Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take LAB majority odds at 2-1 or longer – this is now a gre

13

Comments

  • Hugh said:

    Hugh said:

    This thread is a gem.

    A shining example of how the Tories need to change if they're ever to win a majority again.

    OK. I'll bite. Specifically what is about the comments on this thread that lead you to that conclusion?
    Can you really not see why the exchanges on this thread might give many people a poor impression of Tories?

    You all sound like a combination of Gordon Gekko and Marie Antoinette.

    The only reason voters might reject the Tories is down to class envy. That's my favourite.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Nowcasts are useless. Forecasts at least try to predict the future...

    Forecast 2015 Con leads from various models:-

    Byelection swingback: -1.2%
    TPO: 2.0%
    Fisher: 3.7%
    Prosser: 5.0%
    2009-2010 repeat: 5.8%
    L&N: 8.5%

    With the exception of swingback, the central probabilities for the other models are 0% for a Labour majority...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. Urquhart, I know Erdogan's most Islamist than the secular tradition of Turkey, but surely they know they're playing with fire? If ISIS gains all Syria and Iraq then Jordan and Lebanon may well be next. More than that, the whole of Turkey's southern border will be dominated by the most violent lunatics on the planet.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Smarmeron said:

    @Alanbrooke
    I was arguing about the rich getting exponentially more wealthy in terms of remuneration, while wanting those below them in the company to take below inflation wage increases.
    You seem to be wanting to make this into some other unrelated argument.
    If you earn you earn your money you should be able to keep it, but increasing the pay of a CEO when productivity is flat. or by making everyone else in the company poorer?
    You class that as "earning"?

    No I don't, not unless the results justify it.

    And nor do I class raising public sector fancy roles on six figure salaries as justifiable.

    If your beef is top salaries then governments have to stop top salary pay rises in the public sector and boards have to do their jobs of restraining pay and basing it on results in the private.

    If you want to see low wages rise you have to train people with basic skills and restrict immigtation.

    Labour in it's terms of office did neither so why are they shouting about it now ?
  • Smarmeron said:

    @SouthamObserver
    I can almost guarantee you are an Apple "fan boy".
    ;-)

    I have had iPhones forced on me at work, but otherwise no. I just follow the generic/proprietary thing as part of my job. Obviously, the difference is minimal - but there can be one.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    Hugh said:

    Hugh said:

    This thread is a gem.

    A shining example of how the Tories need to change if they're ever to win a majority again.

    OK. I'll bite. Specifically what is about the comments on this thread that lead you to that conclusion?
    Can you really not see why the exchanges on this thread might give many people a poor impression of Tories?

    You all sound like a combination of Gordon Gekko and Marie Antoinette.

    The only reason voters might reject the Tories is down to class envy. That's my favourite.

    Class prejudice, Southam. Get it right.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Morris_Dancer
    You would have assumed at some point preceding WW2 that people would have spotted that the Nazis were going to be a problem, but a fair few of our leaders appear to have been quite in favour of that Mr, Hitler.
    Nothing much changes.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Smarmeron said:

    @OldKingCole
    It's the same with most things, take aspirin as an example. There is no difference between branded and unbranded except price, but people will swear the more expensive ones are "better"

    Quite. Spent years trying to convince GP’s that that was the case!
    Mr. Cole, I think we have spoken about this issue a few weeks ago. I am far from convinced that all brands of the same drug are actually identical. Personal experience and talking to clinicians is actually leading me to the opposite conclusion. To be blunt, Mr Smarmeron's statement that there is no difference between branded and non-branded drugs except price may actually be, in some cases, false.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376

    Mr. Gin, Mr. Burdett was on Twitter a day or two ago, lambasting me [in a silly way] for playing up to stereotypes (I'd stated I'd been very productive, and if I became any more efficient I would transmogrify into a German engineer).

    Thanks Morris. Sounds like he's doing OK then. That's good news. :)

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Some on the left clearly support genocide:

    @pleb68 Just retweet this poster. It clearly says UAF ay the top right corner. pic.twitter.com/a0dM0ailJi

    — Tim Allen (@tims50ave_tim) August 21, 2014

    It will be up to the UAF to deny this poster, and they haven't yet.
    That's a very poor fake.

    The UAF had a demonstration in Tower Hamlets in 2013, same date and time except on Saturday September 7th - and you can clearly see that the "6" in the date on that poster is a poor paste job in a different font.

    Pathetic, but you believe it because you want to.
    It may well be a fake, but UAF haven't denied it.
    The obviousness of the fake is there for all to see. Anyone with any hint of critical thinking skills should be able to work it out without UAF needing to go to the trouble of dignifying it with a denial.

    The poster for the anti-EDL demo is here. Look at the consistency of font used. Compare it with the pathetic fake who could not even be bothered to match font.

    You so desperately want it to be true that you apply no critical thinking at all.

    You're embarrassing yourself.
    Good to know that you are a supporter, and probably a member of Unite Against fascism, an organisation which is itself fascistic; which is anti-semitic, loves supporting Islamism, a brother to the Socialist Workers Party and loves burning US and Israeli flags at the drop of a hat.
  • Hugh said:

    Hugh said:

    This thread is a gem.

    A shining example of how the Tories need to change if they're ever to win a majority again.

    OK. I'll bite. Specifically what is about the comments on this thread that lead you to that conclusion?
    Can you really not see why the exchanges on this thread might give many people a poor impression of Tories?

    You all sound like a combination of Gordon Gekko and Marie Antoinette.

    The only reason voters might reject the Tories is down to class envy. That's my favourite.

    Class prejudice, Southam. Get it right.

    Apologies, Richard. You're right - there can be no other conceivable explanation.

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    RodCrosby said:

    Nowcasts are useless. Forecasts at least try to predict the future...

    Forecast 2015 Con leads from various models:-

    Byelection swingback: -1.2%
    TPO: 2.0%
    Fisher: 3.7%
    Prosser: 5.0%
    2009-2010 repeat: 5.8%
    L&N: 8.5%

    With the exception of swingback, the central probabilities for the other models are 0% for a Labour majority...

    I love you Rod. Literally splitting sides. You should have been pb poster of the year 2010, but don't you feel all this stuff starts to look like those economic models where things that were supposed to happen every 10,000 years were happening every week?
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @HurstLlama
    Aspirin is salicylic acid, can you tell me the difference between branded and unbranded?
    You seem to be doing your usual by the way, I use aspirin as an example, and you start waffling on about other drugs of which I made no claim.
    (I don't mind that much, pretty much standard fare on PB)
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    RodCrosby said:

    Nowcasts are useless. Forecasts at least try to predict the future...

    Forecast 2015 Con leads from various models:-

    Byelection swingback: -1.2%
    TPO: 2.0%
    Fisher: 3.7%
    Prosser: 5.0%
    2009-2010 repeat: 5.8%
    L&N: 8.5%

    With the exception of swingback, the central probabilities for the other models are 0% for a Labour majority...

    Lol
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,044
    hucks67 said:

    Between April and July government borrowing was £10 billion more than the same period the previous year. There are also signs that some consumer spending is lower. Will the UK economy be slowing down in the run up to the election ? I think this is a real possibility, with other countries experiencing reduced growth.

    Its actually only £1.8bn, the other higher figure takes into account the funny money from the Bank of England.

    Even then I don't think this year's deficit target is achievable. We're already too far behind.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Some on the left clearly support genocide:

    @pleb68 Just retweet this poster. It clearly says UAF ay the top right corner. pic.twitter.com/a0dM0ailJi

    — Tim Allen (@tims50ave_tim) August 21, 2014

    It will be up to the UAF to deny this poster, and they haven't yet.
    That's a very poor fake.

    The UAF had a demonstration in Tower Hamlets in 2013, same date and time except on Saturday September 7th - and you can clearly see that the "6" in the date on that poster is a poor paste job in a different font.

    Pathetic, but you believe it because you want to.
    It may well be a fake, but UAF haven't denied it.
    The obviousness of the fake is there for all to see. Anyone with any hint of critical thinking skills should be able to work it out without UAF needing to go to the trouble of dignifying it with a denial.

    The poster for the anti-EDL demo is here. Look at the consistency of font used. Compare it with the pathetic fake who could not even be bothered to match font.

