The only real growth (imo) comes from innovation and productivity and the biggest incentive for innovation and productivity comes from a labour shortage.
Or a big war.
I haven't given it much thought but in the end isn't that mostly just debt-based consumption?
Although I guess if you blow everything up then you'll likely get a productivity boost if you rebuild everything new afterwards (although you could do that without a war - get the RAF (if there was one) to blow up some random industry once a year and then rebuild it).
A war creates a labour shortage afterwards as well i guess so that would spur innovation.
Mr. Jones, I was thinking particularly of innovation. Consider the leaps and bounds in the application of science into technology that occurred during both WW1 and WW2. Pick any field and you'll find it jumped ahead during both conflicts. Even my own best loved subject, number theory, which Godfrey Hardy was celebrating as having no practical purpose in the inter-war years, found role in cryptology and computing during WW2.
Big wars may not advance pure science too much but they accelerate innovation because in such wars, for the West at least, its a case of innovate or die. Didn't someone say necessity is the mother of invention.
Fair point.
In that case maybe it's quite good WWIII is starting up
Bear in mind that Fisher is ONLY looking at how what you can deduce from opinion polls at this stage; you need to superimpose a political judgement on top of that to decide on the 'fair' odds.
That doesn't alter the main point I have to keep repeating: the polls, on past form, are likely to shift substantially over ten months, in either direction. However, they are more likely to shift in the Conservatives' direction. The key point is that the shift may be substantial, so it is foolish to extrapolate naively from the current polls.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
Socrates I know, but she does know how to get attention. Some quotes 'Liberal moms like soccer because it's a sport in which athletic talent finds so little expression that girls can play with boys. No serious sport is co-ed, even at the kindergarten level.'
'No other "sport" ends in as many scoreless ties as soccer. This was an actual marquee sign by the freeway in Long Beach, California, about a World Cup game last week: "2nd period, 11 minutes left, score: 0:0." Two hours later, another World Cup game was on the same screen: "1st period, 8 minutes left, score: 0:0." If Michael Jackson had treated his chronic insomnia with a tape of Argentina vs. Brazil instead of Propofol, he'd still be alive, although bored.'
'The prospect of either personal humiliation or major injury is required to count as a sport. Most sports are sublimated warfare. As Lady Thatcher reportedly said after Germany had beaten England in some major soccer game: 'Don't worry. After all, twice in this century we beat them at their national game.' Baseball and basketball present a constant threat of personal disgrace. In hockey, there are three or four fights a game — and it's not a stroll on beach to be on ice with a puck flying around at 100 miles per hour. After a football game, ambulances carry off the wounded. After a soccer game, every player gets a ribbon and a juice box.'
'I resent the force-fed aspect of soccer. The same people trying to push soccer on Americans are the ones demanding that we love HBO's "Girls," light-rail, Beyonce and Hillary Clinton. The number of New York Times articles claiming soccer is "catching on" is exceeded only by the ones pretending women's basketball is fascinating.'
'Soccer is like the metric system, which liberals also adore because it's European. Naturally, the metric system emerged from the French Revolution, during the brief intervals when they weren't committing mass murder by guillotine.'
Regarding QT and the Muslim terror... Anna SOUBRY talking about Muslim community leaders etc.. After 40 years of immigration there shouldn't be communities of immigrants that need leaders or spokesmen if mass immigration was successful ... That there is shows it was a failure
New definition of mid 30s Lab 37/38 is mid thirties
Con on 32/33 is mid thirties
CRRROOOSSSOOOOVVVVVEEEERRRRR
35% is mid-thirties. That's Labour's current average rating.
No its not the mean median and modal labour scores are all in excess of 35.
Can you provide your workings so i can disprove them
Labour currently poll 37% on average, with Yougov, 36% with Populus, 35% with Opinium, TNS, 34% with MORI and ConRes, 33% with Ashcroft, 32% with ICM. Looks like mid-thirties to me.
Regarding QT and the Muslim terror... Anna SOUBRY talking about Muslim community leaders etc.. After 40 years of immigration there shouldn't be communities of immigrants that need leaders or spokesmen if mass immigration was successful ... That there is shows it was a failure
Hear, hear.
And you have to hand it to the Lib Dem guy. Would any other member of that panel be prepared to retweet a Jesus & Mo cartoon?
