What no-one seems to have commented on yet is the knock-on effect of the proposed Mansion Tax. It is not just those houses that are in the £2m range, but those priced not much above a million that people are now reluctant to buy, for fear of being caught. This is already happening, I am told.
The great irony is that Ed's lasting legacy might be in reducing house price inflation. And as a raft of people can't sell their £2m+ houses, they have to reduce the price to below the threshold for capture by the tax. So by threatening to introduce it, Mr Market reduces the number of properties that would ever pay it. Not that that will stop the army of valuers, who will be employed on contracts that incentivise them for every £2m property they can locate. Which would become an early source of outrage in Ed's premiership.
I also suspect that to defeat the tax, a lot of estate agents might find they have many, many properties on their books priced at £1,950,000 where the "sellers" seem remarkably reluctant to show potential buyers around....
I also suspect there will be a large number of flats created in large properties, where granny or the children will live separate from the main house. A £2m property becomes a £1.6m and a £400k property. How are you going to deal with that, Ed?
I'm not sure that there are enough houses in the >£1 million mark to make that much of a difference to house price inflation. They are swamped out by the lower-priced housing. Then there are a considerable number of people for whom paying the mansion tax will be inconsequential.
I think you're right in saying that it may effect is the availability of flats. These large houses will still exist, and I can see many of them being split up into flat, each of which is worth much less than the target price. This could well be a positive, not only in terms of housing stock, but also in creating a boom time for builders specialising in flat conversions?
My biggest problem with the mansion tax is that I'm in no position to be charged it. Although it's going to be tough for many income-poor houseowners, it's a problem I'd quite like to have. ;-)
Eek, Josias, we agree on something . Unnerving! I see nothing in Marquee's post to warrant a scintilla of worry.
"I wish I could dismiss such comments as a different form of provokatsiya carried out by EU supporters in an attempt to discredit their opponents, but I’ve heard the same sentiments from UKIP parliamentary candidates. Well, as the saying goes, not in my name. We are an internationalist, forward-looking, optimistic nation. An independent Britain will be free-trading, pluralist, open-minded, fully engaged in the affairs of every continent, including Europe. That’s my kind of Euro-scepticism. It leaves no place for Putin."
The other thing to consider about chunks of the Eurozone with massive unemployment and two tier labour markets is what it's doing to the relationship prospects for under 35s. If you are unemployed for most of your 20s and still live at home into your 30s, you're not a very good marriage prospect, and you'll be unlikely to start a family. This will cause long term demographic issues with funding to even normal pension levels, let alone the super generous ones in some of these nations. The cuts will have to keep on coming.
Sounds believable, but I wonder, is it true to say that high unemployment = low birth rate? Within a single country, I'd be tempted to say no, but I don't know about countrywide.
I disagree with some of that. I can see the houses being sold outright, and instead of the family living in part of the house, it being subdivided into equalish-sized flats, just as rows of Georgian houses have in many city centre.
The effect of this might be interesting, with people realising that the mansion tax buys an awful lot of commuting, and £1-2 million a very nice pile in the country. The resultant houses then get converted.
You are right about the problems of valuing and assessment. I just cannot see why all the main parties club together and back a full revaluation of our housing stock over a number of years, and the addition of several higher bands.
I think it is absolutely wrong to introduce a tax of this sort knowing that it will force people to sell family homes. I don't think that is an appropriate use of the taxation system.
Revaluation and higher council tax bands is something I can see working - but that, of course, puts the money into the hands of the local authorities....
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
I've asked Ben many times to tell us which country's finance minister he thinks HAS done better than Osborne. (Alanbrooke might also like to answer that question). Surely he must be able to point to somewhere in the world which is implementing Benenomics and therefore doing incredibly well.
The big point about this week is the dog that didn't bark.
We heard for 4 years that Ed had his poker hand hidden and that policy review teams were coming up with great ideas that would be revealed at the final conference before the GE.
We had nothing this week - nada.
Absolutely. That is indeed the crucual lesson from this week.
