There isn't much significant difference between 53-47 and 51-49, but FWIW it fits with my theory that No bounced a bit with the Home Rule speech and is now settling back. Like Mike and others I think Yes is ridiculously long-priced - with the margins as tight as this they shouldn't be worse than about 7-4. i don't think that counting the number of polls showing a slight No edge really proves anything except that there's probably a slight No edge - liable to be overcome on the day if there's any differential turnout.
Bizarrely Betfair has moved TOWARDS NO and away from YES, following the ICM poll.
Back YES: 4.8
Back NO: 1.25
Either there's a lot of supersmart people with insider info, or the Betfair markets are deluded. I suspect a mix of both, but more of the latter.
That's because of the very high level of undecideds, which (historically) have broken very heavily for the status quo. Including them at 75:25 to 'no' gives you about 58:42. Add in the shy no's (won't says), and you get to about 60:40 for no.
Robert that logic doesn't apply this time. It is reckoned as of yesterday that with the electorate at 4.25 million for next week, that is 98% of the potential maximum. The vast majority of these new voters (apart from the 60,000 or so 16/17 yr olds) are people who have never voted before and never taken part in the democratic process. These people sadly have not registered to vote No. They have registered to vote YES. It is the YES canvassers doing door-to-door round all the large, supposedly socially deprived, council estates in Central Scotland who have identified most of these people and got them to register. The higher the turnout the greater likelihood of a YES victory.
As I mentioned earlier the weather looks good so that will boost turnout. However I can't imagine we'll have anything like a 100% turnout of that 98% roll. I think I may have to take a couple of days off and travel up from Kent to help out the No campaign and ensure my recalcitrant nephew and his girlfriend vote!
Oh, and more to the point, nothing in my list would put off swing voters, so there's no tactical reason not to do it. In fact, all three could appeal to different groups of swing voters.
I read on here yesterday that Galloway had likened the SNP to Nazis in the big big debate. Yet either it was edited out or he never said such a thing. Sounds like more dissembling from our Nationalist friends on here. Whatever the truth of that story the Labour run No campaign have been guilty of believing too much Nationalist spin. That includes hiding Tories away from the campaign. People always resent people who appear to sit in ivory towers or are stand-offish more. Dave will have an important job to do on Monday.
Galloway has a bit of a cheek calling other people Nazis (if he did) given that he was Britain's first fascist MP.
Afternoon all and gosh wasn't ICM a shock to the system for most? Wish I had had spare cash over a year ago when I first said I thought YES would win.
SKY has just announced that George Osborne and Mark Carney have cancelled a trip to Australia next week because of the IndyRef. Squeaky bum time.
Is Sean T sitting in his counting house counting all his Canadian dollars and South African rand
No, Sean isn't counting his money. I went into overseas shares and bonds - and they are all suffering. It's not the end of the world, but it seems UK turbulence is hitting markets everywhere.
I need somewhere nice and safe with a steady 5% return, nothing drastic.
Our input into the war effort was per capital much more valuable than any other part of Britain.
Indeed nice one Dougie. its good to know you think the Scots are more valuable than my grandparents who both worked in the Woolwich Arsenal or my mother who preferred being with her family in London during the Blitz as a young teenager than being evacuated to the west country or my father who also was in the Marines and landed on D-day in France or indeed the three Uncles of mine who thankfully survived Dunkirk.
Clearly you know how to win friends and influence people.......!
I don't think anything of the sort was said. In ignorance, and without checking I at any rate posted something that suggested an early leader of the SNP was less than patriotic during WWII. I don't know about others but I was led to do a bot of checking and I realise that this was one of those canards which get attached to people due to misunderstandings, accidental or deliberate. It's up there with "Churchill ordering the shooting of the Welsh miners".
Taking BP as an example, the UK government gets taxes from BP plc at a corporate level, from various UK domiciled UK operating companies, and from the field level via the Petroleum Revenue Tax.
In the event of a separation of UK and Scotland, BP plc would remain a UK domiciled company, and the vast bulk of UK operating businesses would remain domiciled as they are now. There would be certain operating companies who would directly own Scottish assets (whether oil fields, refining or retail) and which would pay corporation tax to Edinburgh. Petroleum Revenue Tax would be the big one and would largely end up going to Edinburgh (although it is worth remembering that Wytch Farm is in England and is the largest producing on-shore oil field in Europe; PRT from Wytch Farm would go to London, not Edinburgh).
Nevertheless, your contention that without oil money the UK's borrowing would go up substantially is incorrect. Petroleum Revenue Tax raised a fairly miserly £1.7bn last fiscal year (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249324/UKCS_Tax_Table_Oct_2013.pdf) because oil companies are incentivised to invest in finding new fields and can lower their PRT bill by drilling wells. Therefore, the removal of PRT from rUK would have next to no effect on the UK's government deficit.
The Scottish government can always remove this incentive, to increase near-term tax take; however, this will be at the expense of oil companies drilling fewer wells, lowering long-term oil production, and reducing employment.
Your contention about oil company profits is also inaccurate: both Shell and BP have net debt.
Is the great Obama and his administration now going completely bonkers? Very probable.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 39m US announces fresh sanctions on Russia - hitting its largest bank, Sberbank, as well as energy & defence industries http://bbc.in/1win6AO
For US military that has been willing to pay $34 for rivet as long as 10 years ago and has had 7 fighter planes crash in the past 5 weeks, it looks like a nervous breakdown.
"... Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead ..."
That is total bollocks.
I have seen figures quoted that Scottish regiments lost as killed more than 20% of their number over the course of WWI compared to an overall death rate of about 12% (those figures don't actually make sense either, but let that pass) but to claim that the Scots made up 20% of the total UK war dead is just silly.
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Shadsy explained previously that a 'yes' landslide (55%+) would be Ladbrokes worst ever political betting result. (Did he even say non-sport result? Anyway a big 'yes' win would be problematical for this major bookmaking firm.)
Maybe it's a relic of my schooling, but we were proud of our Empire and the pink bits of the map.
I was a young teen when it became very fashionable for our colonies to declare independence. Our atlases were going out of date every month or so, or that's how it felt.
I have no guilt about it at all. We did a great deal of good. Sure it wasn't perfect, but I think on the whole we were as good as the Romans when it came to leaving behind a positive legacy.
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
I always thought you were around the same age as me for some reason. But clearly not.
There isn't much significant difference between 53-47 and 51-49, but FWIW it fits with my theory that No bounced a bit with the Home Rule speech and is now settling back. Like Mike and others I think Yes is ridiculously long-priced - with the margins as tight as this they shouldn't be worse than about 7-4. i don't think that counting the number of polls showing a slight No edge really proves anything except that there's probably a slight No edge - liable to be overcome on the day if there's any differential turnout.
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
I agree with the reasons for the bookmaker's odds but, as you say, it doesn't explain the BetFair odds (unless the bookmakers are trying to hedge in that market? .... surely not). They look seriously mispriced, with far too long odds on a YES. Again, I think that the weight of money on BetFair reflects an English view that the Scot's will eventually come to their senses. But I fear it won't happen; the SNP has created a new reality...
Afternoon all and gosh wasn't ICM a shock to the system for most? Wish I had had spare cash over a year ago when I first said I thought YES would win.
SKY has just announced that George Osborne and Mark Carney have cancelled a trip to Australia next week because of the IndyRef. Squeaky bum time.
Is Sean T sitting in his counting house counting all his Canadian dollars and South African rand
No, Sean isn't counting his money. I went into overseas shares and bonds - and they are all suffering. It's not the end of the world, but it seems UK turbulence is hitting markets everywhere.
I need somewhere nice and safe with a steady 5% return, nothing drastic.
Ideas?
There are none. That is the way the central bankers need it. And why many of the true heavyweight fund managers are staying in cash. (!!!) The real trick to wealth protection is not to get a marginally higher return on the way up but not to catch a knife on the way down. Get out of the things which will at some point collapse because they must (equities, bonds). Cash may suck from a return perspective - but it isn't going to go all 1997 or 2008 either.
We gave you that... 2 collapses and shocking bowling at the tail in the 2nd innings and you still only won by 30odd runs. Hopefully you do well enough that we see you in 2 seasons time...
Afternoon all and gosh wasn't ICM a shock to the system for most? Wish I had had spare cash over a year ago when I first said I thought YES would win.
SKY has just announced that George Osborne and Mark Carney have cancelled a trip to Australia next week because of the IndyRef. Squeaky bum time.
Is Sean T sitting in his counting house counting all his Canadian dollars and South African rand
No, Sean isn't counting his money. I went into overseas shares and bonds - and they are all suffering. It's not the end of the world, but it seems UK turbulence is hitting markets everywhere.
I need somewhere nice and safe with a steady 5% return, nothing drastic.
Ideas?
An appropriate portfolio mix between shares and bonds will return a steadier return than either one alone. The best way to get rid of risk is diversification and intermittent rebalancing.
I'm a Speyside man essentially, however. I have been since I walked the Speyside Way
If you haven't already, you should try Highland Park's Orkney neighbour Scapa. Amazingly smooth, richly sweet -fantastic with food.
@Luckyguy1983 - I was thinking about Scapa myself when I typed that. I haven't had it for a long time (first was a pouring wet day ashore from a yacht in Kirkwall) as I find HP so good, but perhaps I ought to refresh my acquaintance (and myself) sometime.
@taffys - I find them milder - for me - than Islays which I often find rather peaty (horses for courses, nothing wrong with that sometimes).