    You so desperately want it to be true that you apply no critical thinking at all.

    You're embarrassing yourself.
    Good to know that you are a supporter, and probably a member of Unite Against fascism, an organisation which is itself fascistic; which is anti-semitic, loves supporting Islamism, a brother to the Socialist Workers Party and loves burning US and Israeli flags at the drop of a hat.I have a commitment to reality that you appear to lack. Why can't you simply admit that you have made a mistake and made yourself look like a credulous twerp?

    As it happens, I am quite proud of my US flag, for which I have a certificate certifying that it was flown above the US Capitol building. My grandmother fled Nazi Austria just before the war, and never saw her Jewish mother again, so I will take no lectures on anti-semitism from anyone.

    I'll save off from "denying" your other accusations so that you can comfort yourself with the absence of such a denial.
  • MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    Some on the left clearly support genocide:

    @pleb68 Just retweet this poster. It clearly says UAF ay the top right corner. pic.twitter.com/a0dM0ailJi

    — Tim Allen (@tims50ave_tim) August 21, 2014

    It will be up to the UAF to deny this poster, and they haven't yet.
    That's a very poor fake.

    The UAF had a demonstration in Tower Hamlets in 2013, same date and time except on Saturday September 7th - and you can clearly see that the "6" in the date on that poster is a poor paste job in a different font.

    Pathetic, but you believe it because you want to.
    It may well be a fake, but UAF haven't denied it.
    The obviousness of the fake is there for all to see. Anyone with any hint of critical thinking skills should be able to work it out without UAF needing to go to the trouble of dignifying it with a denial.

    The poster for the anti-EDL demo is here. Look at the consistency of font used. Compare it with the pathetic fake who could not even be bothered to match font.

    You so desperately want it to be true that you apply no critical thinking at all.

    You're embarrassing yourself.
    Good to know that you are a supporter, and probably a member of Unite Against fascism, an organisation which is itself fascistic; which is anti-semitic, loves supporting Islamism, a brother to the Socialist Workers Party and loves burning US and Israeli flags at the drop of a hat.



    Spot on. How dare Oblitus point out you're talking crap. It must mean he hates America, Jews and Israel.

  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    Aspirin is salicylic acid, can you tell me the difference between branded and unbranded?
    You seem to be doing your usual by the way, I use aspirin as an example, and you start waffling on about other drugs of which I made no claim.
    (I don't mind that much, pretty much standard fare on PB)

    Mr. S., I think you are doing me an injustice. Perhaps I misread your, first post on the subject. If I did then I apologise. I thought you were talking about branded and unbranded drugs, Mr. Cole certainly was and it was to him I was replying and not to you.

    My apologies if I have offended you in anyway.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited August 2014
    Lidl is now appearing in weekly Grocer analysis. "found that it sold a basket of common groceries for 29% cheaper than Tesco."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2728701/Lidl-throws-gauntlet-rivals.html

    There is now little stigma attached to shopping in Lidl and Aldi. Just amazed at how ripped off we have been.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @HurstLlama
    No offense taken, it is easy to misread things and then fly off at a tangent.
  • Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    Aspirin is salicylic acid, can you tell me the difference between branded and unbranded?
    You seem to be doing your usual by the way, I use aspirin as an example, and you start waffling on about other drugs of which I made no claim.
    (I don't mind that much, pretty much standard fare on PB)

    Mr. S., I think you are doing me an injustice. Perhaps I misread your, first post on the subject. If I did then I apologise. I thought you were talking about branded and unbranded drugs, Mr. Cole certainly was and it was to him I was replying and not to you.

    My apologies if I have offended you in anyway.

    I thought Smarmeron was talking about drugs in general too. God knows why having reread his original post.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    SeanT said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @OldKingCole
    It's the same with most things, take aspirin as an example. There is no difference between branded and unbranded except price, but people will swear the more expensive ones are "better"

    They may be slightly better as generics will usually meet minimum standards only.

    Generic Viagra (i.e. sildenafil citrate) is not as good as the branded Pfizer blue diamond tablets, as myself, and several friends, have discovered
    and neither of them stand up compared to taladafil and vardenafil...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Lidl is now appearing in weekly Grocer analysis. "found that it sold a basket of common groceries for 29% cheaper than Tesco."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2728701/Lidl-throws-gauntlet-rivals.html

    There is now little stigma attached to shopping in Lidl and Aldi. Just amazed at how ripped off we have been.

    Lidl is great if you want to buy what they want to sell. I rarely do.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?
  • Lidl is now appearing in weekly Grocer analysis. "found that it sold a basket of common groceries for 29% cheaper than Tesco."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2728701/Lidl-throws-gauntlet-rivals.html

    There is now little stigma attached to shopping in Lidl and Aldi. Just amazed at how ripped off we have been.

    Was there ever a stigma. Choice is the issue mostly. They're great with what they have, but they have comparatively little in my experience. And you can't pay by credit card.

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TCPoliticalBetting
    My favourite is the ambient music played in some supermarkets, that they use to subliminally modify your shopping habits.
    The way the store is laid out, is also a source of amusement once you understand the principles.
    (you should really shop in "reverse" order to maximize your money)
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Far from "crossover" we are seeing Labour "pullaway".It's like watching Frankel in the final furlong.
  • Actually I think the lefties here on PB do have a point about pay differentials.

    But governments of both stripes repeatedly fail to address rent seeking. Labour promote it in the public sector and Tories then fail to trim it back. And vice versa in the private sector (esp financial services).

    I don't give a damn WTF Branson pays himself - I'm not paying. But council bosses and bank CEOs whose failures I backstop with my taxes should have their packages controlled to reflect the risks they take and the value they add.
  • currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    It's a Hung Parliament for me and has been since around July 2010.

  • Hugh said:



    You all sound like a combination of Gordon Gekko and Marie Antoinette.

    I am not a destroyer of Energy companies. I am a liberator of them!

    The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Ed, for lack of a better word, is good. Ed is right, Ed works. Ed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the (R)evolutionary spirit. Ed, in all of his forms; Ed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Ed, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK.

    Thank you very much.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited August 2014
    Wowsers just seen a sample of the alleged messages between Moody and Mackay. When I first heard I thought here we go again with tasteless sexist jokes ala Keys and Gray, however totally different level.

    If they are accurate, and they are printed on Telegraph website, those two are never going to be able to work in football again.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2014

    Mr. Urquhart, I know Erdogan's most Islamist than the secular tradition of Turkey, but surely they know they're playing with fire? If ISIS gains all Syria and Iraq then Jordan and Lebanon may well be next. More than that, the whole of Turkey's southern border will be dominated by the most violent lunatics on the planet.

    Have you read the latest reports?

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-considers-turkey-to-be-official-target-for-spying-a-986656.html

    http://www.todayszaman.com/national_new-evidence-of-erdogans-secret-meeting-with-al-qadi-emerges_355836.html

    "A number of new snapshots from a video surveillance camera were leaked on Friday in a Turkish daily, documenting secret meetings attended by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Yasin al-Qadi -- a Saudi businessman who is on the US Treasury Department's “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” (SDGT) list -- and Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan."

    So Turkey is in what category in relation with the west and islamic terrorism, ally or enemy?
    I suspect that officially its a western ally, but western governments know that in reality its a western enemy.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078

    Lidl is now appearing in weekly Grocer analysis. "found that it sold a basket of common groceries for 29% cheaper than Tesco."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2728701/Lidl-throws-gauntlet-rivals.html

    There is now little stigma attached to shopping in Lidl and Aldi. Just amazed at how ripped off we have been.

    Was there ever a stigma. Choice is the issue mostly. They're great with what they have, but they have comparatively little in my experience. And you can't pay by credit card.

    Lidl is especially good for fruit,veg and salad.Because of our membership of the EU,we can get all sorts of European produce.Not as good as fresh from a tree in Crete I grant you,,but good quality,and cheaper.(I worked on the fruit and veg at the a Co-op I helped establish and was mentored by an expert).

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Can't have this tip at all. Labour have barely got a majority on current polling.