Miliband had a couple of policies. But no plan, no roadmap for government. The ten year plan is already dying, predators died, one nation labour died, too far died (mostly). There were probably others.
The other thing to consider about chunks of the Eurozone with massive unemployment and two tier labour markets is what it's doing to the relationship prospects for under 35s. If you are unemployed for most of your 20s and still live at home into your 30s, you're not a very good marriage prospect, and you'll be unlikely to start a family. This will cause long term demographic issues with funding to even normal pension levels, let alone the super generous ones in some of these nations. The cuts will have to keep on coming.
Sounds believable, but I wonder, is it true to say that high unemployment = low birth rate? Within a single country, I'd be tempted to say no, but I don't know about countrywide.
There is no evidence. Birth rates in Spain and Greece have ticked up post Eurozone crisis.
Birth rates in China, Hong Kong and Singapore, where things are booming, are in decline. In Beijing province, for example, TFRs are a staggeringly low 0.68.
So, while Socrates' theory is intellectually compelling, there is no empiricial evidence to support it. And in fact, the evidence would seem to suggest the opposite.
That's why I hate the Lefty All Must Have Prizes attitude - it doesn't work in the real world and it's misleading kids into thinking that mediocre is *good*. Well, anyone with eyes knows that isn't true in any walk of life.
@Charles Don't try to buck the issue. Our companies have basically been doing as little training as possible. Since the glory days of Thatcherism, right through Phony Blairs years, they have looked to the cheapest option like good little Thatcherites. Now as those people are retiring, they are whining that there is a shortage of trained personnel for them to hire. How much foresight would that have taken? The answer is none at all if they had opened their ears and listened.
Utter garbage.
There are, of course, businesses that rely largely on cheap labour (eg agriculture, catering) but these are not strategic priorities in terms of growing the economy.
If you look at our specialist engineers - Rolls, Dyson, BAe, JCB, etc, they spend a huge amount on training and development.
The problem though is the fundamental failure of the education system has resulted in so many kids that are unprepared for real life.
There is so much wasted potential in this country it makes me f*cking livid.
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
.
Agreed. But think what that means for net immigration to the UK. Already the numbers coming in from Italy and Spain are turning into a flood. How many more can our housing stock, transport infrastructure and public services take? And at the same time the benefit of membership of the single market is getting smaller and smaller as the Eurozone wallows in the doldrums. Far better just to get access to it via an extensive free trade agreement, filter immigration to the best and brightest, and allow us to reduce trading barriers with the parts of the world that are actually growing. It amazes me how many smart people can't think this through.
That clearly is a problem in several ways. Firstly it is making it much harder for our less able and very poorly educated youth to get on the jobs ladder. We are betraying these people for the second time in their short lives.
Secondly, as you point out, it is creating tremendous pressure on our services and infrastructure although as a general rule these immigrants who are young, motivated, trained and employed will feed more into the system than they take out.
Thirdly, it is has turned London in particular into a foreign country which in very large parts is not even a part of Britain. It is more like a trading state like Singapore. The resonance of the "Westminster" issue in Scotland showed the widely held perception decisions are not being made in our country anymore.
Fixing this, when pretty much everyone who studies a second language on the continent will study English, within the EU is incredibly difficult. Given our low levels of unemployment we will not get a lot of sympathy if we seek to complain that Spaniards, Italians and Frenchmen who would otherwise be sitting at home unemployed are coming here instead. The worship of the great god GDP is problematic. These immigrants boost our GDP, beyond question. But are we any better off as a result?
It really should be median GNI per capita that should be the primary economic metric looked at.
Well done, you chose three countries which didn't have anything like the massive deficit Osborne inherited in 2010, thus showing quite how well Osborne has done given the starting point.
The other thing to consider about chunks of the Eurozone with massive unemployment and two tier labour markets is what it's doing to the relationship prospects for under 35s. If you are unemployed for most of your 20s and still live at home into your 30s, you're not a very good marriage prospect, and you'll be unlikely to start a family. This will cause long term demographic issues with funding to even normal pension levels, let alone the super generous ones in some of these nations. The cuts will have to keep on coming.
