensioners. You can expect to get the same return when economic output doesn't justify it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Whether this Axelrod is any good is yet to be seen, I knew Lynton Crosby was good because of the way tim regul;arly attacked him.

    Given the improving economy, EdM's patent weaknesses and Labour's general lack of any meaningful alternative narrative to government policy the Tories *should* win a handy overall majority next year. Crosby should only be judged against that. To the best of my knowledge, which is not that great on this admittedly, he has never run a successful FPTP election campaign.

    You keep saying this.

    Charles - my suspicion is that the Tories have a tribal vote too.

    But I do agree that you need to persuade voters to support you. That is Crosby's job, isn't it? If he can't do it when so much is in his favour we should conclude he's not very good, shouldn't we?
    No, not necessarily.

    You're argument is that the economy is going well therefore people *should* vote Tory.

    I think that a lot of people don't care/understand the economy and will vote against the Tories for completely unrelated reasons.

    Consequently your argument falls down because large parts of the British electorate are irrational and/or irresponsible.
    Quite so. There may be good reasons to vote Tory or Labour, or even Lib Dem and UKIP, but tribal loyalty and gut feeling seem to have much more influence than rational arguments, and the perception of any party impacts what arguments they make will resonate with people and what claims against them they can get away with. It's one reason why Labour can get away with the 'out of touch' argument on the Tories despite their leadership being about as out of touch, because that is what most people think about the Tories instinvtively, and it's the reason that if people dislike a party enough, or come to see them as incompetent and so on, positive arguments in their favour will fall on a lot of deaf ears, as people will consider those positives are either irrelevant, inevitable or nothing to do with that party in actual fact.

    It works against Labour too, but not nearly to the same extent. It might not have for the LDs as much, but now it does worse than the Tories, to the point that even if they have a good idea it will be ignored by a large chunk of the population.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    He will stay behind the sofa and earn his place in history
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    taffys said:

    The UK becomes an ever more attractive place to invest and London is where foreigners want to be.

    We are now realising that the UK's unparalleled reputation for upholding the rights of the property owner is actually extremely valuable and will continue to be.

    Could the government do more to shift the burden of property taxation on to those foreigners and away from its own people?

    It surely could.

    That's why, frankly, they should look at an annual property tax.

    It should also be introduced by the Tories, so they (a) they don't put in any bollocks about thresholds and (b) they can use the money to selective cut much more damaging taxes.

    I would avoid a revaluation as well, by making it based on the last sale/transfer value. This will protect the stereotyped widow-in-a-big-house-but-with-a-small-pension. Yes, it might lead to some anomalies, but these will be self-correcting. There is a risk that it will make people reluctant to move from a grandfathered property - but the tax they will need to pay should (in theory) be reflected in a lower price for the next property they have to purchase
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    He will stay behind the sofa and earn his place in history
    And by not debating Eck, will deny him his place in history too.....

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @rcs1000

    It is economically sensible to delay deleveraging until you're back maximising output from putting all your resources to work. Otherwise you're just cutting aggregate demand and operating with a big chunk of unused labour for many years.

    People have been talking about the aftershocks of QE being just six months away for the last five years.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Pulpstar, ha! At the last race they were 8/11 (pre-qualifying) to get a double podium. Evens for a win would be great. Ladbrokes has them 1/8 to win.

    Mr. Briskin, splendid. Hope that continues (and my own results remain in the green).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Socrates said:

    @rcs1000

    It is economically sensible to delay deleveraging until you're back maximising output from putting all your resources to work. Otherwise you're just cutting aggregate demand and operating with a big chunk of unused labour for many years.

    People have been talking about the aftershocks of QE being just six months away for the last five years.

    We've bashed this issue around for a long-time, and I don't think either of us is nearer convincing the other!

    That said, I think the aftershocks of QE happen when the process begins to unwind. Only then will we see whether the cost was worth it: will attempts to raise interest rates in the UK and the US cause serious asset price falls and discourage banks from extending credit? I don't know, but it is a serious possibility.