    Mike's obsession with the LD ---> Lab switchers (who I'd agree are important and likely quite sticky) is blinding him to other realities, such as what has happened to the Lab voters in 2010.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,114
    edited August 2014
    SeanT said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @OldKingCole
    It's the same with most things, take aspirin as an example. There is no difference between branded and unbranded except price, but people will swear the more expensive ones are "better"

    They may be slightly better as generics will usually meet minimum standards only.

    Generic Viagra (i.e. sildenafil citrate) is not as good as the branded Pfizer blue diamond tablets, as myself, and several friends, have discovered
    Who needs Viagra when I have Rachel to get my blood pumping :)

    (OMG did I just press "send"???)
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    hucks67 said:

    Between April and July government borrowing was £10 billion more than the same period the previous year. There are also signs that some consumer spending is lower. Will the UK economy be slowing down in the run up to the election ? I think this is a real possibility, with other countries experiencing reduced growth.

    No, all the UK forward indicators are very strong, bodes well for Labour's continued slide in the polls.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,114
    edited August 2014
    RodCrosby said:


    With the exception of swingback, the central probabilities for the other models are 0% for a Labour majority...

    "So you're telling me there's a chance....

    "YEEEEEAAAAAHHHH!"

    - Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber
  • JonCisBackJonCisBack Posts: 911
    Why do i have to create a new account every time I come back to this site after a few months? Even resetting my password doesn;t let me log in...interesting different failure modes in Chrome and IE as well

    Anyway

    GE coming up next year, how exciting for aprt-time political anorak. Except I don't really want anyone to win. The big argument in 2010 was whether to eliminate the deficit in 1 parliament (Tories) or halve it (Labour). I said at the time that ironically the tories would probably only manage to halve it anyway, yet amazingly they don't even look like they are going to do that. Despite all the "cuts" public spending continues to rise and the deficit is stuck.

    The economy is growing we are told, but as far as i can see it's mainly reflected in house price growth which is terrible news for my children, and not wage growth, which is bad news for everyone else. Structurally I very much doubt things are fixed in any way.

    So what exactly is the attraction of voting tory? Big fat Meh from me.

    Labour offer nothing at all, waffle and ineptitude. Lib Dems have not, unlike for most people, gone down in my estimation, but nether have they gone up from their low base. UKIP are like the worst bits of my Dad after a few drinks.

    None of the above it is for now!
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    The worst thing I experienced opening a foodstore was the waste of good food that was thrown away.The manager said he was expected to have full shelves all the time which meant he over-ordered.It broke my heart to throw out a skip load of sliced bread in a poor part of town.One million people at Foodbanks-can't someone join up the dots?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24603008
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Khalid Mahmood, the MP for Perry Barr in Birmingham speaks out and it's quite revealing.

    http://www.newsweek.com/twice-many-british-muslims-fighting-isis-armed-forces-265865
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Speedy said:

    Mr. Urquhart, I know Erdogan's most Islamist than the secular tradition of Turkey, but surely they know they're playing with fire? If ISIS gains all Syria and Iraq then Jordan and Lebanon may well be next. More than that, the whole of Turkey's southern border will be dominated by the most violent lunatics on the planet.

    Have you read the latest reports?

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-considers-turkey-to-be-official-target-for-spying-a-986656.html

    http://www.todayszaman.com/national_new-evidence-of-erdogans-secret-meeting-with-al-qadi-emerges_355836.html

    "A number of new snapshots from a video surveillance camera were leaked on Friday in a Turkish daily, documenting secret meetings attended by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Yasin al-Qadi -- a Saudi businessman who is on the US Treasury Department's “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” (SDGT) list -- and Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan."

    So Turkey is in what category in relation with the west and islamic terrorism, ally or enemy?
    I suspect that officially its a western ally, but western governments know that in reality its a western enemy.
    Kurds might be the key here. Traditional foreign policy for the last couple of decades was that the Kurds are an oppressed minority when being bombed by Saddam but ruthless terrorists when being bombed by Turkey.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496

    Lidl is now appearing in weekly Grocer analysis. "found that it sold a basket of common groceries for 29% cheaper than Tesco."

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2728701/Lidl-throws-gauntlet-rivals.html

    There is now little stigma attached to shopping in Lidl and Aldi. Just amazed at how ripped off we have been.

    Lidl is great if you want to buy what they want to sell. I rarely do.
    Same as Aldi, good for beer if very limited choice. I want organic meat and vegs so no use for me. I cannot be bothered going to multiple shops either so if they don't do my main items I would not normally go there.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,376
    edited August 2014

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    That is absolutely stark-raving bonkers.

    How many hours a week do people run a vacuum cleaner for? Not enough for the power rating of the motor to have a measurable impact on household power consumption, that's for sure.
    We must be the first generation in history that's actually going backwards in terms of it's advancement and progress.

    The overall message these day's seems to be that we must substitute the best that modern technology can give us for things that are inferior. In that way lies ruin for society and the economy, IMO.

    Of course, the other point is that so many of these measures are counter productive. OK, from 1st September hoovers will be less powerful and use less energy, but quite obviously people will be using them more because they will do an inferior job. So net result might be that people finish up using MORE energy doing the hoovering not less.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    £16.8M for Mario Balotelli AC Milan -> Liverpool

    Oh my
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    FalseFlag said:

    hucks67 said:

    Between April and July government borrowing was £10 billion more than the same period the previous year. There are also signs that some consumer spending is lower. Will the UK economy be slowing down in the run up to the election ? I think this is a real possibility, with other countries experiencing reduced growth.

    No, all the UK forward indicators are very strong, bodes well for Labour's continued slide in the polls.
    This is the current prediction from Electoral Calculus. Labours polling has recently edged up slightly.

    Current Prediction: Labour majority 40
    Party 2010 Votes 2010 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
    CON 36.97% 307 32.65% 257
    LAB 29.66% 258 35.52% 345
    LIB 23.56% 57 7.90% 17
    UKIP 3.17% 0 13.65% 0
    NAT 2.26% 9 2.78% 12
    MIN 4.37% 19 7.50% 19
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    RodCrosby said:

    Nowcasts are useless. Forecasts at least try to predict the future...

    Forecast 2015 Con leads from various models:-

    Byelection swingback: -1.2%
    TPO: 2.0%
    Fisher: 3.7%
    Prosser: 5.0%
    2009-2010 repeat: 5.8%
    L&N: 8.5%

    With the exception of swingback, the central probabilities for the other models are 0% for a Labour majority...

    Just like those economists that make models as usefull in predicting the economy as those named Claudia Schiffer, your L&N model would be as good in predicting elections as the train one:

    http://appalachianrailroadmodeling.com/models/ln-models/
  • £16.8M for Mario Balotelli AC Milan -> Liverpool

    Oh my

    You would have thought Liverpool would have had enough of having total nutters on their books.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    I'm too busy to step into the fray today, but here's a link re the Ferguson shooting that's quite interesting: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cell-phone-video-emerges-refutes-st-louis-cops-version-shooting/

    Time, I think, for all police officers (in the UK, etc.) to wear cameras as a matter of course. It should both increase conviction rates and improve police behaviour.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Anorak said:

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    The EU is stopping you making a bad choice that impacts the planet.

    A good directive. Well done EU.
    Yes, but it's my choice. It's the start of the (admittedly long) road where at the end the only car you're allowed to buy is a zero-emission Lada.
    And I'm glad your choice is being cutailed by sensible legislation to help safeguard the planet.

    More sense (than the usual Europhobe knee jerk reaction) on this here:

    http://www.jonworth.eu/vacuum-cleaners-in-the-eu-when-technocratic-decisions-overshadow-politics/
  • Mucho apologies for posting something Scottish on a non-Jock day.

    The row over the pound killed off Yes Scotland's hopes for gaining momentum after the last debate between Salmond and Darling.

    I wonder if this might do the same for next week too (Next debate is the 25th)?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11046740/Sir-Ian-Wood-15-years-of-oil-left-before-independent-Scotland-spending-cuts.html


    "The North Sea most eminent oil and gas tycoon has delivered a devastating blow to Alex Salmond’s independence campaign by warning there are only 15 years of reserves left before its decline starts wreaking major damage on the Scottish economy.


    "Sir Ian Wood, who has been praised by both David Cameron and Mr Salmond as the industry’s foremost expert, said the First Minister was overestimating the remaining reserves by between 45 per cent and 60 per cent.