Sounds believable, but I wonder, is it true to say that high unemployment = low birth rate? Within a single country, I'd be tempted to say no, but I don't know about countrywide.
There is no evidence. Birth rates in Spain and Greece have ticked up post Eurozone crisis.
Birth rates in China, Hong Kong and Singapore, where things are booming, are in decline. In Beijing province, for example, TFRs are a staggeringly low 0.68.
So, while Socrates' theory is intellectually compelling, there is no empiricial evidence to support it. And in fact, the evidence would seem to suggest the opposite.
I'd expect a direct correlation between unemployment and birth rates. The devil makes work for idle hands.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
By the 2015 election campaign UK unemployment will be half that of the Eurozone. It is a remarkable achievement and it frustrates those on the left mightily.
So we hear and will hear endless stories about how these are not "real" jobs, that these are self employed monetising their hobbies for additional benefits and that some of this comes close to forced Labour. And there is some truth in these allegations. But a stable, consistent and credible macro-economic framework for the UK from Osborne and Alexander has made us job central of the EU. That really is an indisputable fact.
Unemployment is clearly low given the difficult situation and it's reasonable to give some credit for that, but it's the flip side of the acceptance of real falls in income, which in turn is a primary reason why Osborne isn't making serious inroads on the deficit:
We have a recovery based on consumer spending and house purchases, and employers are not bothering to invest to the extent needed in the medium term. The consequence is a grim balance of payments and a completely unresolved deficit issue. Instead of messing about with populist nonsense like Help to Buy, the Government should have been making investment seriously worthwhile. Economically, quite apart from anything else, most of the last 5 years have been wasted.
ROFL
since when did Labour ever give a rat's arse about the real economy ?
Crocodile tears.
( no animals were injured in the use of these idioms )
NPxMP - that is risible and actually insulting..... a picture tells a thousand words... look at Labour's no more boom and bust period especially on the UK savings ratio...
If someone told me that I'd get clobbered with a Mansion Tax - I'd simply split it in two with the Land Registry and sell both bits to the same person.
What no-one seems to have commented on yet is the knock-on effect of the proposed Mansion Tax. It is not just those houses that are in the £2m range, but those priced not much above a million that people are now reluctant to buy, for fear of being caught. This is already happening, I am told.
The great irony is that Ed's lasting legacy might be in reducing house price inflation. And as a raft of people can't sell their £2m+ houses, they have to reduce the price to below the threshold for capture by the tax. So by threatening to introduce it, Mr Market reduces the number of properties that would ever pay it. Not that that will stop the army of valuers, who will be employed on contracts that incentivise them for every £2m property they can locate. Which would become an early source of outrage in Ed's premiership.
I also suspect that to defeat the tax, a lot of estate agents might find they have many, many properties on their books priced at £1,950,000 where the "sellers" seem remarkably reluctant to show potential buyers around....
I also suspect there will be a large number of flats created in large properties, where granny or the children will live separate from the main house. A £2m property becomes a £1.6m and a £400k property. How are you going to deal with that, Ed?
Primrose Hill intellectuals and Guardianistas. A friend of mine is hardcore and proud WWC Northern Lefty who works for the NHS. He's despairing of EdM and wants Gordon back as at least he'd give Cameron a run for his money personality wise.
I can see his logic. He also hates the piss taking by asylum seeking AKA economic migrants after working for the Asylum team in Hastings. I made disbelieving remark about 8 month pregnant Nigerian ladies turning up here and he got really funny about it and said it was all true.
He also talked about diversity and Labour, that it'd destroyed our British identity, and cited numerous examples of it. I was really quite taken about how upset he was about it all as he's pretty mild mannered most of the time. The disconnect between him and Labour hierarchy was massive.
That is just hilarious.. WTF are Miliband's PR team doing??? They are supposed to protect him from making such stupid mistakes.....