I can sympathise. I've got a bottle from the Scottish Whisky Society in my cupboard which tastes exactly like distilled essence of rhubarb - and not one I like at all, alas. Can't recall which distillery as my dad has the decoder for the number on the bottle!
There isn't much significant difference between 53-47 and 51-49, but FWIW it fits with my theory that No bounced a bit with the Home Rule speech and is now settling back. Like Mike and others I think Yes is ridiculously long-priced - with the margins as tight as this they shouldn't be worse than about 7-4. i don't think that counting the number of polls showing a slight No edge really proves anything except that there's probably a slight No edge - liable to be overcome on the day if there's any differential turnout.
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
I agree with the reasons for the bookmaker's odds but, as you say, it doesn't explain the BetFair odds (unless the bookmakers are trying to hedge in that market? .... surely not). They look seriously mispriced, with far too long odds on a YES. Again, I think that the weight of money on BetFair reflects an English view that the Scot's will eventually come to their senses. But I fear it won't happen; the SNP has created a new reality...
They have created a brilliant unreality, as will become apparent to Scots over the coming months. It will not be pleasant when the hope turns to fury.
Afternoon all and gosh wasn't ICM a shock to the system for most? Wish I had had spare cash over a year ago when I first said I thought YES would win.
SKY has just announced that George Osborne and Mark Carney have cancelled a trip to Australia next week because of the IndyRef. Squeaky bum time.
Is Sean T sitting in his counting house counting all his Canadian dollars and South African rand
No, Sean isn't counting his money. I went into overseas shares and bonds - and they are all suffering. It's not the end of the world, but it seems UK turbulence is hitting markets everywhere.
I need somewhere nice and safe with a steady 5% return, nothing drastic.
Ideas?
I've got an email from a lovely Nigerian prince if you're interested.
And seriously - in a world where there is overall deflation, and short rates are below zero, there shouldn't really be anywhere where you can get a nice steady 5% return.
Bizarrely Betfair has moved TOWARDS NO and away from YES, following the ICM poll.
Back YES: 4.8
Back NO: 1.25
Either there's a lot of supersmart people with insider info, or the Betfair markets are deluded. I suspect a mix of both, but more of the latter.
That's because of the very high level of undecideds, which (historically) have broken very heavily for the status quo. Including them at 75:25 to 'no' gives you about 58:42. Add in the shy no's (won't says), and you get to about 60:40 for no.
Robert that logic doesn't apply this time. It is reckoned as of yesterday that with the electorate at 4.25 million for next week, that is 98% of the potential maximum. The vast majority of these new voters (apart from the 60,000 or so 16/17 yr olds) are people who have never voted before and never taken part in the democratic process. These people sadly have not registered to vote No. They have registered to vote YES. It is the YES canvassers doing door-to-door round all the large, supposedly socially deprived, council estates in Central Scotland who have identified most of these people and got them to register. The higher the turnout the greater likelihood of a YES victory.
IIRC about 10% of the population move house every year. Most of the new people registering since the latest registration survey last autumn in theory should be house movers and in theory should represent the population at large ie 50% each way. The electoral roll will, I think retain the names of those that have moved out or died, so the numbers will be inflated by 10%.
I'm not going to second guess the polls. Unless they move it really is a dead heat
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Shadsy explained previously that a 'yes' landslide (55%+) would be Ladbrokes worst ever political betting result. (Did he even say non-sport result? Anyway a big 'yes' win would be problematical for this major bookmaking firm.)
But a narrow Yes Win (<55%) would be the best possible outcome for them given how much they've taken on No.
Remind me never to recruit anyone scottish with an economics A level
Would be funny if your commentary was not so sad and desperate.
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is importing less. There simply isn't the demand. Britain's manufacturing base - which underpins its currency price - has shrunk well below healthy levels and that's what underpins the currency, the ability to sell stuff and not have to buy it in meaning accumulation of reserves. Ever wonder why the news doesn't talk about PSBR so much and headlines with GDP figures as though they reflect 'growth'?
The oil age is not running out. It is the peak cheap oil age which is running out. It now costs a lot more in energy to retrieve oil and gas - eROI (energy return on investment). Shale simply doesn't give a high eROI and neither does renewables - better than peat though.
This fall in eROI means investment capitalism fails hence the reason why money printing is used to create the notion that GDP is rising. There is no growth, merely an increase in the money supply caused by an exponential rise in private sector debt / credit and QE. Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
Back on recounts, the following guidance is given to Scottish counting officers:
"7.28 As Counting Officer, you may have the votes re-counted if you consider it appropriate to do so. You must consider any request for a recount but may refuse if, in your opinion, the request is unreasonable. You may, however, consider offering the agents a recalculation of the totals or a full re-count of all ballot papers for the local authority area if you consider it appropriate."
This seems to open the door to recounts because the vote is close. The Officer may refuse, but given what we've seen of the passions raised in last few days, I think things could get very very heated in the early hours of the morning!
The concern for labour in that poll is the UKIP total - 15%....
That's a big reservoir of potential tories, if Cameron can get his offering right.
Whats he going to offer? To withdraw from the EU, implement universal immigration quotas, scrap the green energy policies, scrap his Foreign Aid policy, abandon HS2, commit to an English Parliament, reverse same-sex marriage and on top of that realise he is personally Kipper repellant and resign? And that's just for starters.
Stop kidding yourself Taffys. The Kipper 7th cavalry ain't coming to Dave's rescue......
I don't think he'd have to do all that. For me, the Tories would probably get my vote if their manifesto included:
(1) A pledge to substantial reduction in unskilled non-EU immigration and spelled out the mechanisms for doing that (2) A strong starting point for what they want to negotiate back from the EU, including parts on CAP, CET and free movement. I accept not all of this will be achieved, but the stronger your starting point the closer the end deal will be to your position (3) A renewed focus on civil liberties, including a British bill of rights and bringing in judicial warrants for all searches by GCHQ
To me, none of that is unreasonable for the Conservatives to do, and the vast majority of the party could sign up to it. It's only a small circle of Matthew Parris types around David Cameron that would object.
Putting aside whether you could ever trust the word of such a slippery customer as Cameron on any of it, my point is people's dissatisfaction is so varied one or two changes is not going to accrue many prodigals. For the Tories to recover the necessary votes they would have to make a wide range of concessions. That's also putting aside how unpopular Cameron is with Kippers.
Seriously for the Tories to win in 2015 Cameron would have to step aside and the Tories would have to make the sort of commitments on the EU and Immigration that would make withdrawal at least an even chance (i.e. Brussels would have to back down or we leave).
As for me I'd never go back The attitudes of Tories to UKIP has been far too reminiscent of the disgusting attitudes of Labour to Tories in the preceding 13 years The only real difference being that Labour were actually competent at the politics whereas the Tories are total political inadequates who are their own worst enemies. Then there are all their internal problems. I'm not voting for a broken cardboard cutout caricature of the Labour Party that is divided, and dysfunctional. The Tory brand is broken
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
I refereed quite a few association football matches at high school named after him in Portland, OR. Alas you may have hit the nail on the head with the invasive rhododendron though.
Bizarrely Betfair has moved TOWARDS NO and away from YES, following the ICM poll.
Back YES: 4.8
Back NO: 1.25
Either there's a lot of supersmart people with insider info, or the Betfair markets are deluded. I suspect a mix of both, but more of the latter.
That's because of the very high level of undecideds, which (historically) have broken very heavily for the status quo. Including them at 75:25 to 'no' gives you about 58:42. Add in the shy no's (won't says), and you get to about 60:40 for no.
In the above post you appear to be identifying "Shy NOs as being those wouldn't say. It's just as likely, perhaps more so in a phone poll, that such Shy NOs actually responded YES, thereby doubling the distortion.
There isn't much significant difference between 53-47 and 51-49, but FWIW it fits with my theory that No bounced a bit with the Home Rule speech and is now settling back. Like Mike and others I think Yes is ridiculously long-priced - with the margins as tight as this they shouldn't be worse than about 7-4. i don't think that counting the number of polls showing a slight No edge really proves anything except that there's probably a slight No edge - liable to be overcome on the day if there's any differential turnout.
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
I agree with the reasons for the bookmaker's odds but, as you say, it doesn't explain the BetFair odds (unless the bookmakers are trying to hedge in that market? .... surely not). They look seriously mispriced, with far too long odds on a YES. Again, I think that the weight of money on BetFair reflects an English view that the Scot's will eventually come to their senses. But I fear it won't happen; the SNP has created a new reality...
They have created a brilliant unreality, as will become apparent to Scots over the coming months. It will not be pleasant when the hope turns to fury.
I think that could happen, but I suspect otherwise. Scotland may well unite behind their new country & government and see the short-term pain as a necessary step towards the happy future. I think the separation will go ahead, almost irrespective of just how much pain occurs.
Pam Ayres @PamAyres 26 mins Farewell and adieu bonny Scotland, We bid you goodbye and give thanks, For haggises proud, bagpipers loud, And an imminent run on the banks.
Remind me never to recruit anyone scottish with an economics A level
Would be funny if your commentary was not so sad and desperate.
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is importing less. There simply isn't the demand. Britain's manufacturing base - which underpins its currency price - has shrunk well below healthy levels and that's what underpins the currency, the ability to sell stuff and not have to buy it in meaning accumulation of reserves. Ever wonder why the news doesn't talk about PSBR so much and headlines with GDP figures as though they reflect 'growth'?
The oil age is not running out. It is the peak cheap oil age which is running out. It now costs a lot more in energy to retrieve oil and gas - eROI (energy return on investment). Shale simply doesn't give a high eROI and neither does renewables - better than peat though.