    "He said the industry’s projected decline means “the case is heavily weighted towards Scotland remaining in the UK” and he was speaking out to ensure young Scots voting in the referendum knew there would be little production by the time they are middle aged."


    Sir Ian Wood is very very credible on this issue and has a pretty high profile up here. Darling is bound to focus on this. Oil is pretty fundamental to the economic case for independence (to say the least). And focusing on the prospects of the younger generation is an astute move, given that women are still very wary of Salmond and his broad-brush approach.

    Basically time is running out for Yes to generate momentum. If Better Together can continue to push sticks into their bicycle wheels they will struggle to get over the 50%+1 finishing line.

  • currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    Actually I think the consensus is it'll be a tightly hung parliament - but 'who knows' which way on total votes and MP counts. Who then gets to be PM is a bit complicated and political.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    hucks67 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    hucks67 said:

    Between April and July government borrowing was £10 billion more than the same period the previous year. There are also signs that some consumer spending is lower. Will the UK economy be slowing down in the run up to the election ? I think this is a real possibility, with other countries experiencing reduced growth.

    No, all the UK forward indicators are very strong, bodes well for Labour's continued slide in the polls.
    This is the current prediction from Electoral Calculus. Labours polling has recently edged up slightly.

    Current Prediction: Labour majority 40
    Party 2010 Votes 2010 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
    CON 36.97% 307 32.65% 257
    LAB 29.66% 258 35.52% 345
    LIB 23.56% 57 7.90% 17
    UKIP 3.17% 0 13.65% 0
    NAT 2.26% 9 2.78% 12
    MIN 4.37% 19 7.50% 19
    Not a prediction. It's a nowcast.

    Nowcasts in 2009 were 'predicting' 100 seat Tory majorities, IIRC.

    Useless...
  • They compromised 953 bank accounts and took some £160,000, although they stole details from more than 60,000 accounts.

    The Romanian nationals, who operated from Harrow in north-west London, were jailed for between 21 and 64 months...

    The Dedicated Cheque and Plastic Crime Unit (DCPCU) said the cards recovered had a street value of £16m - based on the amount stolen on average from a compromised card,

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28879973

    Is that it? Steal £16 million worth, and you get couple of years in lock up.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    Patrick said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    Actually I think the consensus is it'll be a tightly hung parliament - but 'who knows' which way on total votes and MP counts. Who then gets to be PM is a bit complicated and political.
    If the LibDems end up on less than 10% (which seems an increasingly good bet) then a hung parliament is increasingly unlikely.

    Essentially, if you take 40 LibDem seats and share them between "The Big Two", then the range of outcomes that lead to a hung parliament is pretty narrow.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Mucho apologies for posting something Scottish on a non-Jock day.

    The row over the pound killed off Yes Scotland's hopes for gaining momentum after the last debate between Salmond and Darling.

    I wonder if this might do the same for next week too (Next debate is the 25th)?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11046740/Sir-Ian-Wood-15-years-of-oil-left-before-independent-Scotland-spending-cuts.html


    "The North Sea most eminent oil and gas tycoon has delivered a devastating blow to Alex Salmond’s independence campaign by warning there are only 15 years of reserves left before its decline starts wreaking major damage on the Scottish economy.


    "Sir Ian Wood, who has been praised by both David Cameron and Mr Salmond as the industry’s foremost expert, said the First Minister was overestimating the remaining reserves by between 45 per cent and 60 per cent.


    "He said the industry’s projected decline means “the case is heavily weighted towards Scotland remaining in the UK” and he was speaking out to ensure young Scots voting in the referendum knew there would be little production by the time they are middle aged."


    Sir Ian Wood is very very credible on this issue and has a pretty high profile up here. Darling is bound to focus on this. Oil is pretty fundamental to the economic case for independence (to say the least). And focusing on the prospects of the younger generation is an astute move, given that women are still very wary of Salmond and his broad-brush approach.

    Basically time is running out for Yes to generate momentum. If Better Together can continue to push sticks into their bicycle wheels they will struggle to get over the 50%+1 finishing line.

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-lost-treasure-of-the-deep/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608

    They compromised 953 bank accounts and took some £160,000, although they stole details from more than 60,000 accounts.

    The Romanian nationals, who operated from Harrow in north-west London, were jailed for between 21 and 64 months...

    The Dedicated Cheque and Plastic Crime Unit (DCPCU) said the cards recovered had a street value of £16m - based on the amount stolen on average from a compromised card,

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28879973

    Is that it? Steal £16 million worth, and you get couple of years in lock up.

    Credit card fraud has always attracted bafflingly light sentences, presumably because the victims are big banks.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    Actually I think the consensus is it'll be a tightly hung parliament - but 'who knows' which way on total votes and MP counts. Who then gets to be PM is a bit complicated and political.
    If the LibDems end up on less than 10% (which seems an increasingly good bet) then a hung parliament is increasingly unlikely.

    Essentially, if you take 40 LibDem seats and share them between "The Big Two", then the range of outcomes that lead to a hung parliament is pretty narrow.
    EICIPM it is then! Buy gold, beans, shotgun shells, puritabs and KY jelly.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Mucho apologies for posting something Scottish on a non-Jock day.

    Basically time is running out for Yes to generate momentum. If Better Together can continue to push sticks into their bicycle wheels they will struggle to get over the 50%+1 finishing line.

    Welcome! And don't be silly!

    It's No that needs the momentum!

    Yes has edged up a couple of points and will overtake No sometime in mid-2015!

    You should read such non-biased objective sources as "Wings over Somerset", "Bella Gloucester" and "Comical James Goes Pop" for objective analysis based on a street in a housing scheme in a Dundee!

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    GIN1138 said:

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    That is absolutely stark-raving bonkers.

    How many hours a week do people run a vacuum cleaner for? Not enough for the power rating of the motor to have a measurable impact on household power consumption, that's for sure.
    We must be the first generation in history that's actually going backwards in terms of it's advancement and progress.

    The overall message these day's seems to be that we must substitute the best that modern technology can give us for things that are inferior. In that way lies ruin for society and the economy, IMO.

    Of course, the other point is that so many of these measures are counter productive. OK, from 1st September hoovers will be less powerful and use less energy, but quite obviously people will be using them more because they will do an inferior job. So net result might be that people finish up using MORE energy doing the hoovering not less.
    Thats the EU for you, that so many on PB love, worship, and can't get along without.
    If we keep following EU's stupid rules, we may find ourselves living in tents in 25 years time. Thank god I won't probably be around.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Steve ‏@hu1698 2h
    @DavidCoburnUKip Day by day, inch by inch I feel the tide is changing against EU. Momentum is gathering.

    You bet!
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited August 2014

    Mucho apologies for posting something Scottish on a non-Jock day.

    The row over the pound killed off Yes Scotland's hopes for gaining momentum after the last debate between Salmond and Darling.

    I wonder if this might do the same for next week too (Next debate is the 25th)?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11046740/Sir-Ian-Wood-15-years-of-oil-left-before-independent-Scotland-spending-cuts.html


    "The North Sea most eminent oil and gas tycoon has delivered a devastating blow to Alex Salmond’s independence campaign by warning there are only 15 years of reserves left before its decline starts wreaking major damage on the Scottish economy.


    "Sir Ian Wood, who has been praised by both David Cameron and Mr Salmond as the industry’s foremost expert, said the First Minister was overestimating the remaining reserves by between 45 per cent and 60 per cent.


    "He said the industry’s projected decline means “the case is heavily weighted towards Scotland remaining in the UK” and he was speaking out to ensure young Scots voting in the referendum knew there would be little production by the time they are middle aged."


    Sir Ian Wood is very very credible on this issue and has a pretty high profile up here. Darling is bound to focus on this. Oil is pretty fundamental to the economic case for independence (to say the least). And focusing on the prospects of the younger generation is an astute move, given that women are still very wary of Salmond and his broad-brush approach.

    Basically time is running out for Yes to generate momentum. If Better Together can continue to push sticks into their bicycle wheels they will struggle to get over the 50%+1 finishing line.