They don't know any ordinary people.
When they actually do meet one, as Gordon Brown did in Rochdale, they are horrified.
The current labour party reminds me of the woman in 'Common people' by pulp....
'She studied sculpture at St Martins collage...she came from Greece and had a thirst for knowledge'
'Because you think that poor is cool......'
I think this is totally correct and it is a huge problem for Labour. A lot of the people that vote for the party are completely alienated from it. And at some stage they are going to stop voting for it as a result. That's why I am not sure it is a good idea to assume that all those who went out to the polls for Labour last time will do so next year.
Labour do seem to have a 40% cap on their UK support. That maybe enough to give them a 34% in 2015 and Govt. But losing a large chunk of the WC vote permanantly, reduces their chances in future elections. In Scotland Labour are tetering on the edge of a 40+ vs 20+ block of MPs, depending on how the non-Labour votes are shared out, But to expect 2/3 of the seats with only 1/3 of the vote in Scotland seems optimistic.
The big point about this week is the dog that didn't bark.
We heard for 4 years that Ed had his poker hand hidden and that policy review teams were coming up with great ideas that would be revealed at the final conference before the GE.
We had nothing this week - nada.
Absolutely. That is indeed the crucial lesson from this week.
Not a peep from John Cruddas this week - has he been kidnapped ?
@oxfordsimon "I think it is absolutely wrong to introduce a tax of this sort knowing that it will force people to sell family homes"
I thought you lot were in favour of forcing people out of homes if they couldn't afford them?
Looking down the other end of the telescope - your lot are in favour of forcing people out of homes they have paid for with taxed income? People who have paid off mortgages from what remains after income tax, or bequeathed to them after inheritance tax? People who have spent big money to improve their homes now get penalised.
Builders and the DIY industry are going to love you....
Well done, you chose three countries which didn't have anything like the massive deficit Osborne inherited in 2010, thus showing quite how well Osborne has done given the starting point.
Remind me, how is growth in Germany going?
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
The big point about this week is the dog that didn't bark.
We heard for 4 years that Ed had his poker hand hidden and that policy review teams were coming up with great ideas that would be revealed at the final conference before the GE.
We had nothing this week - nada.
Absolutely. That is indeed the crucial lesson from this week.
Not a peep from John Cruddas this week - has he been kidnapped ?
@Richard_Nabavi Three economies whose base is exports rather than financial services. How are we getting on with "rebalancing"?
Canada and Australia's exports are digging stuff out the ground to sell abroad. Presumably you support relaunching fracking to get extractive exports going again in the UK?
Germany is a bizarre case due to the Eurozone giving it an undervalued currency. It's the flip-side of the south being overvalued and unable to export, so every strength Germany has here is counter-balanced for being on the hook for depression in the south.
I was WTF re the hospital bed. It sent all the wrong messages to me. He looked like he was an in-patient/had a hospital pass - not someone *in-tune* with it.
A bizarre Jim Hacker mistake on the PR front. What were they thinking? If nothing else - it put Jon Snow in the role of *consultant to patient* who was in denial about how serious his condition was.
EdM just hand-waved him away and continued asserting that he was fine despite all the medical evidence to the contrary.
It is quite astonishing that somebody thought the setting was a good idea.
Miliband had a couple of policies. But no plan, no roadmap for government. The ten year plan is already dying, predators died, one nation labour died, too far died (mostly). There were probably others.
All the policies were rehashes of previous ones, weren't they? And in most cases the money has already been earmarked for other things:
We would use the money raised by a mansion tax to reintroduce a lower 10 pence starting rate of tax, with the size of the band depending on the amount raised. Ed Miliband, 14 February 2013
And in order to pay for [extra spending on the NHS] we won’t borrow an extra penny. Or raise taxes on ordinary working families. We will clamp down on tax avoidance including tax loopholes by the hedge funds to raise over £1 billion. We will use the proceeds from a mansion tax on homes above £2 million. Ed Miliband, 23 September 2014
What ever happened to all those policy initiatives and thingies that Labour have been talking about for YEARS?