This fall in eROI means investment capitalism fails hence the reason why money printing is used to create the notion that GDP is rising. There is no growth, merely an increase in the money supply caused by an exponential rise in private sector debt / credit and QE. Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
I agree. There's a reservoir of ex-Tories who want to be loved a bit.
I was effed off with Cameron for a while, then he converted me back in spades and I joined up. For the first time ever.
If I can be won back - there's more like me. I recall OGH commenting on my Effed Offness at the time as being a rubicon of sorts for Dave.
Funnily enough, I feel a great deal more bullish about being a Tory than I've ever felt since I was 18yrs old and really irked by Sue Lawley overtalking Norman Tebbit back in 1983.
I think it's up to people like me who can see both sides to be counted. And it's not for more socialism. It's failed. And whilst I want the cybernats et al to bugger off/be glad to see the back of their bully-boy disembling, I want rationale Scots to have the facts and decide based on them, not Bridagoon.
Just from Ladbrokes point of view: We'll win a tidy amount for any NO victory. A 50-55% YES win is bad, a 55%+ YES win is worst.
And I'd be right in assuming that there's no way you would be hedging any business?
For the biggest firms, "getting it right" on the referendum is as much about professional pride as it is about the bottom line. It's not going to trigger a profits warning if 55%+ comes in.
Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
I think you need to revisit your economics knowledge if you think that is the case. It's perfectly plausible for the price of oil to drop below the cost of extraction as the price is based on no more than current demand and supply.
Granted as the price drops below extraction costs any sensible company will stop extraction (so reducing supply and potentially increase the market price) but that assumes companies are always rational or production can be easily stopped.
Basically, the market has split into two; we have a large scottish shop base and those punters have gone overwhelmingly for YES, in particular an easy YES win. The on-line, non-Scottish money has been much more for NO.
On-line only businesses will probably have a totally different exposure than us. Hills took that reputed £800k from one customer on NO, so I expect they are cheering on YES. Until a couple of days ago they didn't have any markets on YES vote share etc, so they haven't got that liability either, despite having loads of shops in Scotland.
"... Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead ..."
That is total bollocks.
I have seen figures quoted that Scottish regiments lost as killed more than 20% of their number over the course of WWI compared to an overall death rate of about 12% (those figures don't actually make sense either, but let that pass) but to claim that the Scots made up 20% of the total UK war dead is just silly.
Never stand between a martyr and their martyrdom.....
The census of 1921 recorded 74,000 war dead in Scotland - half the estimate freely bandied about....
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
Apparently bookies hedge on Betfair and, anyway, if there were a significant underround available by backing NO with Betfair and YES elsewhere it would soon be arbed away.
Interesting. A lot of first time small scale punters in Scotland betting with their hearts rather than their heads?
Meantime the big professional gamblers and institutions clean up.
Or have they got it fundamentally wrong..
It will be the small scale people / punters in Scotland that determine the outcome. Votes are not weighted by stake. The odds on YES are far far too long...
Quite. The 101 of Objection Handling. It's the second answer that's the true one. Which is why we tend to offer our preferred option as the second one in a question. It doesn't look so obvious.
Bizarrely Betfair has moved TOWARDS NO and away from YES, following the ICM poll.
Back YES: 4.8
Back NO: 1.25
Either there's a lot of supersmart people with insider info, or the Betfair markets are deluded. I suspect a mix of both, but more of the latter.
That's because of the very high level of undecideds, which (historically) have broken very heavily for the status quo. Including them at 75:25 to 'no' gives you about 58:42. Add in the shy no's (won't says), and you get to about 60:40 for no.
Robert that logic doesn't apply this time. It is reckoned as of yesterday that with the electorate at 4.25 million for next week, that is 98% of the potential maximum. The vast majority of these new voters (apart from the 60,000 or so 16/17 yr olds) are people who have never voted before and never taken part in the democratic process. These people sadly have not registered to vote No. They have registered to vote YES. It is the YES canvassers doing door-to-door round all the large, supposedly socially deprived, council estates in Central Scotland who have identified most of these people and got them to register. The higher the turnout the greater likelihood of a YES victory.
I'm sorry, my point is simply that a lot of people are saying they are undecided.
It's like when a salesperson asks you: "Do you want to buy this.", if you say 'Yes' it means yes. If you say 'maybe' it means almost certainly no.
Maybe it's a relic of my schooling, but we were proud of our Empire and the pink bits of the map.
I was a young teen when it became very fashionable for our colonies to declare independence. Our atlases were going out of date every month or so, or that's how it felt.
I have no guilt about it at all. We did a great deal of good. Sure it wasn't perfect, but I think on the whole we were as good as the Romans when it came to leaving behind a positive legacy.
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
In the Atlantic, we took millions of Africans from their native lands, shipped them in barbaric conditions across the ocean, often with only a few feet to move in, and then put them into the most brutal slavery upon sugar plantations. Death rates were so high that a philosophy of "better to buy than to breed" emerged, so the slaves were literally worked to death as corporate strategy. Elsewhere, our empire deliberately stopped large chunks of the world from ever industrialising. Incredibly punitive tax rates - above 90% in parts of India - kept hundreds of millions impoverished. On top of this were brutal monopolistic interference by state to make it even worse for them: in many cases of Indian textiles government monopolies caused farmers to be paid less than cost for their output, plunging them ever deeper into debt. The Bengal was the richest country in the world when we took it over, and one of the poorest places in the world by the time we left.
Virtually no investment was made into the development of the people: Far more of the native population became literate in the first two decades of independence than they had under a century of British rule; two centuries in some cases. Democratic rights were suppressed and legitimate protests were occasionally put down brutally. In Amritsar, British troops fired into a crowd of unarmed civilians, killing hundreds and wounding thousands, rather than allow them to express their political opinions. In Kenya, the most terrible torture was done for the same ends, and then covered up by the government. In Australia, outright genocide took place.
In other places, we occasionally did good: particularly places like Hong Kong, Singapore and Chinese treaty ports. We built a lot of railways in India. The suppression of the slave trade from 1807 (even while we continued slavery for another quarter century) was one of the noblest things we ever did. But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
I saw a quote in the Telegraph a few months ago, an obit I think, that the author had come to see that the push towards Irish independance was a device to bring the Conservatives back to power.
Win or lose the Scottish, Welsh and Irish are out of English politics...
I've always taken the next day off after big elections and all my friends thought I was insane.
The poor lady who just delivered my Tesco shopping got my unexpurgated views on SIndy...!! I suspect she has no idea where Catalonia is given the look on her face :^ )
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
They are indeed.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
Politics has been my 'hidden' indulgence since I was about 18/19 (now 30). I'm not from a massively political background.
Though as you say, my friends also think I'm nuts! I've decided to no longer hide my love of all things Political
I agree. There's a reservoir of ex-Tories who want to be loved a bit.
I was effed off with Cameron for a while, then he converted me back in spades and I joined up. For the first time ever.
If I can be won back - there's more like me. I recall OGH commenting on my Effed Offness at the time as being a rubicon of sorts for Dave.
Funnily enough, I feel a great deal more bullish about being a Tory than I've ever felt since I was 18yrs old and really irked by Sue Lawley overtalking Norman Tebbit back in 1983.
I think it's up to people like me who can see both sides to be counted. And it's not for more socialism. It's failed. And whilst I want the cybernats et al to bugger off/be glad to see the back of their bully-boy disembling, I want rationale Scots to have the facts and decide based on them, not Bridagoon.
Stop kidding yourself Taffys. The Kipper 7th cavalry ain't coming to Dave's rescue......
Disagree completely. There are a stack of kipper votes in play, I reckon.
Oh Plato don't give me that. If you fell out with Dave it was only ever a lover's tiff. I'm well aware of your prior Cameroon groupie status and your prior political bed-hopping.
Your political flightiness is nothing like what its taken for many to shift their allegiance to UKIP. Even then not even half of UKIP's support is ex-Tory so its a pretty small pond for the Tories to go fishing in and one that probably has insufficient swing voters in it to make a positive difference for the Tories.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues.
Wait, prices are nose-diving because production in the West is declining?
Someone needs to take Economics 101.
In any case, oil production is rising in the US and Canada. In fact, the US production has risen more in the last 18 months than total UK production. Let me repeat that again: the US has increased oil production by more than total UK production in just a year and a half. So your contention that Western oil production is dropping is wrong.
UK production will continue to decline it is true, as North Sea fields are mature. However, tight oil production in the Permian, the Eagle Ford, the Bakken, plus the oil sands in Canada and a number of other new plays, means that North American production should continue to rise for some time. Furthermore, we are about to see the giant off-shore Brazil fields come on-line in the next couple of years. Longer-term there are other opportunities - small on-shore fields in Eastern Europe, off-shore Ireland, gas-to-liquids - that make me feel pretty comfortable about supply.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
Apparently bookies hedge on Betfair and, anyway, if there were a significant underround available by backing NO with Betfair and YES elsewhere it would soon be arbed away.
Bookies at the track, or small chains of independents, might hedge on betfair. The big firms generally won't bother - it's mostly just giving away value. If you've laid a bad bet, you suck it up.
Interesting. A lot of first time small scale punters in Scotland betting with their hearts rather than their heads?
Meantime the big professional gamblers and institutions clean up.
Or have they got it fundamentally wrong..
It will be the small scale people / punters in Scotland that determine the outcome. Votes are not weighted by stake. The odds on YES are far far too long...
I agree (and I have a direct financial interest in the YES odds shortening) but this has more than a whiff of the 'betting on England to win the world cup' phenomena.