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-lost-treasure-of-the-deep/
    First Minister Salmond has stated on numerous occasions that Sir Ian Wood is a man of the highest integrity. The phony Reverend of Bath is doing the YESNP no favours with his insinuations.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    edited August 2014
    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    The consensus is not at that point yet, but I suspect it will eventually as 'narrow Labour % lead to narrow % Labour loss' still equaling a Labour plurality at the least, kicks in.

    As a social lefty (economically I lean more to the Tories to be honest), I think he'll be underwhelming. Economically he'll still be restricted in what he can do, and despite the occasional radical or populous statement, he seems too cautious to do anything that would be devastating if it failed. Messing around with the NHS and schools again I would guess will be the limit of ambition early on, in some fashion at any rate. The only real problem for him is if Scotland votes Yes in a few weeks.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Mucho apologies for posting something Scottish on a non-Jock day.

    The row over the pound killed off Yes Scotland's hopes for gaining momentum after the last debate between Salmond and Darling.

    I wonder if this might do the same for next week too (Next debate is the 25th)?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11046740/Sir-Ian-Wood-15-years-of-oil-left-before-independent-Scotland-spending-cuts.html


    "The North Sea most eminent oil and gas tycoon has delivered a devastating blow to Alex Salmond’s independence campaign by warning there are only 15 years of reserves left before its decline starts wreaking major damage on the Scottish economy.


    "Sir Ian Wood, who has been praised by both David Cameron and Mr Salmond as the industry’s foremost expert, said the First Minister was overestimating the remaining reserves by between 45 per cent and 60 per cent.


    "He said the industry’s projected decline means “the case is heavily weighted towards Scotland remaining in the UK” and he was speaking out to ensure young Scots voting in the referendum knew there would be little production by the time they are middle aged."


    Sir Ian Wood is very very credible on this issue and has a pretty high profile up here. Darling is bound to focus on this. Oil is pretty fundamental to the economic case for independence (to say the least). And focusing on the prospects of the younger generation is an astute move, given that women are still very wary of Salmond and his broad-brush approach.

    Basically time is running out for Yes to generate momentum. If Better Together can continue to push sticks into their bicycle wheels they will struggle to get over the 50%+1 finishing line.

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-lost-treasure-of-the-deep/
    First Minister Salmond has stated on numerous occasions that Sir Ian Wood is a man of the highest integrity.
    Up there with Fred Goodman?

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    The only real problem for him is if Scotland votes Yes in a few weeks.
    Not just for him. For all of us. It will set off an earthquake with unforseen and unforseeable consequences. As the old Arab curse goes 'may your children live in interesting times....'

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    woody662 said:

    Sept 2009 marginals poll indicated a Tory majority of 70.

    Clutching straws.

    What we saw then simply cannot be compared with what's now being produced.

    The Tories would be in with a better shout if they had a leader with a background like John Major or David David. It was a massive mistake going for an old Etonian who operates in a circle of other old Etonians.


    Sorry, late to the thread, so may have already been debunked, but I can't let this comment go unremarked.

    Frankly, Mike, it's unworthy of you. It's the sort of prejudiced bullsh1t that belongs in a past generation. Modern society does - largely - judge people on their race, colour, religion or background. It's only a few intolerant old lefties who think that this kind of analysis is meaningful and appropriate in today's society.

    It's a fairer mment that Cameron surrounds himself with too many people who have a similar worldview - but this is a problem that affects most, if not all, PMs after a while. Avoiding insularity is one of the biggest challenges of the job.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited August 2014
    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    MikeK said:


    Steve ‏@hu1698 2h
    @DavidCoburnUKip Day by day, inch by inch I feel the tide is changing against EU. Momentum is gathering.

    You bet!

    Yet recent YouGOv polls often show pluralities for staying in the EU.

    More UKIP wishful thinking.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    dr_spyn said:

    Which UK politician would be first in the queue?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/george-bush-delivers-possibly-the-best-als-ice-bucket-challenge-yet-9680934.html

    Salmond to do ice bucket challenge, might liven up the live TV debate.

    MND (as ALS is called here) took my daughter earlier this year. This time last year she seemed fine. The more raised to combat this awful disease the better. It’s the hopelessness of it, especially when, as my daughter did, the patient deteriorates quickly.
    I've very sorry to hear that, Mr Cole. There is some interesting research going on for ALS, but our scientists don't really understand the disease yet (all autoimmune problems are challenging) but there is hope. I'm sorry it wasn't soon enough for your daughter.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    The only real problem for him is if Scotland votes Yes in a few weeks.
    Not just for him. For all of us. It will set off an earthquake with unforseen and unforseeable consequences. As the old Arab curse goes 'may your children live in interesting times....'

    Ms Vance, you may have missed that discussion of Scotland's problems is banned on here today, by Mr Smithson no less.

    However, if it wasn't I'd say your comment "It [a Yes vote] will set off an earthquake with unforseen and unforseeable consequences", was over the top. It will undoubtedly cause a lot of extra work fr the Civil Service (won't do them any harm and may, provided their numbers aren't increased to cope with it, reduce the damage they do) and some additional expenditure (not good but not that terrible either). An earthquake, though? Nah, not down here. I doubt if any but a small minority of people will even notice.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    BBC - From 1 September, companies in the EU will be banned from making or importing vacuum cleaners above 1600 watts. -The new European rules known as 2009/125/EC are part of the EU's energy efficiency directive, designed to help tackle climate change.

    I believe in 2009 it was still called ‘man made global warming’ – the only reason I mention it, is because it’s August and bloody cold outside…
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    The consensus is not at that point yet, but I suspect it will eventually as 'narrow Labour % lead to narrow % Labour loss' still equaling a Labour plurality at the least, kicks in.

    As a social lefty (economically I lean more to the Tories to be honest), I think he'll be underwhelming. Economically he'll still be restricted in what he can do, and despite the occasional radical or populous statement, he seems too cautious to do anything that would be devastating if it failed. Messing around with the NHS and schools again I would guess will be the limit of ambition early on, in some fashion at any rate. The only real problem for him is if Scotland votes Yes in a few weeks.
    I think Ed Miliband will look to do some quite radicals things in the first few years, such as start a major programme of building social housing. This may be done by allowing councils to borrow money to build social housing. I think they will also allow a similar approach for care homes to be built, so there is not as much reliance on the private sector. New school buildings and additional teachers will also be needed given the shortfall expected in the years ahead.

    There will also be some legislation which will increase employment rights, particularly enforcement of an increased minimum or living wage. I suspect that they will look to ensure that this is not seen by employers as the rate they employ people at and they do offer increases to take into account performance/experience. Measures will also be taken to stop abuses of zero hours contracts, where they are unfair to employees.

    Supermarkets and energy companies will also face new requirements. Supermarkets already have to spend money on local infrastructure, as part of any planning permissions, but additional measures may be applied to support local high street traders, who sometimes suffer when big Supermarkets are built nearby. Energy companies will no doubt face measures to ensure more competition.

    So there is quite a lot that Labour could do, which would help deal with some of the current issues people face and I think that Labour would have to do this pretty quickly. Any new government could not afford to just tinker around, as many public services are currently under massive pressure.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    taffys said:

    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.

    Mr. Taffys, is Osborne chasing any sort of vote. My impression has been for a long time that he has simply become house-trained and is pretty much a mouth piece for the treasury.

    HM Treasury, like the FCO and, to a lesser extent, the Home Office have been pursuing pretty much their own agenda for decades and regard changes in elected ministers as an opportunity to wipe the slate clean of political taint. I'd be all in favour if the heads of the Civil Service were actually on the side of the British people and actually knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, all the evidence in my life time suggests that they aren't and don't.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/shock-rise-in-borrowing-hits-george-osbornes-deficit-drive-9683252.html

    Economy charging along on cheap credit, deficit not coming down due to Osborne spending addiction.

    Epic fail.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    The EU is stopping you making a bad choice that impacts the planet.

    A good directive. Well done EU.
    Yes, but it's my choice. It's the start of the (admittedly long) road where at the end the only car you're allowed to buy is a zero-emission Lada.
    And I'm glad your choice is being cutailed by sensible legislation to help safeguard the planet.