By the same logic, there is no point in UKIP standing in FPTP Westminster elections. They do not get a seat because they are outvoted, and in the unlikely event of getting a handful of seats would still be outvoted by the major parties.
You either find common ground with others or sulk in splendid isolation.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
Its a leap to say that just because on this issue we may niot win we have no influence. What is a fact is that the Eurozone countries will drive to an ever closer union - that is their problem. We are not in the Euro so we need to negotiate a different relationship. Cameron is right to set his stall out now. Labour could have stopped all this by calling for a referendum on Lisbon - the electorate have to decide if they want labour back in charge at a time like this.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
The practical difference is that you can have an impact next time. It turns out that "ignore the election and hope it goes away" is not an effective strategy for winning, but the British parties can use a different strategy next time. The place to start is that the Tories need to let their group run a candidate and take part in the debates - they probably won't win but you never know - and Labour need to make sure there's somebody to their liking in the primary, and if necessary nominate them.
Interesting that both Juncker and Jacques Delors [remember him?] are talking about a special status for the UK in the EU.
This could be a glimmer of a way out.
As I think I may have said before - I think something like this is inevitable. The eurzone is clearly a different situation now. They will have to be politically as wwell as monetarily closer. we are not in the Euro mand the best place to negotiate an arrangement with the EU is within in not having first left it.
I thought Question Time was decent - Nawaz spoke well, Prescott was more bearable than I thought he might be too. Nuttall's performance was alot better than when I saw him last.
Soubry.. hmm.. the style grates a touch but that might just be because I've backed Nick in Broxtowe
With Regards to Juncker, Britain is almost in a Northern Ireland situation in Europe right now in that the EPP only got about 200,000 votes as the Conservatives are also fairly non existant in NI but they form the Gov't for the mainland nevertheless.
The EPP could have at least made the effort to stick itself on the ballot in each GB region and not just London.
Richard Navabi We could join with Hungary, who will also vote against Juncker, and other non Eurozone countries like Sweden and Denmark, who have also expressed opposition to Juncker in the past, to form a new outer tier in the EU, not in the eurozone, but based more on the original common market, if not completely outside the EU like Switzerland and Norway
Richard Navabi We could join with Hungary, who will also vote against Juncker, and other non Eurozone countries like Sweden and Denmark, who have also expressed opposition to Juncker in the past, to form a new outer tier in the EU, not in the eurozone, but based more on the original common market, if not completely outside the EU like Switzerland and Norway
He's the president of the commission FFS, it's not like he's an all-powerful dictator who's going to force everyone to drink cognac for breakfast. These other countries have zero interest in being in an outer tier, especially over something like this.
Regarding QT and the Muslim terror... Anna SOUBRY talking about Muslim community leaders etc.. After 40 years of immigration there shouldn't be communities of immigrants that need leaders or spokesmen if mass immigration was successful ... That there is shows it was a failure
I agree:
"Multicultural policies have come to be seen as a means of empowering minority communities and giving them a voice. In reality such policies have empowered not individuals but "community leaders" who owe their position and influence largely to their relationship with the state. Multicultural policies tend to treat minority communities as homogenous wholes, ignoring class, religious, gender and other differences, and leaving many within those communities feeling misrepresented and, indeed, disenfranchised.
As well as ignoring conflicts within minority communities, multicultural policies have often created conflicts between them. In allocating political power and financial resources according to ethnicity, such policies have forced people to identify themselves in terms of those ethnicities, and those ethnicities alone, inevitably setting off one group against another."
Malik writes very thoughtfully on his blog on the issue, and I substantially agree. We should not be defining peoples politics by their background culture and ethnicity and religion in particular. It denies them their individuality and panders to the social conservatives. This is true of all cultures including traditional British ones, but is particularly problematic with muslim communities. If we define a young mans politics by his religion, can we really complain when he does the same?
That doesn't alter the main point I have to keep repeating: the polls, on past form, are likely to shift substantially over ten months, in either direction. However, they are more likely to shift in the Conservatives' direction. The key point is that the shift may be substantial, so it is foolish to extrapolate naively from the current polls.