British Pathe has some super vintage political stuff too. I watched one about How To Canvass from the Tories c 1950s.
It was brilliant. I've no idea how they showed this to activists, coffee mornings? I wish I could find it again. It's about 25mins long IIRC and a total DIY guide complete with cut glass accents/ladies in hats/clipboards.
I've always taken the next day off after big elections and all my friends thought I was insane.
The poor lady who just delivered my Tesco shopping got my unexpurgated views on SIndy...!! I suspect she has no idea where Catalonia is given the look on her face :^ )
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
They are indeed.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
Politics has been my 'hidden' indulgence since I was about 18/19 (now 30). I'm not from a massively political background.
Though as you say, my friends also think I'm nuts! I've decided to no longer hide my love of all things Political
It's fun to watch vintage election night programmes on YouTube.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
Yes, the SNP seem happy to argue that there are vast reserves of oil in the North Sea but they seem unwilling to discuss what happens when we switch energy sources. As has been said, the Stone Age didn't end because they ran out of stone.
My school teachers were almost all Old Girls/born in the colonies and loved them passionately. Think Joanna Lumley and Gurkhas.
I was infected by their love of these far flung places. When I spent a month in Rajashstan, I wanted to stay forever. It felt like home. I'm seriously considering doing the move and emigrating there.
Maybe it's a relic of my schooling, but we were proud of our Empire and the pink bits of the map.
I was a young teen when it became very fashionable for our colonies to declare independence. Our atlases were going out of date every month or so, or that's how it felt.
I have no guilt about it at all. We did a great deal of good. Sure it wasn't perfect, but I think on the whole we were as good as the Romans when it came to leaving behind a positive legacy.
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
I always thought you were around the same age as me for some reason. But clearly not.
"... Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead ..."
That is total bollocks.
I have seen figures quoted that Scottish regiments lost as killed more than 20% of their number over the course of WWI compared to an overall death rate of about 12% (those figures don't actually make sense either, but let that pass) but to claim that the Scots made up 20% of the total UK war dead is just silly.
Never stand between a martyr and their martyrdom.....
The census of 1921 recorded 74,000 war dead in Scotland - half the estimate freely bandied about....
Thats the figure I had in mind too. The total recruitment to the British Army from Scotland in WWI was, in round figures, 558k. Giving a death rate of about 13% which is pretty much in line with the Welsh and the English.
The one that does stand out seems to be the Irish with deaths of 51k out of a recruitment of 134k, i.e. damn near 40%. Now, we know about some outstanding acts of collective gallantry by Irish units (the Ulsters on day 1 of the Somme for example) but that figure really does look wrong. Digging into it a bit one finds that the army recorded where a recruit joined (and the change in the arrangements in Ireland may well have confused the records) but the deaths were recorded on Nationality. So a man from Dublin who enlisted in NI or England maybe be recorded in the English Enlistment column but in the Irish column if he were killed.
Anyway which ever you you cut it 74 is not 20% of 700, BlackDouglas is talking bollocks
I was gobsmacked when I watched a documentary about it all a month or so ago. I'd not a clue. Mind, the chappy in charge was as stupid as Quisling in thinking he was *their friend*. Useful idiot more like.
Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
I think you need to revisit your economics knowledge if you think that is the case. It's perfectly plausible for the price of oil to drop below the cost of extraction as the price is based on no more than current demand and supply.
Granted as the price drops below extraction costs any sensible company will stop extraction (so reducing supply and potentially increase the market price) but that assumes companies are always rational or production can be easily stopped.
Oh dear, we are nit-picking. Ok yes, prices can fall below the costs of extraction temporarily. There, now that's out of the way, can we have an normal discussion?
There is no long term supply when prices fall below the cost of extraction, you really only need beans to work that one out, surely? The answer to your pondering, is that supply is hoarded until prices rise which they always do while stockpiling goes on.
Nice theoretical nitpicking but the reality is that as the global economy transitions East and so the City and Wall Street are marginalised, oil deals will be made where production is actually happening - East. We'll sell to China while the speculators pick off English assets at firesale prices as is happening in Greece.
@Tissue_Price No hedging into exchanges going on here.
You are right of course, our potential losses on this are quite small beer compared to the business as a whole. But it would still be very big for a non-sports market.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
I think you need to revisit your economics knowledge if you think that is the case. It's perfectly plausible for the price of oil to drop below the cost of extraction as the price is based on no more than current demand and supply.
Granted as the price drops below extraction costs any sensible company will stop extraction (so reducing supply and potentially increase the market price) but that assumes companies are always rational or production can be easily stopped.
Oh dear, we are nit-picking. Ok yes, prices can fall below the costs of extraction temporarily. There, now that's out of the way, can we have an normal discussion?
There is no long term supply when prices fall below the cost of extraction, you really only need beans to work that one out, surely? The answer to your pondering, is that supply is hoarded until prices rise which they always do while stockpiling goes on.
Nice theoretical nitpicking but the reality is that as the global economy transitions East and so the City and Wall Street are marginalised, oil deals will be made where production is actually happening - East. We'll sell to China while the speculators pick off English assets at firesale prices as is happening in Greece.
There are two different 'costs of extraction': one is the marginal lifting cost - i.e. the cost of running the pumps, doing the maintenance, and getting the oil to the refiner. The second is the total cost, including the capital expenditure that was required at the start of the project: in particular to drill the holes, etc.
It is quite possible for the cost of oil to be well below the fully loaded cost of production for many years (it was from 1985 to 1996, probably), but it is not possible for it to be below the lifting cost for any sustained period of time.
Maybe it's a relic of my schooling, but we were proud of our Empire and the pink bits of the map.
I was a young teen when it became very fashionable for our colonies to declare independence. Our atlases were going out of date every month or so, or that's how it felt.
I have no guilt about it at all. We did a great deal of good. Sure it wasn't perfect, but I think on the whole we were as good as the Romans when it came to leaving behind a positive legacy.
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
I always thought you were around the same age as me for some reason. But clearly not.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
Then it would have been the Indian Empire.
Well, I said federation! And in my alternate history we'd have all English-speaking territories involved, even Ireland and the USA - and the EU too, by virtue of it using English as an official language amongst 20 others (a bit like India!).
Not bright enough to take in everything that makes up this analysis, but pretty sure it's not voodoo.
'Society Disagrees Scotland is “Better Together”
Next week Scotland goes to the polls and for the very first time this week the BBC quoted a YouGov poll saying that the Yes campaign may just about be in the lead. Until now all the polls that I saw them reporting showed the “NO” campaign to be ahead. Everyone is saying that the vote will be close. Majestic is a big data source which can extrapolate deep insights from the way in which pages and entities on the web connect to each other. We thought it would be useful to turn our insights onto the Scottish independence referendum. From my analysis, it looks like the Yes campaign will beat the No campaign on polling day. As I write this I am personally very disappointed as I think Scotland would be stronger in the union. We predicted it correctly for the Mayor of London, and Obama vs Romney – so we do have a track of calling these things.'
The Times explained, yesterday, why the odds are so daft with the official bookies. It's because they've taken huge bets on NO and they need to balance the books, and take some bets on YES, or risk calamity. So they are making NO as unattractive as possible - 1/6 on one bookie right now (insane). They don't want any more NO bets.
Meanwhile they want to make YES attractive to punters, to hedge against the same disaster, so they are being generous.
That's what's happening there.
However this doesn't explain the misalignment on Betfair.
Apparently bookies hedge on Betfair and, anyway, if there were a significant underround available by backing NO with Betfair and YES elsewhere it would soon be arbed away.
Bookies at the track, or small chains of independents, might hedge on betfair. The big firms generally won't bother - it's mostly just giving away value. If you've laid a bad bet, you suck it up.
British Pathe has some super vintage political stuff too. I watched one about How To Canvass from the Tories c 1950s.
It was brilliant. I've no idea how they showed this to activists, coffee mornings? I wish I could find it again. It's about 25mins long IIRC and a total DIY guide complete with cut glass accents/ladies in hats/clipboards.
I've always taken the next day off after big elections and all my friends thought I was insane.
The poor lady who just delivered my Tesco shopping got my unexpurgated views on SIndy...!! I suspect she has no idea where Catalonia is given the look on her face :^ )
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
They are indeed.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
Politics has been my 'hidden' indulgence since I was about 18/19 (now 30). I'm not from a massively political background.
Though as you say, my friends also think I'm nuts! I've decided to no longer hide my love of all things Political
It's fun to watch vintage election night programmes on YouTube.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
Yes, the SNP seem happy to argue that there are vast reserves of oil in the North Sea but they seem unwilling to discuss what happens when we switch energy sources. As has been said, the Stone Age didn't end because they ran out of stone.
Oh deary me.
You can't switch energy sources. Oil is used in 95% of products and so effects the price of everything. You put oil in plastic bags, packaging, clothes and so and so on. Do you think you can use wind power to make a plastic bag? No, manufacturing plants need physical oil for machinery too - can you oil a machine with wind power? No. And oil takes little energy to extract so for example it used to be that 1:90 energy return so in plane terms one barrel of oil would be used up to extract 90. With renewables this ratio is around 1:5. This means that prices go up 18 -19 times even for those things which oil can be replaced.
However because oil cannot be replaced in production, it means you do not need replacement energy because there is no industrial economy left to motor. You simply revert back to agriculture in a post-industrial economy. All you gamblers should be investing in agricultural equipment while you still have time..
The Scots will use our 50-100 years of oil to diversify and become even more self-sufficient than we already are..