    Oh yes: one other crisis coming that I didn't mention. At some point people will realise that the Japanese government is bust.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited April 2014
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
    In the last UK GE popular vote:

    Labour: 1,035,528
    SNP: 491,386
    LibD: 465,471
    Con: 412,855

    Also, more Tories say they will vote 'no' (82%) than SNP say they will vote 'Yes' (55%).......

    Do you want to work out which is the bigger number.....55% of 491,386, or 82% of 412,855.....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    re QE

    As an aside, stamp duty falls on the purchaser of property, and therefore cannot discourage people from selling their property, only from buying new ones.

    As a believer in the free market, you must accept that transaction costs are reflected in the clearing price surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
    Didn't they get 16% or so in the last Scottish elections? The Tories are a minority in Scotland, and the way their vote is distributed they get a hilariously low number of MPs now for the amount of the vote they get at GEs, which is their own damn fault, but regardless, the point being made was not that the Tories in Scotland are some massive force who will decide the outcome, but that winning them over to the NO side is already achieved so now it is down to convincing the Labour undecideds, and even though the Tories are unpopular in Scotland, they are in fact nowhere close to next to nothing - they're just a minor party rather than a major one.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Socrates said:

    @rcs1000
    People have been talking about the aftershocks of QE being just six months away for the last five years.

    Well they'll be right eventually I guess. Same reason even though the government's plans went far behind schedule they expected adulation to hit when eventually things started to pick up, even though at some point things were bound to regardless of what the government were doing (I do not know enough about economics to know if that is what happened of ir GO's plans did pay off, just later than expected)
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
    In the last UK GE popular vote:

    Labour: 1,035,528
    SNP: 491,386
    LibD: 465,471
    Con: 412,855

    Also, more Tories say they will vote 'no' (82%) than SNP say they will vote 'Yes' (55%).......

    Do you want to work out which is the bigger number.....55% of 491,386, or 82% of 412,855.....
    Now you've done it. Introducing facts to a true believer is like explaining evolution to an American televangelist.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    He will stay behind the sofa and earn his place in history
    And by not debating Eck, will deny him his place in history too.....

    Not at all , he will go down as the man who made independence happen, books will be written , statues everywhere , guaranteed a place in history , etc etc
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited April 2014
    kle4 said:

    a minor party rather than a major one.

    Which got 84% of the SNP vote in the last UK GE.......

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited April 2014
    SeanT said:

    As rcs and Charles and other financial brainiacs are around, I have a request for advice

    I have some cash to put to use. I've paid down a chunk of my mortgage but I'm looking to invest about £100k elsewhere. I'm havering between two choices - go the sensible route and get a diversified portfolio of shares and bonds blah blah- or invest in property.

    Specifically I am looking at 2 bed flats/houses in Spain and Portugal, as they are now incredibly cheap (esp Spain). This will be more fun than owning shares, and its a place my kids can go on holiday.

    But is this crazy? Perhaps Europe has further to fall. Yet prices have already dropped 50-60%.


    http://www.kyero.com/house_prices/31868-la-duquesa-house-prices

    Surely they must be near the bottom? Any thoughts? If you had £100k to tuck away, where would you put it?

    We've chatted about this in the past.

    If you want a holiday, buy a holiday home in an area that you like. If it makes money that's great, but don't pretend it's an investment. It's a cost.

    If you want an investment, then liquidity in the key thing. Single unit property investment, in my view, is a poor strategy because it is lumpy and illiquid. What you might want to think about, though - assuming you have a reasonable expectation of your current high income continuing for the foreseeable future is a selection of VCT/EIS-qualifying investments. You get 30% back from the taxman off the top and if it all goes tits up you are able to write off your losses against future income. Do the boring stuff - max out your ISAs, consider pensions, etc, first though.

    Of course, though, this is just personal opinion as I am neither qualified nor licensed as a financial adviser for retail customers.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    BobaFett said:

    @SeanT - The London property market dropped precipitously five or six years back if I remember. At that time one of my fellow directors picked up a four bedroomed, four storey house in Tufnell Park - fully habitable, but in need of a bit of work - for £650,000. He's added about £1 million to that since.

    The thing about 0207 London, at least, is that when there is a fall the bounce-back is always pretty swift - so opportunities are fleeting but the rewards are huge. It's great swathes of 0208 and the surrounds that are always worst and longest hit.