    More sense (than the usual Europhobe knee jerk reaction) on this here:

    http://www.jonworth.eu/vacuum-cleaners-in-the-eu-when-technocratic-decisions-overshadow-politics/
    Thanks BenM, that's an interesting read. I think this is an example of where the marketing acts to inhibit technological progress.

    A larger number on the wattage of the vacuum cleaner sounds better - all other things being equal of course it will be better - and so for marketing purposes it enables you to charge more for a vacuum cleaner with a 2200W motor than a 1500W motor, even if the suction on the 1500W vacuum cleaner is as good, because it is better designed.

    This still leaves the consumer with the problem of how to work out which vacuum cleaner is better than another, with no good metric available to use to choose between them.

    It is telling that none of the Dyson vacuum cleaners will be affected by this mandatory limit, and he appears to be well on the way to being ready for the stricter limit due in 2017.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    hucks67 said:

    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    The consensus is not at that point yet, but I suspect it will eventually as 'narrow Labour % lead to narrow % Labour loss' still equaling a Labour plurality at the least, kicks in.

    As a social lefty (economically I lean more to the Tories to be honest), I think he'll be underwhelming. Economically he'll still be restricted in what he can do, and despite the occasional radical or populous statement, he seems too cautious to do anything that would be devastating if it failed. Messing around with the NHS and schools again I would guess will be the limit of ambition early on, in some fashion at any rate. The only real problem for him is if Scotland votes Yes in a few weeks.
    I think Ed Miliband will look to do some quite radicals things in the first few years, such as start a major programme of building social housing. This may be done by allowing councils to borrow money to build social housing. I think they will also allow a similar approach for care homes to be built, so there is not as much reliance on the private sector. New school buildings and additional teachers will also be needed given the shortfall expected in the years ahead.

    There will also be some legislation which will increase employment rights, particularly enforcement of an increased minimum or living wage. I suspect that they will look to ensure that this is not seen by employers as the rate they employ people at and they do offer increases to take into account performance/experience. Measures will also be taken to stop abuses of zero hours contracts, where they are unfair to employees.

    Supermarkets and energy companies will also face new requirements. Supermarkets already have to spend money on local infrastructure, as part of any planning permissions, but additional measures may be applied to support local high street traders, who sometimes suffer when big Supermarkets are built nearby. Energy companies will no doubt face measures to ensure more competition.

    So there is quite a lot that Labour could do, which would help deal with some of the current issues people face and I think that Labour would have to do this pretty quickly. Any new government could not afford to just tinker around, as many public services are currently under massive pressure.
    A very interesting post, Mr 67. One would hope that Labour might actually fill in with some detail and how all that largesse is going to be paid for, but we shall see.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    And still our politicians blather on about how this is nothing to do with religion; even Cameron was at it last night.

    What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited August 2014
    ''My impression has been for a long time that he has simply become house-trained and is pretty much a mouth piece for the treasury.''

    You have to be a person of little or no political conviction to being as much of a mouthpiece as George has become. Any person of even a slight conservative leaning would be appalled by some of what is being suggested.

    No wonder conservatives are leaving in droves.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    The EU is stopping you making a bad choice that impacts the planet.

    A good directive. Well done EU.
    Yes, but it's my choice. It's the start of the (admittedly long) road where at the end the only car you're allowed to buy is a zero-emission Lada.
    And I'm glad your choice is being cutailed by sensible legislation to help safeguard the planet.

    More sense (than the usual Europhobe knee jerk reaction) on this here:

    http://www.jonworth.eu/vacuum-cleaners-in-the-eu-when-technocratic-decisions-overshadow-politics/
    Thanks BenM, that's an interesting read. I think this is an example of where the marketing acts to inhibit technological progress.

    A larger number on the wattage of the vacuum cleaner sounds better - all other things being equal of course it will be better - and so for marketing purposes it enables you to charge more for a vacuum cleaner with a 2200W motor than a 1500W motor, even if the suction on the 1500W vacuum cleaner is as good, because it is better designed.

    This still leaves the consumer with the problem of how to work out which vacuum cleaner is better than another, with no good metric available to use to choose between them.

    It is telling that none of the Dyson vacuum cleaners will be affected by this mandatory limit, and he appears to be well on the way to being ready for the stricter limit due in 2017.
    Dysons are rubbish. Expensive, heavy and prone to breaking down.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    Charles said:

    woody662 said:

    Sept 2009 marginals poll indicated a Tory majority of 70.

    Clutching straws.

    What we saw then simply cannot be compared with what's now being produced.

    The Tories would be in with a better shout if they had a leader with a background like John Major or David David. It was a massive mistake going for an old Etonian who operates in a circle of other old Etonians.


    Sorry, late to the thread, so may have already been debunked, but I can't let this comment go unremarked.

    Frankly, Mike, it's unworthy of you. It's the sort of prejudiced bullsh1t that belongs in a past generation. Modern society does - largely - judge people on their race, colour, religion or background. It's only a few intolerant old lefties who think that this kind of analysis is meaningful and appropriate in today's society.

    It's a fairer mment that Cameron surrounds himself with too many people who have a similar worldview - but this is a problem that affects most, if not all, PMs after a while. Avoiding insularity is one of the biggest challenges of the job.
    Aw, Mike's upset the simpering Cameron fanboys!

    Cameron's policies and actions give the impression that he's in it for the rich and powerful, and is out of touch with - or doesn't give a stuff about - the lives of ordinary folk.

    Like it or not, rightly or wrongly, people put 2+2 together and conclude Cameron's background might be something to do with this.

    Someone like Major could sell Toryness far more effectively than Cameron, someone who's so posh he's nearly Royalty. That's why Major has a majority on his CV and Cameron never will.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    What hope is there of doing anything about a problem if you can't even describe it accurately in the first place?

    Archbishop Cranmer has a good blog on this. Its a bit like saying Stalin was nothing to do with marxism.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited August 2014
    Hugh said:

    Charles said:

    woody662 said:

    Sept 2009 marginals poll indicated a Tory majority of 70.

    Clutching straws.

    What we saw then simply cannot be compared with what's now being produced.

    The Tories would be in with a better shout if they had a leader with a background like John Major or David David. It was a massive mistake going for an old Etonian who operates in a circle of other old Etonians.


    Sorry, late to the thread, so may have already been debunked, but I can't let this comment go unremarked.

    Frankly, Mike, it's unworthy of you. It's the sort of prejudiced bullsh1t that belongs in a past generation. Modern society does - largely - judge people on their race, colour, religion or background. It's only a few intolerant old lefties who think that this kind of analysis is meaningful and appropriate in today's society.

    It's a fairer mment that Cameron surrounds himself with too many people who have a similar worldview - but this is a problem that affects most, if not all, PMs after a while. Avoiding insularity is one of the biggest challenges of the job.
    Aw, Mike's upset the simpering Cameron fanboys!

    *snip*
    The usual tedious, juvenile sloganeering.
    *snip*
    You are 20 years old and a student at a red-brick university and I claim my £5.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    Cyclefree said:

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    BenM said:

    Anorak said:

    I know this is trivial, but it really hacks me off that I can't even buy a f*cking hoover without the EU interfering with my choice...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28878432

    From next month, there is a mandatory limit on the power (and therefore effectiveness) of vacuum cleaners. You know, for the polar bears.

    The EU is stopping you making a bad choice that impacts the planet.

    A good directive. Well done EU.
    Yes, but it's my choice. It's the start of the (admittedly long) road where at the end the only car you're allowed to buy is a zero-emission Lada.
    And I'm glad your choice is being cutailed by sensible legislation to help safeguard the planet.

    More sense (than the usual Europhobe knee jerk reaction) on this here:

    http://www.jonworth.eu/vacuum-cleaners-in-the-eu-when-technocratic-decisions-overshadow-politics/
    Thanks BenM, that's an interesting read. I think this is an example of where the marketing acts to inhibit technological progress.

    A larger number on the wattage of the vacuum cleaner sounds better - all other things being equal of course it will be better - and so for marketing purposes it enables you to charge more for a vacuum cleaner with a 2200W motor than a 1500W motor, even if the suction on the 1500W vacuum cleaner is as good, because it is better designed.

    This still leaves the consumer with the problem of how to work out which vacuum cleaner is better than another, with no good metric available to use to choose between them.