And if it was as you say * a lover's tiff* - then again, there are plenty of us about. Political bed-hopping?! Golly how exciting that sounds. It's the lot of the floating voter who listens to arguments pro-anti, not a drone who can't see another way to get the right result.
Attempting to trivialise my SubSampleOfOne makes more of a fool of you than me.
I agree. There's a reservoir of ex-Tories who want to be loved a bit.
I was effed off with Cameron for a while, then he converted me back in spades and I joined up. For the first time ever.
If I can be won back - there's more like me. I recall OGH commenting on my Effed Offness at the time as being a rubicon of sorts for Dave.
Funnily enough, I feel a great deal more bullish about being a Tory than I've ever felt since I was 18yrs old and really irked by Sue Lawley overtalking Norman Tebbit back in 1983.
I think it's up to people like me who can see both sides to be counted. And it's not for more socialism. It's failed. And whilst I want the cybernats et al to bugger off/be glad to see the back of their bully-boy disembling, I want rationale Scots to have the facts and decide based on them, not Bridagoon.
Stop kidding yourself Taffys. The Kipper 7th cavalry ain't coming to Dave's rescue......
Disagree completely. There are a stack of kipper votes in play, I reckon.
Oh Plato don't give me that. If you fell out with Dave it was only ever a lover's tiff. I'm well aware of your prior Cameroon groupie status and your prior political bed-hopping.
Your political flightiness is nothing like what its taken for many to shift their allegiance to UKIP. Even then not even half of UKIP's support is ex-Tory so its a pretty small pond for the Tories to go fishing in and one that probably has insufficient swing voters in it to make a positive difference for the Tories.
My school teachers were almost all Old Girls/born in the colonies and loved them passionately. Think Joanna Lumley and Gurkhas.
I was infected by their love of these far flung places. When I spent a month in Rajashstan, I wanted to stay forever. It felt like home. I'm seriously considering doing the move and emigrating there.
O/T
Was it you who added me to their LinkedIn the other day? On Googling the name, found out it was someone from Sussex who liked cats
Maybe it's a relic of my schooling, but we were proud of our Empire and the pink bits of the map.
I was a young teen when it became very fashionable for our colonies to declare independence. Our atlases were going out of date every month or so, or that's how it felt.
I have no guilt about it at all. We did a great deal of good. Sure it wasn't perfect, but I think on the whole we were as good as the Romans when it came to leaving behind a positive legacy.
Years ago , I listened to a fascinating R4 prog about Mr Douglas - the explorer. IIRC he brought home lupins and rhododendrons - and has fir named after him. That's what *being British* means to me.
I always thought you were around the same age as me for some reason. But clearly not.
I agree. There's a reservoir of ex-Tories who want to be loved a bit.
I was effed off with Cameron for a while, then he converted me back in spades and I joined up. For the first time ever.
If I can be won back - there's more like me. I recall OGH commenting on my Effed Offness at the time as being a rubicon of sorts for Dave.
Funnily enough, I feel a great deal more bullish about being a Tory than I've ever felt since I was 18yrs old and really irked by Sue Lawley overtalking Norman Tebbit back in 1983.
I think it's up to people like me who can see both sides to be counted. And it's not for more socialism. It's failed. And whilst I want the cybernats et al to bugger off/be glad to see the back of their bully-boy disembling, I want rationale Scots to have the facts and decide based on them, not Bridagoon.
Stop kidding yourself Taffys. The Kipper 7th cavalry ain't coming to Dave's rescue......
Disagree completely. There are a stack of kipper votes in play, I reckon.
Oh Plato don't give me that. If you fell out with Dave it was only ever a lover's tiff. I'm well aware of your prior Cameroon groupie status and your prior political bed-hopping.
Your political flightiness is nothing like what its taken for many to shift their allegiance to UKIP. Even then not even half of UKIP's support is ex-Tory so its a pretty small pond for the Tories to go fishing in and one that probably has insufficient swing voters in it to make a positive difference for the Tories.
If too many Tory>ukip look like they're going back to Dave why wouldn't Lab/Lib>Ukip also go home to stop them counting?
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues.
Wait, prices are nose-diving because production in the West is declining?
Someone needs to take Economics 101.
In any case, oil production is rising in the US and Canada. In fact, the US production has risen more in the last 18 months than total UK production. Let me repeat that again: the US has increased oil production by more than total UK production in just a year and a half. So your contention that Western oil production is dropping is wrong.
UK production will continue to decline it is true, as North Sea fields are mature. However, tight oil production in the Permian, the Eagle Ford, the Bakken, plus the oil sands in Canada and a number of other new plays, means that North American production should continue to rise for some time. Furthermore, we are about to see the giant off-shore Brazil fields come on-line in the next couple of years. Longer-term there are other opportunities - small on-shore fields in Eastern Europe, off-shore Ireland, gas-to-liquids - that make me feel pretty comfortable about supply.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
I wasn't talking about oil production but industrial production generally. The West is not producing things and so needs to import less oil. Some manufacturing is returning to the States however, in general, they just don't need as much oil cause financiers have hollowed out their economy. And it's not just GDP figures I don't believe, when it comes to the States I really don't believe any of their official stats any more than folk used to believe Soviet economic stats..
British Pathe has some super vintage political stuff too. I watched one about How To Canvass from the Tories c 1950s.
It was brilliant. I've no idea how they showed this to activists, coffee mornings? I wish I could find it again. It's about 25mins long IIRC and a total DIY guide complete with cut glass accents/ladies in hats/clipboards.
I've always taken the next day off after big elections and all my friends thought I was insane.
The poor lady who just delivered my Tesco shopping got my unexpurgated views on SIndy...!! I suspect she has no idea where Catalonia is given the look on her face :^ )
I love the way the same poll is open to such different interpretations / spin, depending on the angle you come at things from...for example:
ft.com: Second Scots poll gives No campaign lead ICM survey backs claims that Yes surge has been halted
elswhere: "Neck and neck" "still too close to call" "everything to play for" etc etc...
Neck and neck et al will surely sell more papers
Thing is, both interpretations are valid.
It is neck and neck: scrotum-tighteningly close.
Yet I can't help feeling (perhaps optimistically) that at the height of the Salmond Leap, last weekend, when YES seemed to be sweeping to victory, this same ICM poll might have shown YES ahead.
Now we've just got to sit it out and wait for the next nerve wracker. I understand we have 36 hours to actually do some work, isn't that right? Opinium/Observer is the next poll: tomorrow night.
I'm sure TSE will confirm this, if so.
And now I am actually going to do some of that work.
They are indeed.
I think though, from a frank position, the papers must love such events as this. Don't blame them of course!
These polls, tweets are ruining my nerves. My usual cool exterior close to cracking!
If that's the case now, next Thursday overnight will be truly horrendous for what's left of my nerves!
I've already warned my Wife to expect me to still be up when she awakes for work. I've taken a long weekend just for the referendum.
Politics has been my 'hidden' indulgence since I was about 18/19 (now 30). I'm not from a massively political background.
Though as you say, my friends also think I'm nuts! I've decided to no longer hide my love of all things Political
It's fun to watch vintage election night programmes on YouTube.
Oh that was me! I clicked on some random Google thingy link and it hoovered up all my online chats and spammed a bunch of people who've no idea who I actually am.
I do like integrated platforms/single sign-ons, but that one caught me out entirely!
My school teachers were almost all Old Girls/born in the colonies and loved them passionately. Think Joanna Lumley and Gurkhas.
I was infected by their love of these far flung places. When I spent a month in Rajashstan, I wanted to stay forever. It felt like home. I'm seriously considering doing the move and emigrating there.
O/T
Was it you who added me to their LinkedIn the other day? On Googling the name, found out it was someone from Sussex who liked cats
That's the Tories first lead with Ipsos-Mori since December 2011 and Vetogasm
Tories tired of taking one for the Union saying 'f*ck it'?
Although I'm an unabashed unionist I think the No campaign tactic of suggesting Labour will win the next GE is ludicrous and has back-fired. Ed has gone up there and looks an irrelevance , rather like Man U since Fergie left. Ruth Davidson on the other hand - quite impressive.
Ruth Davidson is the politicain coming out of this with the best enhancement to her reputation. In an independent Scotland she would absolutely revitalise and independent Conservative party.
If that is the Tories future in an independent Scotland they will not be in power this century
Oh that was me! I clicked on some random Google thingy link and it hoovered up all my online chats and spammed a bunch of people who've no idea who I actually am.
I do like integrated platforms/single sign-ons, but that one caught me out entirely!
My school teachers were almost all Old Girls/born in the colonies and loved them passionately. Think Joanna Lumley and Gurkhas.
I was infected by their love of these far flung places. When I spent a month in Rajashstan, I wanted to stay forever. It felt like home. I'm seriously considering doing the move and emigrating there.
O/T
Was it you who added me to their LinkedIn the other day? On Googling the name, found out it was someone from Sussex who liked cats
Apologies if it wasn't!
Oh I see, no worries. I'm happy for you to be in my network. Alanbrooke of this parish is too, though I believe he added me quite deliberately
The way the Scottish referendum has panned out makes me even more sure UKIP will get a good voteshare in next year's election. Far from people going back to the status quo or the "serious" options, if anything it seems that people become even more determined to give the "Westminster elite" a kicking as they start focussing on an election/referendum. Even 15% for them is a possibility imo.
Remind me never to recruit anyone scottish with an economics A level
Would be funny if your commentary was not so sad and desperate.
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is im aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
All that typing just for me to say total bollocks.
World manufacturing output is higher than it was 10 years ago even allowing for the recession. The manufacturing sits in China Germany and is coming back to the US. They still all need energy, Uk output hardly affects it.