Why do you think polls will shift substantially either way? It's dangerous to exrapolate anything from past election periods - the sample (of all postwar elections) is too small and each one had radically different conditions. The polls have been largely frozen for too long with both major parties at fairly low levels and the things that fill the daily press - Miliband and the bacon roll, Cameron and the criminal in Downing Street, the war of Juncker's ear - all get shrugged off. Even things which we'd think substantial, like good economic figures or a well-received budget don't do anything much.
Arguably that reflects two things. First, sadly, general disillusionment - many people think we're all a bit rubbish, so they just go with instinctive preference. Second, perhaps, the rise of UKIP gives people more real choice and less temptation to flit uneasily between parties.
Of course it's possible that some unforeseen event will produce a huge shift. But probably not. Currently we have Con -4 Lab +9 over the last election, a 6.5% swing. One can imagine that becoming a 3% swing or a 9% swing, more than that belies both the pattern and the settled opinion one meets on the doorsteps - I don't remember ever meeting fewer people who say they really haven't decided. How many of us here are not sure how they'll vote?
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
Only 8% could name him [Juncker] EU-wide. This is the supposed democratic legitimacy that means the UK gets completely ignored in the decision.
But the UK isn't being ignored. It's stated its disapproval of Juncker, it will vote against him, and has attempted to get other countries to vote likewise. At the end of the day there will be a vote in the European Council and if Juncker gets a qualified majority, he wins, and if he doesn't, he won't. The UK isn't being ignored. It's being outvoted.
What are the practical differences between being ignored and being outvoted? We have no influence in the EU. We'd lose nothing if we left.
The practical difference is that you can have an impact next time. It turns out that "ignore the election and hope it goes away" is not an effective strategy for winning, but the British parties can use a different strategy next time. The place to start is that the Tories need to let their group run a candidate and take part in the debates - they probably won't win but you never know - and Labour need to make sure there's somebody to their liking in the primary, and if necessary nominate them.
Better politicking may have stopped Juncker, but we'd have ended up with one federalist or another. All the slick backroom dealing in the world isn't going to make the rest of Europe nominate someone who isn't committed to every closer union. There's a fundamentally different vision between us and the continent, and its not reconcilable.
EdinTokyo But after Sweden and Denmark voted against the Euro in their referendums and we stayed out along with a few Eastern European nations still in the EU like Hungary a two tier EU of eurozone and non eurozone nations is inevitable
BTW, Colindale takes a long time because it's a 3-member ward - all those people who Lab/Green/Con or some other unlikely combination need to be totted up separately. Turnout is 27.8%, about par for the course for a local by-election. Amber Valley should come first.
I thought Question Time was decent - Nawaz spoke well, Prescott was more bearable than I thought he might be too. Nuttall's performance was alot better than when I saw him last.
Soubry.. hmm.. the style grates a touch but that might just be because I've backed Nick in Broxtowe
With Regards to Juncker, Britain is almost in a Northern Ireland situation in Europe right now in that the EPP only got about 200,000 votes as the Conservatives are also fairly non existant in NI but they form the Gov't for the mainland nevertheless.
The EPP could have at least made the effort to stick itself on the ballot in each GB region and not just London.
Sorry, I wasn't paying attention at the time - who exactly was Cameron proposing for EU President during the euro-elections?
The only real growth (imo) comes from innovation and productivity and the biggest incentive for innovation and productivity comes from a labour shortage.
Or a big war.
I haven't given it much thought but in the end isn't that mostly just debt-based consumption?
Although I guess if you blow everything up then you'll likely get a productivity boost if you rebuild everything new afterwards (although you could do that without a war - get the RAF (if there was one) to blow up some random industry once a year and then rebuild it).
A war creates a labour shortage afterwards as well i guess so that would spur innovation.
Mr. Jones, I was thinking particularly of innovation. Consider the leaps and bounds in the application of science into technology that occurred during both WW1 and WW2. Pick any field and you'll find it jumped ahead during both conflicts. Even my own best loved subject, number theory, which Godfrey Hardy was celebrating as having no practical purpose in the inter-war years, found role in cryptology and computing during WW2.
Big wars may not advance pure science too much but they accelerate innovation because in such wars, for the West at least, its a case of innovate or die. Didn't someone say necessity is the mother of invention.
Fair point.
In that case maybe it's quite good WWIII is starting up
can't we have more porn as the driver of innovation instead?