All just dust in the wind [to quote a Kansas song] ?
We've had Blue, Red, Black, Purple Labour - what's actually coming out of the sausage machine now? Nowt that I can see. And surely, Labour's Conf should have been the rallying call for the next 8 months - not the squibfest we saw.
The big point about this week is the dog that didn't bark.
We heard for 4 years that Ed had his poker hand hidden and that policy review teams were coming up with great ideas that would be revealed at the final conference before the GE.
Charles, if we're going to be £50bn down a the top of the economic cycle you're Milibanding! Means-test Old Age Pensions, replace the NHS with Health Vouchers (of diminishing value each year) and something similar for schools.
Since you can't that sort of thing past the electorate, we need a Strong Man. Perhaps Mrs Merkel can do for us what she's doing for Greece and the Irish Republic?
No, you ignored what I actually said.
In-work benefits are the biggy.
Also perhaps £3-5bn out of international aid. Plus you can probably get a couple of billon out of various sweeties .
But beyond that there needs to be a rethink about what the government should be doing. I don't think salami slicing will cut it anymore.
The other thing to consider about chunks of the Eurozone with massive unemployment and two tier labour markets is what it's doing to the relationship prospects for under 35s. If you are unemployed for most of your 20s and still live at home into your 30s, you're not a very good marriage prospect, and you'll be unlikely to start a family. This will cause long term demographic issues with funding to even normal pension levels, let alone the super generous ones in some of these nations. The cuts will have to keep on coming.
Sounds believable, but I wonder, is it true to say that high unemployment = low birth rate? Within a single country, I'd be tempted to say no, but I don't know about countrywide.
There is no evidence. Birth rates in Spain and Greece have ticked up post Eurozone crisis.
Birth rates in China, Hong Kong and Singapore, where things are booming, are in decline. In Beijing province, for example, TFRs are a staggeringly low 0.68.
So, while Socrates' theory is intellectually compelling, there is no empiricial evidence to support it. And in fact, the evidence would seem to suggest the opposite.
There's a difference between long-term effects and short-term effects. The people having families now will be in their late 20s and early 30s, so were already on the career ladder before the Eurozone crisis. It's when the people that graduated since it happened get to that age we'll see the effect.
East Asia's falling birth rates are due to stupidly long working hours and, in China, the gender imbalance from the OCP.
Loving the deficit obsession. What people are talking about on the doorstep is jobs and prospects and their kids. They aren't saying we should sacrifice all of that for "the deficit". And why is Osborne struggling with the deficit at the moment according to economists? Because tax receipts are nowhere near prediction. So get people working and they pay tax. Go after tax dodgers and they pay tax. Get the economy working for actual people as opposed to paper stats and people buy stuff, and in doing so they pay tax.
So the deficit obsession in the media is the death rattle of an establishment desperately trying to keep people focused on austerity, on cuts, on doing without. So that the people at the top don't have to
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
By the 2015 election campaign UK unemployment will be half that of the Eurozone. It is a remarkable achievement and it frustrates those on the left mightily.
So we hear and will hear endless stories about how these are not "real" jobs, that these are self employed monetising their hobbies for additional benefits and that some of this comes close to forced Labour. And there is some truth in these allegations. But a stable, consistent and credible macro-economic framework for the UK from Osborne and Alexander has made us job central of the EU. That really is an indisputable fact.
The left has gone from "5 million unemployed", to "jobless recovery", to "not real jobs". If this trend is kept up they will soon be complaining that unemployment is too low, as the alternative will be to admit that they are completely wrong and that the Tories and Lib Dems have done a good job.
Eek, Josias, we agree on something . Unnerving! I see nothing in Marquee's post to warrant a scintilla of worry.
But you can't spell "affect". :-)
Forgive me, I've got baby brain. :-)
I think we actually agree on a lot more than that, Nick. As usual, politics accentuates the differences rather than the similarities in positions.