    There is no such thing as 0207 and 0208 London. The code for London is 020.

    There are leading 8s in inner London and leading 3s.

    There is no boundary between the two and a mix all over.

    The code for London is simply 020.
    At the risk of re opening a can of worms, anybody who has lived in London for more that 15 years or so would know exactly what @SouthamObserver means, even if there are anomalies that make it factually incorrect. Only someone who wasn't really from London, or was a teenager maybe, would make the point you just did
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    SeanT said:

    As rcs and Charles and other financial brainiacs are around, I have a request for advice

    I have some cash to put to use. I've paid down a chunk of my mortgage but I'm looking to invest about £100k elsewhere. I'm havering between two choices - go the sensible route and get a diversified portfolio of shares and bonds blah blah- or invest in property.

    Specifically I am looking at 2 bed flats/houses in Spain and Portugal, as they are now incredibly cheap (esp Spain). This will be more fun than owning shares, and its a place my kids can go on holiday.

    But is this crazy? Perhaps Europe has further to fall. Yet prices have already dropped 50-60%.


    http://www.kyero.com/house_prices/31868-la-duquesa-house-prices

    Surely they must be near the bottom? Any thoughts? If you had £100k to tuck away, where would you put it?

    Take it this is after the allowance for wine, women & song?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    BobaFett said:

    @SeanT - The London property market dropped precipitously five or six years back if I remember. At that time one of my fellow directors picked up a four bedroomed, four storey house in Tufnell Park - fully habitable, but in need of a bit of work - for £650,000. He's added about £1 million to that since.

    The thing about 0207 London, at least, is that when there is a fall the bounce-back is always pretty swift - so opportunities are fleeting but the rewards are huge. It's great swathes of 0208 and the surrounds that are always worst and longest hit.

    There is no such thing as 0207 and 0208 London. The code for London is 020.

    There are leading 8s in inner London and leading 3s.

    There is no boundary between the two and a mix all over.

    The code for London is simply 020.
    At the risk of re opening a can of worms, anybody who has lived in London for more that 15 years or so would know exactly what @SouthamObserver means, even if there are anomalies that make it factually incorrect. Only someone who wasn't really from London, or was a teenager maybe, would make the point you just did
    Or someone who lives in 0208 territory and has a chip on their shoulder about it...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited April 2014
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    He will stay behind the sofa and earn his place in history
    And by not debating Eck, will deny him his place in history too.....

    books will be written , statues everywhere , guaranteed a place in history , etc etc
    Or not.....

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
    In the last UK GE popular vote:

    Labour: 1,035,528
    SNP: 491,386
    LibD: 465,471
    Con: 412,855

    Also, more Tories say they will vote 'no' (82%) than SNP say they will vote 'Yes' (55%).......

    Do you want to work out which is the bigger number.....55% of 491,386, or 82% of 412,855.....
    I note you use the false UK GE numbers for your calculations. How does that work out using the real numbers from Holyrood 2011.
    55% of 902,915 or 85% of 276,652
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    edited April 2014

    kle4 said:

    a minor party rather than a major one.

    Which got 84% of the SNP vote in the last UK GE.......

    I'm trying to meet the nationalists halfway on the issue- suggesting significant if not majority numbers have and will vote Tory or even LD in Scotland even now, with little effect in GEs due to FPTP(I imagine the LDs will find themselves similar to the Tories come 2015) and that therefore to suggest they cannot merely be ridiculed away as inconsequential(despite not being critical), is apparently heresy.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Sound advice from Charles.

    If looking for a holiday home, you should consider Greece or Cyprus also. Some bargain properies there and the Greek islands do not have the same problems as the cities.
    Charles said:

    SeanT said:

    As rcs and Charles and other financial brainiacs are around, I have a request for advice

    I have some cash to put to use. I've paid down a chunk of my mortgage but I'm looking to invest about £100k elsewhere. I'm havering between two choices - go the sensible route and get a diversified portfolio of shares and bonds blah blah- or invest in property.

    Specifically I am looking at 2 bed flats/houses in Spain and Portugal, as they are now incredibly cheap (esp Spain). This will be more fun than owning shares, and its a place my kids can go on holiday.