NoOffenceAlan The ECR, of which the Tories are the biggest component, were stupid not to nominate a candidate for the Presidency as they are now the 3rd largest group in the EU Parliament after the elections
Richard Navabi We could join with Hungary, who will also vote against Juncker, and other non Eurozone countries like Sweden and Denmark, who have also expressed opposition to Juncker in the past, to form a new outer tier in the EU, not in the eurozone, but based more on the original common market, if not completely outside the EU like Switzerland and Norway
Thee's a difference between "could" (it's feasible), "may" (it's permissible), "likely" (it's probable) and "will" (it's certain). It's entirely possible we could form such a group, but it's not likely. Although both are somewhat distanced from the core European project, their proximity to Germany is a factor. Germany is an enormous source of imports/exports and has local hegemony: from memory, it is the biggest trading partner of eight of its neighbouring countries, including (perhaps surprisingly) Sweden, even tho' the Baltic separates them. So I don't think Sweden nor Denmark (Denmark has a land border with Germany) will leave.
As for Hungary...well, chance would be a fine thing, but it won't leave until it's kicked out...which it won't be.
But as for the "outer tier": it would be a stable solution that would satisfy many, but reading Juncker's mission statement (http://juncker.epp.eu/my-priorities ) gave me pause. His approach would be to treat the UK as a special case, recognising it as an anomaly. That's not a two-tier solution, it's a 27+1 solution. Should, (say) Sweden want changes, then that would be dealt with in likewise manner - i.e. individually, not part of a larger outer tier. So then we'd have 26+1+1, not 26+2. This may seem similar, but it's not the same thing
viewcode Juncker may go down that route initially, but once one wants changes and then changes are granted to another, inevitably those countries granted change will be closer together
Comments
In that case maybe it's quite good WWIII is starting up
Con Maj: Fisher34%, Betfair 26%
Hung: Fisher 47%, Betfair 44%
Lab Maj: Fisher 19%, Betfair 30%
Bear in mind that Fisher is ONLY looking at how what you can deduce from opinion polls at this stage; you need to superimpose a political judgement on top of that to decide on the 'fair' odds.
That doesn't alter the main point I have to keep repeating: the polls, on past form, are likely to shift substantially over ten months, in either direction. However, they are more likely to shift in the Conservatives' direction. The key point is that the shift may be substantial, so it is foolish to extrapolate naively from the current polls.
'Liberal moms like soccer because it's a sport in which athletic talent finds so little expression that girls can play with boys. No serious sport is co-ed, even at the kindergarten level.'
'No other "sport" ends in as many scoreless ties as soccer. This was an actual marquee sign by the freeway in Long Beach, California, about a World Cup game last week: "2nd period, 11 minutes left, score: 0:0." Two hours later, another World Cup game was on the same screen: "1st period, 8 minutes left, score: 0:0." If Michael Jackson had treated his chronic insomnia with a tape of Argentina vs. Brazil instead of Propofol, he'd still be alive, although bored.'
'The prospect of either personal humiliation or major injury is required to count as a sport. Most sports are sublimated warfare. As Lady Thatcher reportedly said after Germany had beaten England in some major soccer game: 'Don't worry. After all, twice in this century we beat them at their national game.' Baseball and basketball present a constant threat of personal disgrace. In hockey, there are three or four fights a game — and it's not a stroll on beach to be on ice with a puck flying around at 100 miles per hour. After a football game, ambulances carry off the wounded. After a soccer game, every player gets a ribbon and a juice box.'
'I resent the force-fed aspect of soccer. The same people trying to push soccer on Americans are the ones demanding that we love HBO's "Girls," light-rail, Beyonce and Hillary Clinton. The number of New York Times articles claiming soccer is "catching on" is exceeded only by the ones pretending women's basketball is fascinating.'
'Soccer is like the metric system, which liberals also adore because it's European. Naturally, the metric system emerged from the French Revolution, during the brief intervals when they weren't committing mass murder by guillotine.'
And you have to hand it to the Lib Dem guy. Would any other member of that panel be prepared to retweet a Jesus & Mo cartoon?
You either find common ground with others or sulk in splendid isolation.