    It is telling that none of the Dyson vacuum cleaners will be affected by this mandatory limit, and he appears to be well on the way to being ready for the stricter limit due in 2017.
    Dysons are rubbish. Expensive, heavy and prone to breaking down.
    Quite !

    I use this one

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vax-C89P7NT-2400W-Power-Total/dp/B006T3I0PY

    Seriously considering buying another before these bonkers rules come into effect.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    hucks67 said:

    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    snip.
    I think Ed Miliband will look to do some quite radicals things in the first few years, such as start a major programme of building social housing. This may be done by allowing councils to borrow money to build social housing. I think they will also allow a similar approach for care homes to be built, so there is not as much reliance on the private sector. New school buildings and additional teachers will also be needed given the shortfall expected in the years ahead.

    There will also be some legislation which will increase employment rights, particularly enforcement of an increased minimum or living wage. I suspect that they will look to ensure that this is not seen by employers as the rate they employ people at and they do offer increases to take into account performance/experience. Measures will also be taken to stop abuses of zero hours contracts, where they are unfair to employees.

    Supermarkets and energy companies will also face new requirements. Supermarkets already have to spend money on local infrastructure, as part of any planning permissions, but additional measures may be applied to support local high street traders, who sometimes suffer when big Supermarkets are built nearby. Energy companies will no doubt face measures to ensure more competition.

    So there is quite a lot that Labour could do, which would help deal with some of the current issues people face and I think that Labour would have to do this pretty quickly. Any new government could not afford to just tinker around, as many public services are currently under massive pressure.
    I certainly think Ed will be a competent and effective Prime Minister, much more so than the current squatter in that post.

    I have high hopes for how radical he'll be, he's certainly been brave in opposition and correctly diagnosed many of the problems we face. But am also prepared to be slightly underwhelmed.

    Anyway, he will almost certainly pull in the opposition direction on most fronts to Cameron and Osbornes Tory mob, which this country urgently needs.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    Anorak said:

    Hugh said:

    Charles said:

    woody662 said:

    Sept 2009 marginals poll indicated a Tory majority of 70.

    Clutching straws.

    What we saw then simply cannot be compared with what's now being produced.

    The Tories would be in with a better shout if they had a leader with a background like John Major or David David. It was a massive mistake going for an old Etonian who operates in a circle of other old Etonians.


    Sorry, late to the thread, so may have already been debunked, but I can't let this comment go unremarked.

    Frankly, Mike, it's unworthy of you. It's the sort of prejudiced bullsh1t that belongs in a past generation. Modern society does - largely - judge people on their race, colour, religion or background. It's only a few intolerant old lefties who think that this kind of analysis is meaningful and appropriate in today's society.

    It's a fairer mment that Cameron surrounds himself with too many people who have a similar worldview - but this is a problem that affects most, if not all, PMs after a while. Avoiding insularity is one of the biggest challenges of the job.
    Aw, Mike's upset the simpering Cameron fanboys!

    *snip*
    The usual tedious, juvenile sloganeering.
    *snip*
    You are 20 years old and a student at a red-brick university and I claim my £5.
    I wish!
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    taffys said:

    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.

    I wonder what you'll say when Miliband / Balls / Cable abolish the £325k inheritance tax threshold completely and tax ALL inheritance as income?

    Inheritance Tax today on a £300k house = nil.

    Inheritance tax post June 2015 on a £300k house = approx £135k (exact amount will depend on beneficiaries' other income)

    Meanwhile we've got people getting upset because some highly complicated tax avoidance schemes being used by a few thousand people are being clamped down upon.

    From June 2015, millions and millions of ordinary people who own just an average home are going to be facing inheritance tax bills for the first time of well into six figures.

    And yet we are told LibLabCon are all the same.

    People need to wake up and get real. Miliband is going to mean massive tax increases - not just a few quid here and there - it will be life changing amounts of money.

    If anyone is retired and owns their home and is remotely concerned about their families' future finances, stop and think.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    taffys said:

    ''My impression has been for a long time that he has simply become house-trained and is pretty much a mouth piece for the treasury.''

    You have to be a person of little or no political conviction to being as much of a mouthpiece as George has become. Any person of even a slight conservative leaning would be appalled by some of what is being suggested.

    No wonder conservatives are leaving in droves.

    I agree, Mr. Taffys. For me Osborne is the ideal chancellor for Cameron. Neither of them have a principled bone in their body, office is what matters not even power.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    Actually I think the consensus is it'll be a tightly hung parliament - but 'who knows' which way on total votes and MP counts. Who then gets to be PM is a bit complicated and political.
    If the LibDems end up on less than 10% (which seems an increasingly good bet) then a hung parliament is increasingly unlikely.

    Essentially, if you take 40 LibDem seats and share them between "The Big Two", then the range of outcomes that lead to a hung parliament is pretty narrow.
    If you have the Lib Dems on 17 seats, you still have the 18 NI seats, 9 for the SNP and PC and a couple of odds and sods.

    Furthermore, you are approaching this in an abstract way, rather than looking at the particular circumstances that currently prevail. At the moment we have a Conservative PM who does not have a Conservative majority, and the median election outcome [in my view] involves the Conservatives losing some seats to Labour.

    In this context, a Hung Parliament can only be avoided if Labour win enough seats to form a majority - 66 seats. If we generously give labour all the Lib Dem seats in their target list up to and including Simon Hughes in Bermondsey, then that reduces the Labour task to 49 Conservative seats.

    I think that's a fairly wide window for a Hung Parliament.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    MikeL said:

    taffys said:

    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.

    I wonder what you'll say when Miliband / Balls / Cable abolish the £325k inheritance tax threshold completely and tax ALL inheritance as income?

    Inheritance Tax today on a £300k house = nil.

    Inheritance tax post June 2015 on a £300k house = approx £135k (exact amount will depend on beneficiaries' other income)

    Meanwhile we've got people getting upset because some highly complicated tax avoidance schemes being used by a few thousand people are being clamped down upon.

    From June 2015, millions and millions of ordinary people who own just an average home are going to be facing inheritance tax bills for the first time of well into six figures.

    And yet we are told LibLabCon are all the same.

    People need to wake up and get real. Miliband is going to mean massive tax increases - not just a few quid here and there - it will be life changing amounts of money.

    If anyone is retired and owns their home and is remotely concerned about their families' future finances, stop and think.
    Worrying stuff.

    But he'll get in I think. :/
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    MikeL said:

    taffys said:

    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.

    I wonder what you'll say when Miliband / Balls / Cable abolish the £325k inheritance tax threshold completely and tax ALL inheritance as income?
    As often discussed on this site, such a thing would be utterly unworkable
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    I believe in 2009 it was still called ‘man made global warming’ – the only reason I mention it, is because it’s August and bloody cold outside…

    August is the first month since November 2013 that is not warmer than average in the Central England Temperature record, and it is now that you notice the temperature outside?

    Someone less charitable than myself might accuse you of suffering from a common cognitive bias.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    MikeL said:

    taffys said:

    Two words why the conservatives are doing badly. George Osborne. He has allowed the conservatives, incredibly, to reek of high handed socialism with the relentless press stories of how HMRC and the treasury are plotting to take voters' tax and inheritance money.

    If these stories are in any way true the conservatives will get hammered. Even if they are not true the cons will never get rid of the stench of big government corporatism that Osborne has allowed to surround them. Certainly not before 2015.

    Osborne is chasing the ''fairness'' vote - at the expense of vast swathes of genuine conservatives.

    I wonder what you'll say when Miliband / Balls / Cable abolish the £325k inheritance tax threshold completely and tax ALL inheritance as income?

    Inheritance Tax today on a £300k house = nil.

    Inheritance tax post June 2015 on a £300k house = approx £135k (exact amount will depend on beneficiaries' other income)

    Meanwhile we've got people getting upset because some highly complicated tax avoidance schemes being used by a few thousand people are being clamped down upon.

    From June 2015, millions and millions of ordinary people who own just an average home are going to be facing inheritance tax bills for the first time of well into six figures.

    And yet we are told LibLabCon are all the same.

    People need to wake up and get real. Miliband is going to mean massive tax increases - not just a few quid here and there - it will be life changing amounts of money.