    But is this crazy? Perhaps Europe has further to fall. Yet prices have already dropped 50-60%.


    http://www.kyero.com/house_prices/31868-la-duquesa-house-prices

    Surely they must be near the bottom? Any thoughts? If you had £100k to tuck away, where would you put it?

    We've chatted about this in the past.

    If you want a holiday, buy a holiday home in an area that you like. If it makes money that's great, but don't pretend it's an investment. It's a cost.

    If you want an investment, then liquidity in the key thing. Single unit property investment, in my view, is a poor strategy because it is lumpy and illiquid. What you might want to think about, though - assuming you have a reasonable expectation of your current high income continuing for the foreseeable future is a selection of VCT/EIS-qualifying investments. You get 30% back from the taxman off the top and if it all goes tits up you are able to write off your losses against future income. Do the boring stuff - max out your ISAs, consider pensions, etc, first though.

    Of course, though, this is just personal opinion as I am neither qualified nor licensed as a financial adviser for retail customers.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    isam said:

    BobaFett said:

    @SeanT - The London property market dropped precipitously five or six years back if I remember. At that time one of my fellow directors picked up a four bedroomed, four storey house in Tufnell Park - fully habitable, but in need of a bit of work - for £650,000. He's added about £1 million to that since.

    The thing about 0207 London, at least, is that when there is a fall the bounce-back is always pretty swift - so opportunities are fleeting but the rewards are huge. It's great swathes of 0208 and the surrounds that are always worst and longest hit.

    There is no such thing as 0207 and 0208 London. The code for London is 020.

    There are leading 8s in inner London and leading 3s.

    There is no boundary between the two and a mix all over.

    The code for London is simply 020.
    At the risk of re opening a can of worms, anybody who has lived in London for more that 15 years or so would know exactly what @SouthamObserver means, even if there are anomalies that make it factually incorrect. Only someone who wasn't really from London, or was a teenager maybe, would make the point you just did
    Perception is more powerful than reality - the 0207 and 0208 'divide' is still widely perceived. Though I guess 0208 number owners are more prone to dispute it......

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    edited April 2014
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    SeanT said:

    As someone says top o' the thread, Labour should be hiring gurus to win the Scottish referendum, not the bloody GE.

    If Scotland votes YES, Ed Miliband will lose 40 seats, either by 2015 or by 2016 (along with much of his party's talent and money) and no spinmeister is gonna make up for that.

    It is bizarre how Labour are trotting along as if everything is fine in the North. Reminds me of Game of Thrones...

    It is people who voted Labour in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 2010 in Scotland, some of whom voted SNP in 2011 who will determine the IndyRef.
    And yet, somehow, some on here seem to think that its Cameron who is best placed to persuade these people.......
    Yep, that would be me and I have acknowledged the problem. But he is the PM and the leader of the Labour party is an English dork who does not seem to be interested.
    There is another, who, unlike yourself, is profoundly ignorant of things Scottish, yet can only blame Cameron when clearly its Labour voters and Labour campaigning that's the problem.

    The last poll had Scots Tories 85% 'no' - I'm not sure there is much more that can be done with them. Its the DE Labour voter, who, as you astutely observe, a North London Policy wonk is not best equipped to reach.....why hasn't Miliband called up John Reid? I expect that's Cameron's fault too.......
    LOL, 85% of next to next is next to nothing.
    In the last UK GE popular vote:

    Labour: 1,035,528
    SNP: 491,386
    LibD: 465,471
    Con: 412,855

    Also, more Tories say they will vote 'no' (82%) than SNP say they will vote 'Yes' (55%).......

    Do you want to work out which is the bigger number.....55% of 491,386, or 82% of 412,855.....
    I note you use the false UK GE numbers for your calculations. How does that work out using the real numbers from Holyrood 2011.
    55% of 902,915 or 85% of 276,652
    Thank you - as you point out, 276k is not next to nothing. It's just not massive (I had overestimated it by a few % I see).

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Doesn't Cyprus have lots of Russian cash? If so, (and I could be entirely wrong), wouldn't that mean it could be hit if more sanctions are imposed due to the Ukraine situation?
This discussion has been closed.