The Tory I dislike the most... She is like a 1950s hammy actress... Utterly unconvincing
Labour could have stopped all this by calling for a referendum on Lisbon - the electorate have to decide if they want labour back in charge at a time like this.
This could be a glimmer of a way out.
Soubry.. hmm.. the style grates a touch but that might just be because I've backed Nick in Broxtowe
With Regards to Juncker, Britain is almost in a Northern Ireland situation in Europe right now in that the EPP only got about 200,000 votes as the Conservatives are also fairly non existant in NI but they form the Gov't for the mainland nevertheless.
The EPP could have at least made the effort to stick itself on the ballot in each GB region and not just London.
If we are expected to vote Out, what will, if any, be the effect on Scottish independence vote?
"Multicultural policies have come to be seen as a means of empowering minority communities and giving them a voice. In reality such policies have empowered not individuals but "community leaders" who owe their position and influence largely to their relationship with the state. Multicultural policies tend to treat minority communities as homogenous wholes, ignoring class, religious, gender and other differences, and leaving many within those communities feeling misrepresented and, indeed, disenfranchised.
As well as ignoring conflicts within minority communities, multicultural policies have often created conflicts between them. In allocating political power and financial resources according to ethnicity, such policies have forced people to identify themselves in terms of those ethnicities, and those ethnicities alone, inevitably setting off one group against another."
From http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/mar/17/multiculturalism-diversity-political-policy
Malik writes very thoughtfully on his blog on the issue, and I substantially agree. We should not be defining peoples politics by their background culture and ethnicity and religion in particular. It denies them their individuality and panders to the social conservatives. This is true of all cultures including traditional British ones, but is particularly problematic with muslim communities. If we define a young mans politics by his religion, can we really complain when he does the same?
Arguably that reflects two things. First, sadly, general disillusionment - many people think we're all a bit rubbish, so they just go with instinctive preference. Second, perhaps, the rise of UKIP gives people more real choice and less temptation to flit uneasily between parties.
Of course it's possible that some unforeseen event will produce a huge shift. But probably not. Currently we have Con -4 Lab +9 over the last election, a 6.5% swing. One can imagine that becoming a 3% swing or a 9% swing, more than that belies both the pattern and the settled opinion one meets on the doorsteps - I don't remember ever meeting fewer people who say they really haven't decided. How many of us here are not sure how they'll vote?
"Come on, Tim!"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/10929321/Wimbledon-women-forced-to-go-bra-less-due-to-all-white-rule-clampdown.html
Has the telegraph been hacked?
I had heard that the digital edition of the telegraph was in turmoil though. Is this what they meant?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4xQfe41OrQ
As for Hungary...well, chance would be a fine thing, but it won't leave until it's kicked out...which it won't be.
But as for the "outer tier": it would be a stable solution that would satisfy many, but reading Juncker's mission statement (http://juncker.epp.eu/my-priorities ) gave me pause. His approach would be to treat the UK as a special case, recognising it as an anomaly. That's not a two-tier solution, it's a 27+1 solution. Should, (say) Sweden want changes, then that would be dealt with in likewise manner - i.e. individually, not part of a larger outer tier. So then we'd have 26+1+1, not 26+2. This may seem similar, but it's not the same thing
Nagus NARENTHIRA (Labour Party Candidate) 2,190
Gill SARGEANT (Labour Party Candidate) 2,088
Zakia ZUBAIRI (Labour Party Candidate) 2,015
Nneka AKWAEZE (Conservative Party Candidate) 501
William NICHOLSON (Conservative Party Candidate) 466
Golnar BOKAEI (Conservative Party Candidate) 420
John BASKIN (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) 347
Barry RYAN (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) 309
Khalid KHAN (UK Independence Party (UKIP)) 268
Daniel ESTERMANN (Liberal Democrat) 133
Maggie CURATI (Green Party) 130
Andrew NEWBY (Green Party) 114
Francesco MARASCO (Green Party) 108
Victor CORNEY (Liberal Democrat) 90
Sabriye WARSAME (Liberal Democrat) 87
LAB - 66.3% (+10.8)
CON - 15.2% (-4.9)
UKIP - 10.5% (+10.5)
LDEM - 4.0% (-14.6)
GRN - 3.9% (-1.8)
This means Labour have carried the Hendon constituency in this year's local elections by a margin of 286 votes, using top vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28042309