Speaking of which, I must apologise for last night; I was a bit hard on you on a topic I've got very angry about. But I also disagree with your characterisation of me: the reason I argue strenuously for some things (such as the 'train line' you mentioned) is because I've done a heck of a lot of research into them.
The main things I'm worried about in this policy are the implementation, which will have to be done well, and the problems it will cause many asset-rich but income-poor people such as pensioners. But ISTR both Labour's and the Lib Dem's proposals had ways to help them.
Mrs J mischievously suggested it should be gathered on all an individual's property rather than just on each individual property. Hence if you're a buy to let landlord, you'd be in trouble.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
I have never liked Miliband, he looks odd, sounds odd, and to me, comes across on tv as a dork. I just cannot watch him for more than a few secs. That said, when you have his disadvantages you just have to be spot on with your PR.. Is Miliband overriding his PR team, or are they less than useless? How could he possibly miss.. when kissing his wife???.. I mean jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez.
EdM clearly struggles with eating a bacon butty or kissing his wife. This is however not the grounds to judge him on his suitability to be PM. But we can of course look forward to further embarrassments once in Number 10 as our Mr Bean, PM.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m Ed Miliband is no longer favourite with the bookies to be PM after the next election. Paddypower now have both him and Cameron at 10/11.
Not at all, actually. Quite the opposite. The reason I support the Conservatives is because I think they've got things broadly right, not the other way round. I want good government, that is all.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
God knows I am not a Tory but Osborne has done a superb job of getting the country growing again whilst reducing unemployment, something the Left cannot understand at all.
Not at all, actually. Quite the opposite. The reason I support the Conservatives is because I think they've got things broadly right, not the other way round. I want good government, that is all.
Not at all, actually. Quite the opposite. The reason I support the Conservatives is because I think they've got things broadly right, not the other way round. I want good government, that is all.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
I had the same blur issue in India when I saw about 40 forts in two weeks and I can't tell one from another by the end.
Being *forted out* wasn't something I expected. A bit like my banana poisoning in Jamaica. And yes, it's possible - if you consume as many daiquiris as I did. Urgh.
Spot on. Jon Snow looked personally betrayed. It was like he was facing his Great White Hope and discovered that he really didn't have the cojones to ever win for him.
PS I've just found a bunch of emails in my spam trap!! So sorry to have missed you down my way - did you enjoy Battle Abbey or Michelem Priory?
I don't normally watch C4 news but had gained the impression he was viewed as a bit of a guardianista normally?
Precisely! I believe his anger stemmed from the fact that by denying the deficit Miliband was leaving himself exposed to attack; thereby reducing out the prospect of a Labour government acquiring office next year..
Yeah, we had a real ball, but we took in that many Cathedrals, Abbeys, Castles and such during our 6 week tour, that it's all become a bit of a blur. I began naming and sorting our many photographs yesterday, and found myself doing a lot of head-scratching trying to figure out which place was which.
My main recollection of Battle Abbey was how overgrown the battlefield has become. I like to see trees as much as the next guy, but it was hard to visualise the battle being fought, amongst what has now largely become woodland.
I suspect that we could be in for a re-run next year, in order to mop up the places we missed. Hopefully I will get to learn of a better functioning email address for you before then, and we can have that coffee.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
By the 2015 election campaign UK unemployment will be half that of the Eurozone. It is a remarkable achievement and it frustrates those on the left mightily.
So we hear and will hear endless stories about how these are not "real" jobs, that these are self employed monetising their hobbies for additional benefits and that some of this comes close to forced Labour. And there is some truth in these allegations. But a stable, consistent and credible macro-economic framework for the UK from Osborne and Alexander has made us job central of the EU. That really is an indisputable fact.