How the hell you calculate that UK manufacturing which is about 10% of the economy underpins the currency only you can explain. But I doubt many will agree with you.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
Then it would have been the Indian Empire.
Well, I said federation! And in my alternate history we'd have all English-speaking territories involved, even Ireland and the USA - and the EU too, by virtue of it using English as an official language amongst 20 others (a bit like India!).
I'm pleased the British Empire existed. It wasn't a choice back then between free independent loving states and imperialism. It was a case of which empire do you want to be ruled by. If India hadn't been under British rule, it would probably have been under Mughal or Maratha rule until either Russian, Portugese or French influence displaced it, which might have been even worse.
As it happens, India was a left as a state with a love of democratic institutions, common law, a functioning justice system, a good railway network, a strong army and a passion for cricket.
There's plenty of things I'd like to have changed about British rule, but none of those things might have occurred without it. Besides which, it's worth not for forging that everyday life, even in the UK, wasn't exactly smelling of roses in the 18th and 19th centuries either. A 12 year old boy could be executed for nicking a bit of silver to sell to pay for food. Men were transported for life for stealth g loaves of bread, children as young as 5 worked in factories and mines, and thousands of people who lived on the breadline anyway died young from horrible and preventable diseases.
Eh, you might note that with only 9% of the population, Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead thanks to policy in London. Our industrial base around the Clyde Basin was the kernal of Britain's war effort - we made the tanks, ammo and so on that protected Britain during both wars. Our input into the war effort was per capital much more valuable than any other part of Britain. And yet we now see cabinet papers which showed that there were plans to give up Scotland and protect England if Germany invaded.. Indeed it was a highland industrialist that went around Britain before WW2 investing in factories so that they could quickly be turned into war manufacturing plants for items such as spitfires. Then there was the John Logie Baird's input into the development of radar - both of these latter incidences led to Britain winning the Battle of Britain and prevented the German land invasion.
As someone who's grandfather died on D-Day - a royal marine commando - after being shot in the head by a German sniper, I really take offence at this comment and wonder why it hasn't been moderated out?
off to a cracking start there Dougie.
Now you're demanding the moderator imposes censorship. Welcome to PB by the way ;-)
Alan, I think he is quite rightly just pointing out that the moderator (TSE) is an arse of the first order.
Not bright enough to take in everything that makes up this analysis, but pretty sure it's not voodoo.
'Society Disagrees Scotland is “Better Together”
Next week Scotland goes to the polls and for the very first time this week the BBC quoted a YouGov poll saying that the Yes campaign may just about be in the lead. Until now all the polls that I saw them reporting showed the “NO” campaign to be ahead. Everyone is saying that the vote will be close. Majestic is a big data source which can extrapolate deep insights from the way in which pages and entities on the web connect to each other. We thought it would be useful to turn our insights onto the Scottish independence referendum. From my analysis, it looks like the Yes campaign will beat the No campaign on polling day. As I write this I am personally very disappointed as I think Scotland would be stronger in the union. We predicted it correctly for the Mayor of London, and Obama vs Romney – so we do have a track of calling these things.'
Seems to completely ignore the fact that voter-age is crucial in this referendum - in a way it wasn't in Obama or the London mayoralty, or indeed in any election anywhere.
YES has been dominant on Twitter for months. Facebookers and Twitterers, et al, are in their 20s, 30s and 40s - we know these people are trending YES.
The people voting NO are the very young and the 55+. Especially the pensioners who are overwhelmingly NO. My 77 year old mum very rarely goes on the net (once a month?), but she damn well votes.
I think he's just not realised the age factor.
But we shall see. I confess to having the collywobbles again. I thought NO had sealed it yesterday. But ICM is unnerving, and makes me doubt.
I have no doubts about the economic effects of YES. They will start off quite bad, and then get worse. For everyone. I expect exchange controls on the Scottish border within days, to stop capital flight. There may even be physical guards at the border to stop Scots bringing pounds into England. That's what happened when the Slovaks divorced the Czechs.
"During the intervening period, the border was closed to prevent Slovaks escaping the expected devaluation of their currency by carrying their koruna into the Czech Republic"
I think your the only person I've come across more nervous than I.
Eh, you might note that with only 9% of the population, Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead thanks to policy in London. Our industrial base around the Clyde Basin was the kernal of Britain's war effort - we made the tanks, ammo and so on that protected Britain during both wars. Our input into the war effort was per capital much more valuable than any other part of Britain. And yet we now see cabinet papers which showed that there were plans to give up Scotland and protect England if Germany invaded.. Indeed it was a highland industrialist that went around Britain before WW2 investing in factories so that they could quickly be turned into war manufacturing plants for items such as spitfires. Then there was the John Logie Baird's input into the development of radar - both of these latter incidences led to Britain winning the Battle of Britain and prevented the German land invasion.
As someone who's grandfather died on D-Day - a royal marine commando - after being shot in the head by a German sniper, I really take offence at this comment and wonder why it hasn't been moderated out?
off to a cracking start there Dougie.
Now you're demanding the moderator imposes censorship. Welcome to PB by the way ;-)
Alan, I think he is quite rightly just pointing out that the moderator (TSE) is an arse of the first order.
nah malc, this guy's a keeper.
There are enough posters who work in oil and energy on this board ( patrick, RCS1000, Richard T, Mr casino ) so seeing someone telling they don't know what they're talking about is popcorn time.
I just hope he keeps pushing the boat out on how little he understands manufacturing. ;-)
Eh, you might note that with only 9% of the population, Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead thanks to policy in London. Our industrial base around the Clyde Basin was the kernal of Britain's war effort - we made the tanks, ammo and so on that protected Britain during both wars. Our input into the war effort was per capital much more valuable than any other part of Britain. And yet we now see cabinet papers which showed that there were plans to give up Scotland and protect England if Germany invaded.. Indeed it was a highland industrialist that went around Britain before WW2 investing in factories so that they could quickly be turned into war manufacturing plants for items such as spitfires. Then there was the John Logie Baird's input into the development of radar - both of these latter incidences led to Britain winning the Battle of Britain and prevented the German land invasion.
As someone who's grandfather died on D-Day - a royal marine commando - after being shot in the head by a German sniper, I really take offence at this comment and wonder why it hasn't been moderated out?
off to a cracking start there Dougie.
Now you're demanding the moderator imposes censorship. Welcome to PB by the way ;-)
Alan, I think he is quite rightly just pointing out that the moderator (TSE) is an arse of the first order.
nah malc, this guy's a keeper.
There are enough posters who work in oil and energy on this board ( patrick, RCS1000, Richard T, Mr casino ) so seeing someone telling they don't know what they're talking about is popcorn time.
I just hope he keeps pushing the boat out on how little he understands manufacturing. ;-)
I will stick to turnip spotting , which is about 80% of posters on here so keeps me busy.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
Then it would have been the Indian Empire.
Well, I said federation! And in my alternate history we'd have all English-speaking territories involved, even Ireland and the USA - and the EU too, by virtue of it using English as an official language amongst 20 others (a bit like India!).
I'm pleased the British Empire existed. It wasn't a choice back then between free independent loving states and imperialism. It was a case of which empire do you want to be ruled by. If India hadn't been under British rule, it would probably have been under Mughal or Maratha rule until either Russian, Portugese or French influence displaced it, which might have been even worse.
As it happens, India was a left as a state with a love of democratic institutions, common law, a functioning justice system, a good railway network, a strong army and a passion for cricket.
There's plenty of things I'd like to have changed about British rule, but none of those things might have occurred without it. Besides which, it's worth not for forging that everyday life, even in the UK, wasn't exactly smelling of roses in the 18th and 19th centuries either. A 12 year old boy could be executed for nicking a bit of silver to sell to pay for food. Men were transported for life for stealth g loaves of bread, children as young as 5 worked in factories and mines, and thousands of people who lived on the breadline anyway died young from horrible and preventable diseases.
India would certainly have been better under the Mughals. They would have still had the same punitive tax rates, but they wouldn't have had the crippling monopoly system. India had the same per capita income in 1947 as it did 200 years earlier. Bengal was turned from a manufacturing powerhouse to a raw agricultural exporter economy: British administrators openly boasted how they had moved the manufacture from there to Britain. You can't say life in 1947 was that bad in Britain, so that's a canard. The experiences of France and Portugal in India suggest it wouldn't have been any worse under them, but to be fair, it probably wouldn't have been any better.
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues.
Wait, prices are nose-diving because production in the West is declining?
Someone needs to take Economics 101.
In any case, oil production is rising in the US and Canada. In fact, the US production has risen more in the last 18 months than total UK production. Let me repeat that again: the US has increased oil production by more than total UK production in just a year and a half. So your contention that Western oil production is dropping is wrong.
UK production will continue to decline it is true, as North Sea fields are mature. However, tight oil production in the Permian, the Eagle Ford, the Bakken, plus the oil sands in Canada and a number of other new plays, means that North American production should continue to rise for some time. Furthermore, we are about to see the giant off-shore Brazil fields come on-line in the next couple of years. Longer-term there are other opportunities - small on-shore fields in Eastern Europe, off-shore Ireland, gas-to-liquids - that make me feel pretty comfortable about supply.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
I wasn't talking about oil production but industrial production generally. The West is not producing things and so needs to import less oil. Some manufacturing is returning to the States however, in general, they just don't need as much oil cause financiers have hollowed out their economy. And it's not just GDP figures I don't believe, when it comes to the States I really don't believe any of their official stats any more than folk used to believe Soviet economic stats..