    If anyone is retired and owns their home and is remotely concerned about their families' future finances, stop and think.
    Fair go, and what exactly are the Conservative Party currently saying about inheritance tax? The only thing I remember seeing is that they want to introduce a scheme where by you will be forced to pay it while you are alive if you try and avoid it for your descendants. Oh, and they want the revenue to be able to seize money from your bank account even if you don't actually owe them a penny (as long as HMRC pretend you do).

    Even Brown, as barking as he was, didn't come up with state seizure of private assets with no judicial oversight. So tell me again why I should vote Conservative.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    O/T

    Herself has just got back from shopping. She went to Sainsbury's and Aldi. A smallish packet of Italian made pasta in Sainsbury's was 90p, or two for £1.50. In Aldi for an identical packet (made in Italy etc.) was 45p. Now how does that work? How can a basic product cost twice as much in one shop than it does in another? I suppose those Sainsbury millions have to come from somewhere, but isn't someone taking the piss?

    Could be a loss-leader by the supermarket itself, or somewhere in the supply chain. And were they identical? (i.e. the same brand and weight) It would also be worth checking the ingredients between the two.
    Mr. J., they were different brands but in all other respects identical. Someone, somewhere along the line is surely taking the piss.

    Wine is my other beef at the moment. Having spent much of my early years in Portugal, I am very partial to Vinho Verde, so called because it is designed to be drunk as a young wine. So we are not talking vintages here; it is plonk, a guzzling wine for warm sunny days and basic food (coarse bread, sardines, cheese and olive oil type stuff). Last Saturday it was £4.99 in my local Tesco. Herself got it in Aldi this morning at just under two quid a bottle. I haven't tried it yet, obviously, but it seems to be pukka stuff from the labels. How can there be such disparity in pricing between two supermarkets a mile apart?
    Aldi had the advantage of starting up from scratch so didn't have the expensive infrastructure that had accreted over time for Sainsbury's.

    They run a much narrower range of products - usually 1 brand + Aldi brand, may be - which massively reduces costs in distribution, enables them to squeeze better pricing from suppliers and to reduce the capital tied up in inventory

    They also usually have less expensive locations.

    And the Albrechts own the company - usually private companies are much tighter on costs than public ones.

    All of these allow them to run with a volume/low price strategy. From a consumer perspective, they are great for staples and - should you want to supplement your shopping with items outside the Aldi range and are prepared to spend the time/hassle to do two food shops - you can save a bundle
  • Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    Hugh said:

    hucks67 said:

    kle4 said:

    currystar said:

    So the consensus is it will be PM Milliband in 2015, how do those on the left think he will do?

    snip.
    I think Ed Miliband will look to do some quite radicals things in the first few years, such as start a major programme of building social housing. This may be done by allowing councils to borrow money to build social housing. I think they will also allow a similar approach for care homes to be built, so there is not as much reliance on the private sector. New school buildings and additional teachers will also be needed given the shortfall expected in the years ahead.

    There will also be some legislation which will increase employment rights, particularly enforcement of an increased minimum or living wage. I suspect that they will look to ensure that this is not seen by employers as the rate they employ people at and they do offer increases to take into account performance/experience. Measures will also be taken to stop abuses of zero hours contracts, where they are unfair to employees.

    Supermarkets and energy companies will also face new requirements. Supermarkets already have to spend money on local infrastructure, as part of any planning permissions, but additional measures may be applied to support local high street traders, who sometimes suffer when big Supermarkets are built nearby. Energy companies will no doubt face measures to ensure more competition.

    So there is quite a lot that Labour could do, which would help deal with some of the current issues people face and I think that Labour would have to do this pretty quickly. Any new government could not afford to just tinker around, as many public services are currently under massive pressure.
    I certainly think Ed will be a competent and effective Prime Minister, much more so than the current squatter in that post.

    I have high hopes for how radical he'll be, he's certainly been brave in opposition and correctly diagnosed many of the problems we face. But am also prepared to be slightly underwhelmed.

    Anyway, he will almost certainly pull in the opposition direction on most fronts to Cameron and Osbornes Tory mob, which this country urgently needs.
    Given you believe he's going to stop train operators raising fares, as one example, you may end up being disappointed in just how radical he is planning to be once the slogans are wiped off his pronouncements.... Hopefully, you're not expecting him to dismantle the Lansley reforms either having just read the headlines and not studied he detail....
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited August 2014
    Hugh said:

    he's certainly been brave in opposition

    Ha ha! Good joke!

    He's run away from absolutely everything, has not made a single decision on any contentious issue, not one. He supports austerity but doesn't support austerity. His greatest triumph is giving an undertaking to support action in principle against the use of chemical weapons in Syria, and then reneging on it at the last minute because one of the sixth-formers threatened to steal his Kit-Kat.

    Of course he was absolutely firm on standing up to the Murdoch press, and then firm on apologising about not standing up to the Murdoch press:

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband-says-sorry-after-picture-with-the-sun-angers-labour-in-liverpool-9534911.html

    Worse than Brown. And, sadly, there is no Peter Mandelson to hold him on a lead.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    @Charles

    "... the Albrechts own the company - usually private companies are much tighter on costs than public ones ..."

    Doesn't that play back to the discussions we have had on here recently about corporate governance. Maybe, private companies deliver for the consumer as well as their employees, the taxpayer and the environment.

    Stewards looking to hand over an enterprise in better condition than they received it might work out better for all than people who are worried about share price (and their bonus) in the short term. Damn, who would have guessed.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Hugh said:

    he's certainly been brave in opposition

    Ha ha! Good joke!

    He's run away from absolutely everything, has not made a single decision on any contentious issue, not one. He supports austerity but doesn't support austerity. His greatest triumph is giving an undertaking to support action in principle against the use of chemical weapons in Syria, and then reneging on it at the last minute because one of the sixth-formers threatened to steal his Kit-Kat.

    Of course he was absolutely firm on standing up to the Murdoch press, and then firm on apologising about not standing up to the Murdoch press:

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband-says-sorry-after-picture-with-the-sun-angers-labour-in-liverpool-9534911.html

    Worse than Brown. And, sadly, there is no Peter Mandelson to hold him on a lead.
    Top post, Mr. N. I particularly liked the last sentence (laughed like a drain actually).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    The real point about north sea resources is once again elided by the SNP. They claim various figures for the remaining North Sea such as the 24bn barrels, assess that at its market price and claim every Scot is going to be thousands of pounds better off. It is just lies.

    The reality is that by the use of world first clever technology we are going to get more out of the North Sea than we once thought. That is great. It will maintain employment at a much higher level in the North East than would otherwise be the case and there are increasing opportunities to export that expertise developed in the north sea to other offshore, maturing fields.

    What this does not do is produce significant sums for the Scottish Treasury. The cost of extracting the remaining oil is a much higher percentage than it was 20 years ago so it is a lot less profitable. As it is less profitable the amount of tax such as PRT that can be extracted from that profit is massively diminished. The reforms made by Osborne to encourage more investment in the north sea entitled companies to set off far more of their costs than had previously been the case, significantly reducing the tax flow. This was good business and has encouraged more investment but the quid pro quo of more production is going to be less tax.

    So an independent Scotland will have an oil industry for longer than was once thought. It just won't pay the bills. And claims that every Scot will be thousands better off are just lies. Plain and simple lies.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Hugh said:

    Wage restraint is a 'good thing' it offeres the prospect of an inflation free, jobs strong recovery. It realigns us for the future, it should be encouraged

    And Tories wonder why they're perceived as not caring about ordinary people.

    It's nothing to do with class.

    Hugh said:

    Wage restraint is a 'good thing' it offeres the prospect of an inflation free, jobs strong recovery. It realigns us for the future, it should be encouraged

    And Tories wonder why they're perceived as not caring about ordinary people.

    It's nothing to do with class.

    You would rather workers priced themselves out of their jobs? Socialists? I am not surprised that they want to see the economy tank and jobless go through the floor. They are ony interested in power for power's sake and only pay lip service to helping their fellow man.
    Since when did socialism say (in difficult circumstances created by socialists) 'more more more for me and sod the rest of the poor beggers on the dole'?
This discussion has been closed.