Unemployment is clearly low given the difficult situation and it's reasonable to give some credit for that, but it's the flip side of the acceptance of real falls in income, which in turn is a primary reason why Osborne isn't making serious inroads on the deficit:
We have a recovery based on consumer spending and house purchases, and employers are not bothering to invest to the extent needed in the medium term. The consequence is a grim balance of payments and a completely unresolved deficit issue. Instead of messing about with populist nonsense like Help to Buy, the Government should have been making investment seriously worthwhile. Economically, quite apart from anything else, most of the last 5 years have been wasted.
ROFL
since when did Labour ever give a rat's arse about the real economy ?
Crocodile tears.
( no animals were injured in the use of these idioms )
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, economic growth, basic civil liberties remained intact, improved the deficit. So current government is 3rd out of 7, and three of those were outright socialists.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Alanbrooke = Sarah Teather
John O = Vince Cable :-)
Baron-Elect John O to you, sunshine.
Put it in your memoirs, we can call them " The Story of O"
(Reuters) - Brent crude oil inched lower on Tuesday as ample global supplies outweighed tensions in the Middle East, while U.S. oil bounced higher after four sessions of losses.
For Brent, higher output from Libya and Iraq overshadowed the start of U.S.-led air strikes against Islamist groups in Syria. U.S. crude rallied after earlier falling close to 17-month lows.
Global oil prices have fallen steeply since June as geopolitical fears waned and strong supply, including from the United States, swamped markets.
Libyan oil output has risen to 800,000 barrels per day, with the key El Sharara oilfield restarting, a National Oil Corp (NOC) spokesman said on Tuesday, from 700,000 bpd at the weekend.
And if it was "unrealistic" to reduce immigration by more than 10,000, why did Cameron target a reduction of 150,000? How come you didn't call this out as unrealistic (to the scale of 15) at the time?
To all those Tories praising Osborne over growth and unemployment I'd like to remind you that his central plan was to eliminate the structural deficit by the end of the Parliament. Now there were those who felt that was unnecessary and would lead to higher unemployment and less growth. So what has happened? Well Osborne has missed his borrowing targets by miles and you claim his initial critics were wrong because the economy is growing. I don't know if you realise how daft you sound. Osborne just keeps moving the goalposts. Perhaps he's learnt his lesson on fiscal consolidation so we should be grateful.
Not sure this Paddy Power advert will do much for Farage's credibility. Interesting to see how that pans out.
I thought it was hilarious. It says a lot about him that he can make fun of himself in a way that doesn't end up looking ridiculous. Cameron or Miliband would never be able to pull it off.
On topic: what are the ramifications of the likely scenario of UKIP winning by landslide in Clacton and Tories coming a very bad third behind Labour (in first) and UKIP (in 2nd) in Heywood and Middleton?
I think that both of those are "priced in" to political expectations. So, on their own, they won't have a huge impact.
If they trigger further defections among Conservative (or even Labour) MPs, then they will be very big.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, .
Major didn't have as many Eastern European countries in the EU to deal with...
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
To all those Tories praising Osborne over growth and unemployment I'd like to remind you that his central plan was to eliminate the structural deficit by the end of the Parliament. Now there were those who felt that was unnecessary and would lead to higher unemployment and less growth. So what has happened? Well Osborne has missed his borrowing targets by miles and you claim his initial critics were wrong because the economy is growing. I don't know if you realise how daft you sound. Osborne just keeps moving the goalposts. Perhaps he's learnt his lesson on fiscal consolidation so we should be grateful.
When the true scale of Labour's mishandling of the economy became clear, it was inevitable that dealing with that would take longer than initially anticipated.
Do try to remember that Labour's recession was deeper than first thought - the figure has been revised a number of times as the data became available.
Loving the deficit obsession. What people are talking about on the doorstep is jobs and prospects and their kids. They aren't saying we should sacrifice all of that for "the deficit". And why is Osborne struggling with the deficit at the moment according to economists? Because tax receipts are nowhere near prediction. So get people working and they pay tax. Go after tax dodgers and they pay tax. Get the economy working for actual people as opposed to paper stats and people buy stuff, and in doing so they pay tax.