Industrial output continues to climb in the West. It's just employment in industry that falls as we get more productive.
But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
If only the Empire were a fully democratic federation.
Then it would have been the Indian Empire.
Well, I said federation! And in my alternate history we'd have all English-speaking territories involved, even Ireland and the USA - and the EU too, by virtue of it using English as an official language amongst 20 others (a bit like India!).
I'm pleased the British Empire existed. It wasn't a choice back then between free independent loving states and imperialism. It was a case of which empire do you want to be ruled by. If India hadn't been under British rule, it would probably have been under Mughal or Maratha rule until either Russian, Portugese or French influence displaced it, which might have been even worse.
As it happens, India was a left as a state with a love of democratic institutions, common law, a functioning justice system, a good railway network, a strong army and a passion for cricket.
There's plenty of things I'd like to have changed about British rule, but none of those things might have occurred without it. Besides which, it's worth not for forging that everyday life, even in the UK, wasn't exactly smelling of roses in the 18th and 19th centuries either. A 12 year old boy could be executed for nicking a bit of silver to sell to pay for food. Men were transported for life for stealth g loaves of bread, children as young as 5 worked in factories and mines, and thousands of people who lived on the breadline anyway died young from horrible and preventable diseases.
It's quite interesting in this connection to consider the history of Thailand. Alone among SE Asian States the rulers played off one European state against another and maintained their independence. It's prosperous and confident, but one big problem is that it has to catch up with English (or French) as a trading language.
"... Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead ..."
That is total bollocks.
I have seen figures quoted that Scottish regiments lost as killed more than 20% of their number over the course of WWI compared to an overall death rate of about 12% (those figures don't actually make sense either, but let that pass) but to claim that the Scots made up 20% of the total UK war dead is just silly.
Never stand between a martyr and their martyrdom.....
The census of 1921 recorded 74,000 war dead in Scotland - half the estimate freely bandied about....
Maybe I'm not hugely accurate with my war stats. Here is one source putting WW1 at 25% of total:
"A total of 147,609 Scots lost their lives in the four-year-long conflict between 1914 and 1918. While Scotland had just a tenth of the UK's population, its soldiers accounted for a fifth of Britain's war dead. Or, to put it another way, twice as many Scots died per head of population than was the case south of the border." http://www.scotland.org.uk/history/great-war
"the number of Scots killed was disproportionally higher than the other parts of Britain (26.4% compared to 11.8%)." The Scottish Military Research Group
"Niall Ferguson first quoted the figure of 26.4% as a total number of Scots killed as a percentage of those who mobilised, on page 299 of his book The Pity of War in 1998 . On the previous page of his book he also said the following:
Sir Tom Devine’s figures are in his book The Scottish Nation 1700-2000. (published 2000) on page 309.
"Of the 557,000 Scots who enlisted in all services, 26.4 per cent lost their lives. This compares with an average death rate of 11.8 per cent for the rest of the British army between 1914 and 1918. Of all the combatant nations, only the Serbs and the Turks had higher per capita mortality rates”
I enjoy little Englander bon mots and the oily arrogance of southern Tories but facts have to count at some point, no?
Comments
The perfect knowledgeable response to Because I Say So assertions.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 39m
US announces fresh sanctions on Russia - hitting its largest bank, Sberbank, as well as energy & defence industries http://bbc.in/1win6AO
For US military that has been willing to pay $34 for rivet as long as 10 years ago and has had 7 fighter planes crash in the past 5 weeks, it looks like a nervous breakdown.
BlokeNHSF...UP UKIP @Bnhsfup 47m
Two US Navy jets crash in W. Pacific: 1 pilot injured, 1 missing — RT USA http://rt.com/usa/187328-us-jets-crash-pacific/#.VBMAwQog8xg.twitter …
"... Scots accounted for over 20% of war dead ..."
That is total bollocks.
I have seen figures quoted that Scottish regiments lost as killed more than 20% of their number over the course of WWI compared to an overall death rate of about 12% (those figures don't actually make sense either, but let that pass) but to claim that the Scots made up 20% of the total UK war dead is just silly.
Disclaimer; that's a comment and should be taken to represent my views in any way!
Mr. K, what are the new sanctions for?
No, not that one.
http://tinyurl.com/pzec2cn
Please note this is not investment advice.
I'd rather drink nail polish remover.
And seriously - in a world where there is overall deflation, and short rates are below zero, there shouldn't really be anywhere where you can get a nice steady 5% return.
I'm not going to second guess the polls. Unless they move it really is a dead heat
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
See this German military study done a few years back: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/peak-oil-and-the-german-government-military-study-warns-of-a-potentially-drastic-oil-crisis-a-715138.html
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is importing less. There simply isn't the demand. Britain's manufacturing base - which underpins its currency price - has shrunk well below healthy levels and that's what underpins the currency, the ability to sell stuff and not have to buy it in meaning accumulation of reserves. Ever wonder why the news doesn't talk about PSBR so much and headlines with GDP figures as though they reflect 'growth'?
The oil age is not running out. It is the peak cheap oil age which is running out. It now costs a lot more in energy to retrieve oil and gas - eROI (energy return on investment). Shale simply doesn't give a high eROI and neither does renewables - better than peat though.
This fall in eROI means investment capitalism fails hence the reason why money printing is used to create the notion that GDP is rising. There is no growth, merely an increase in the money supply caused by an exponential rise in private sector debt / credit and QE. Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
"7.28 As Counting Officer, you may have the votes re-counted if you consider it appropriate to do so. You must consider any request for a recount but may refuse if, in your opinion, the request is unreasonable. You may, however, consider offering the agents a recalculation of the totals or a full re-count of all ballot papers for the local authority area if you consider it appropriate."
This seems to open the door to recounts because the vote is close. The Officer may refuse, but given what we've seen of the passions raised in last few days, I think things could get very very heated in the early hours of the morning!
Seriously for the Tories to win in 2015 Cameron would have to step aside and the Tories would have to make the sort of commitments on the EU and Immigration that would make withdrawal at least an even chance (i.e. Brussels would have to back down or we leave).
As for me I'd never go back The attitudes of Tories to UKIP has been far too reminiscent of the disgusting attitudes of Labour to Tories in the preceding 13 years The only real difference being that Labour were actually competent at the politics whereas the Tories are total political inadequates who are their own worst enemies. Then there are all their internal problems. I'm not voting for a broken cardboard cutout caricature of the Labour Party that is divided, and dysfunctional. The Tory brand is broken
Farewell and adieu bonny Scotland, We bid you goodbye and give thanks, For haggises proud, bagpipers loud, And an imminent run on the banks.
Meantime the big professional gamblers and institutions clean up.
Or have they got it fundamentally wrong..
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
See this German military study done a few years back: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/peak-oil-and-the-german-government-military-study-warns-of-a-potentially-drastic-oil-crisis-a-715138.html
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is importing less. There simply isn't the demand. Britain's manufacturing base - which underpins its currency price - has shrunk well below healthy levels and that's what underpins the currency, the ability to sell stuff and not have to buy it in meaning accumulation of reserves. Ever wonder why the news doesn't talk about PSBR so much and headlines with GDP figures as though they reflect 'growth'?
The oil age is not running out. It is the peak cheap oil age which is running out. It now costs a lot more in energy to retrieve oil and gas - eROI (energy return on investment). Shale simply doesn't give a high eROI and neither does renewables - better than peat though.
This fall in eROI means investment capitalism fails hence the reason why money printing is used to create the notion that GDP is rising. There is no growth, merely an increase in the money supply caused by an exponential rise in private sector debt / credit and QE. Remember too that oil cannot fall below the cost of extraction which until recently was aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
Delusional. Truly delusional.
I was effed off with Cameron for a while, then he converted me back in spades and I joined up. For the first time ever.
If I can be won back - there's more like me. I recall OGH commenting on my Effed Offness at the time as being a rubicon of sorts for Dave.
Funnily enough, I feel a great deal more bullish about being a Tory than I've ever felt since I was 18yrs old and really irked by Sue Lawley overtalking Norman Tebbit back in 1983.
I think it's up to people like me who can see both sides to be counted. And it's not for more socialism. It's failed. And whilst I want the cybernats et al to bugger off/be glad to see the back of their bully-boy disembling, I want rationale Scots to have the facts and decide based on them, not Bridagoon.
For the biggest firms, "getting it right" on the referendum is as much about professional pride as it is about the bottom line. It's not going to trigger a profits warning if 55%+ comes in.
Granted as the price drops below extraction costs any sensible company will stop extraction (so reducing supply and potentially increase the market price) but that assumes companies are always rational or production can be easily stopped.
On-line only businesses will probably have a totally different exposure than us. Hills took that reputed £800k from one customer on NO, so I expect they are cheering on YES. Until a couple of days ago they didn't have any markets on YES vote share etc, so they haven't got that liability either, despite having loads of shops in Scotland.
The census of 1921 recorded 74,000 war dead in Scotland - half the estimate freely bandied about....
Virtually no investment was made into the development of the people: Far more of the native population became literate in the first two decades of independence than they had under a century of British rule; two centuries in some cases. Democratic rights were suppressed and legitimate protests were occasionally put down brutally. In Amritsar, British troops fired into a crowd of unarmed civilians, killing hundreds and wounding thousands, rather than allow them to express their political opinions. In Kenya, the most terrible torture was done for the same ends, and then covered up by the government. In Australia, outright genocide took place.
In other places, we occasionally did good: particularly places like Hong Kong, Singapore and Chinese treaty ports. We built a lot of railways in India. The suppression of the slave trade from 1807 (even while we continued slavery for another quarter century) was one of the noblest things we ever did. But this can not make up for the subjugation and impoverishment of hundreds of millions. Edmund Burke, one of the finest thinkers that ever graced parliament recognised very early on how colonialism was a betrayal of our own values, and how autocracy abroad led to illiberal governance at home. We would still be wise to listen to him today.
Win or lose the Scottish, Welsh and Irish are out of English politics...
If one can't nerd about what we love - what's the point?! :^ )
Embracing one's inner nerd is de rigeur on here!
Your political flightiness is nothing like what its taken for many to shift their allegiance to UKIP. Even then not even half of UKIP's support is ex-Tory so its a pretty small pond for the Tories to go fishing in and one that probably has insufficient swing voters in it to make a positive difference for the Tories.
Someone needs to take Economics 101.
In any case, oil production is rising in the US and Canada. In fact, the US production has risen more in the last 18 months than total UK production. Let me repeat that again: the US has increased oil production by more than total UK production in just a year and a half. So your contention that Western oil production is dropping is wrong.
UK production will continue to decline it is true, as North Sea fields are mature. However, tight oil production in the Permian, the Eagle Ford, the Bakken, plus the oil sands in Canada and a number of other new plays, means that North American production should continue to rise for some time. Furthermore, we are about to see the giant off-shore Brazil fields come on-line in the next couple of years. Longer-term there are other opportunities - small on-shore fields in Eastern Europe, off-shore Ireland, gas-to-liquids - that make me feel pretty comfortable about supply.
On the demand side, it's worth noting that cars are becoming much more efficient and electrical vehicles are cutting into oil demand.
It was brilliant. I've no idea how they showed this to activists, coffee mornings? I wish I could find it again. It's about 25mins long IIRC and a total DIY guide complete with cut glass accents/ladies in hats/clipboards.
My school teachers were almost all Old Girls/born in the colonies and loved them passionately. Think Joanna Lumley and Gurkhas.
I was infected by their love of these far flung places. When I spent a month in Rajashstan, I wanted to stay forever. It felt like home. I'm seriously considering doing the move and emigrating there.
The one that does stand out seems to be the Irish with deaths of 51k out of a recruitment of 134k, i.e. damn near 40%. Now, we know about some outstanding acts of collective gallantry by Irish units (the Ulsters on day 1 of the Somme for example) but that figure really does look wrong. Digging into it a bit one finds that the army recorded where a recruit joined (and the change in the arrangements in Ireland may well have confused the records) but the deaths were recorded on Nationality. So a man from Dublin who enlisted in NI or England maybe be recorded in the English Enlistment column but in the Irish column if he were killed.
Anyway which ever you you cut it 74 is not 20% of 700, BlackDouglas is talking bollocks
I was gobsmacked when I watched a documentary about it all a month or so ago. I'd not a clue. Mind, the chappy in charge was as stupid as Quisling in thinking he was *their friend*. Useful idiot more like.
There is no long term supply when prices fall below the cost of extraction, you really only need beans to work that one out, surely? The answer to your pondering, is that supply is hoarded until prices rise which they always do while stockpiling goes on.
Nice theoretical nitpicking but the reality is that as the global economy transitions East and so the City and Wall Street are marginalised, oil deals will be made where production is actually happening - East. We'll sell to China while the speculators pick off English assets at firesale prices as is happening in Greece.
You are right of course, our potential losses on this are quite small beer compared to the business as a whole. But it would still be very big for a non-sports market.
It is quite possible for the cost of oil to be well below the fully loaded cost of production for many years (it was from 1985 to 1996, probably), but it is not possible for it to be below the lifting cost for any sustained period of time.
'Society Disagrees Scotland is “Better Together”
Next week Scotland goes to the polls and for the very first time this week the BBC quoted a YouGov poll saying that the Yes campaign may just about be in the lead. Until now all the polls that I saw them reporting showed the “NO” campaign to be ahead. Everyone is saying that the vote will be close.
Majestic is a big data source which can extrapolate deep insights from the way in which pages and entities on the web connect to each other. We thought it would be useful to turn our insights onto the Scottish independence referendum.
From my analysis, it looks like the Yes campaign will beat the No campaign on polling day. As I write this I am personally very disappointed as I think Scotland would be stronger in the union. We predicted it correctly for the Mayor of London, and Obama vs Romney – so we do have a track of calling these things.'
http://tinyurl.com/qjhfrp9
http://www.macearchive.org/
You can't switch energy sources. Oil is used in 95% of products and so effects the price of everything. You put oil in plastic bags, packaging, clothes and so and so on. Do you think you can use wind power to make a plastic bag? No, manufacturing plants need physical oil for machinery too - can you oil a machine with wind power? No. And oil takes little energy to extract so for example it used to be that 1:90 energy return so in plane terms one barrel of oil would be used up to extract 90. With renewables this ratio is around 1:5. This means that prices go up 18 -19 times even for those things which oil can be replaced.
However because oil cannot be replaced in production, it means you do not need replacement energy because there is no industrial economy left to motor. You simply revert back to agriculture in a post-industrial economy. All you gamblers should be investing in agricultural equipment while you still have time..
The Scots will use our 50-100 years of oil to diversify and become even more self-sufficient than we already are..
And if it was as you say * a lover's tiff* - then again, there are plenty of us about. Political bed-hopping?! Golly how exciting that sounds. It's the lot of the floating voter who listens to arguments pro-anti, not a drone who can't see another way to get the right result.
Attempting to trivialise my SubSampleOfOne makes more of a fool of you than me.
Yours with much love.
MWAH
Was it you who added me to their LinkedIn the other day? On Googling the name, found out it was someone from Sussex who liked cats
Apologies if it wasn't!
I do like integrated platforms/single sign-ons, but that one caught me out entirely!
Well that's how I rationalise liking teen-dramas!
http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/yes-favourite-to-take-glasgow-say-bookies/
We do highers not A levels and remember it was a Scot who pretty much invented it when it was a science and not the pap Neo-classical version that passes as economics today thanks in part to the influence of the corrupt UK financial system which has co-opted the political class.
The reason oil producing countries are being destabilised by rogue Western states using dodgy pretexts and ignoring international law for military interventions and manipulation is because oil has become increasingly important geo-politically than it was before.
See this German military study done a few years back: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/peak-oil-and-the-german-government-military-study-warns-of-a-potentially-drastic-oil-crisis-a-715138.html
The reason why oil prices have temporarily dropped is because production in the West -especially UK - is nosediving as economic collapse continues. This is also the reason the US is im aroun$15 but is now $70+
With declining manufacturing the markets are increasingly looking at oil - with forecasts of long term price increases - as the only real asset the Uk has to repay its debts. But then, as I said before the market for gilts doesn't really exist the way you might think it does. It is merely reprinted money being used through offices set up clandestinely worldwide to buy gilts and pretend the market exists. That and newly printed US dollars buying gilts and vice versa.
All this will become plane to see in poundland rUK once the oil industry goes.. The Emperors' New Clothes springs to mind.
All that typing just for me to say total bollocks.
World manufacturing output is higher than it was 10 years ago even allowing for the recession. The manufacturing sits in China Germany and is coming back to the US. They still all need energy, Uk output hardly affects it.
How the hell you calculate that UK manufacturing which is about 10% of the economy underpins the currency only you can explain. But I doubt many will agree with you.
As it happens, India was a left as a state with a love of democratic institutions, common law, a functioning justice system, a good railway network, a strong army and a passion for cricket.
There's plenty of things I'd like to have changed about British rule, but none of those things might have occurred without it. Besides which, it's worth not for forging that everyday life, even in the UK, wasn't exactly smelling of roses in the 18th and 19th centuries either. A 12 year old boy could be executed for nicking a bit of silver to sell to pay for food. Men were transported for life for stealth g loaves of bread, children as young as 5 worked in factories and mines, and thousands of people who lived on the breadline anyway died young from horrible and preventable diseases.
There are enough posters who work in oil and energy on this board ( patrick, RCS1000, Richard T, Mr casino ) so seeing someone telling they don't know what they're talking about is popcorn time.
I just hope he keeps pushing the boat out on how little he understands manufacturing. ;-)
It's prosperous and confident, but one big problem is that it has to catch up with English (or French) as a trading language.
"A total of 147,609 Scots lost their lives in the four-year-long conflict between 1914 and 1918. While Scotland had just a tenth of the UK's population, its soldiers accounted for a fifth of Britain's war dead. Or, to put it another way, twice as many Scots died per head of population than was the case south of the border." http://www.scotland.org.uk/history/great-war
"the number of Scots killed was disproportionally higher than the other parts of Britain (26.4% compared to 11.8%)."
The Scottish Military Research Group
"Niall Ferguson first quoted the figure of 26.4% as a total number of Scots killed as a percentage of those who mobilised, on page 299 of his book The Pity of War in 1998 . On the previous page of his book he also said the following:
"The Scots were (after the Serbs and Turks) the soldiers who suffered the highest death rate of the war""
http://scottishmilitary.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/celebrating-scotlands-disproportionate.html
Sir Tom Devine’s figures are in his book The Scottish Nation 1700-2000. (published 2000) on page 309.
"Of the 557,000 Scots who enlisted in all services, 26.4 per cent lost their lives. This compares with an average death rate of 11.8 per cent for the rest of the British army between 1914 and 1918. Of all the combatant nations, only the Serbs and the Turks had higher per capita mortality rates”
I enjoy little Englander bon mots and the oily arrogance of southern Tories but facts have to count at some point, no?