So the deficit obsession in the media is the death rattle of an establishment desperately trying to keep people focused on austerity, on cuts, on doing without. So that the people at the top don't have to
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
By the 2015 election campaign UK unemployment will be half that of the Eurozone. It is a remarkable achievement and it frustrates those on the left mightily.
So we hear and will hear endless stories about how these are not "real" jobs, that these are self employed monetising their hobbies for additional benefits and that some of this comes close to forced Labour. And there is some truth in these allegations. But a stable, consistent and credible macro-economic framework for the UK from Osborne and Alexander has made us job central of the EU. That really is an indisputable fact.
The left has gone from "5 million unemployed", to "jobless recovery", to "not real jobs". If this trend is kept up they will soon be complaining that unemployment is too low, as the alternative will be to admit that they are completely wrong and that the Tories and Lib Dems have done a good job.
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
.
.
Secondly, as you point out, it is creating tremendous pressure on our services and infrastructure although as a general rule these immigrants who are young, motivated, trained and employed will feed more into the system than they take out.
Thirdly, it is has turned London in particular into a foreign country which in very large parts is not even a part of Britain. It is more like a trading state like Singapore. The resonance of the "Westminster" issue in Scotland showed the widely held perception decisions are not being made in our country anymore.
Fixing this, when pretty much everyone who studies a second language on the continent will study English, within the EU is incredibly difficult. Given our low levels of unemployment we will not get a lot of sympathy if we seek to complain that Spaniards, Italians and Frenchmen who would otherwise be sitting at home unemployed are coming here instead. The worship of the great god GDP is problematic. These immigrants boost our GDP, beyond question. But are we any better off as a result?
I'm thinking about other "nuclear" announcements that Cameron/Osborne could make next week. One would be to admit failure to get as far with immigration as they'd like, and admit that they didn't have the tools to do it.
They then declare that reform of freedom of movement of workers is on the agenda post-2015 and set out their position.
This document is interesting. It holds its own counsel, but contains numerous suggestions:
I like the suggestions of David Goodhart (Demos) the most. The reinstatement of special privileges for national citizens in labour, welfare and public services should be on the list. Further, restrict the right to full time workers only (not any EU citizen) and job searches to 6 months. Require EU nationals to register.
It obviously doesn't go as far as some would like, but it gives a few more tools to control numbers.
On topic: I'm not backing Labour at the current odds. By-elections frequently produce major upsets, and in this case there is a volatile combination of factors which are hard to assess. Jim Dobbin's majority was big but not overwhelming, John Bickley is a candidate likely to appeal to Labour voters, tactical voting both for and against UKIP is an unpredictable factor, there was a quite big BNP chunk in 2010 which will mainly go UKIP, the former LibDem voters here may well be NOTA-style LibDems who may break towards UKIP, and there is the wild card of the grooming scandal.
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
.
.
Secondly, as you point out, it is creating tremendous pressure on our services and infrastructure although as a general rule these immigrants who are young, motivated, trained and employed will feed more into the system than they take out.
Thirdly, it is has turned London in particular into a foreign country which in very large parts is not even a part of Britain. It is more like a trading state like Singapore. The resonance of the "Westminster" issue in Scotland showed the widely held perception decisions are not being made in our country anymore.
here instead. The worship of the great god GDP is problematic. These immigrants boost our GDP, beyond question. But are we any better off as a result?
I'm thinking about other "nuclear" announcements that Cameron/Osborne could make next week. One would be to admit failure to get as far with immigration as they'd like, and admit that they didn't have the tools to do it.
They then declare that reform of freedom of movement of workers is on the agenda post-2015 and set out their position.
This document is interesting. It holds its own counsel, but contains numerous suggestions:
I like the suggestions of David Goodhart (Demos) the most. The reinstatement of special privileges for national citizens in labour, welfare and public services should be on the list. Further, restrict the right to full time workers only (not any EU citizen) and job searches to 6 months. Require EU nationals to register.
It obviously doesn't go as far as some would like, but it gives a few more tools to control numbers.
"I'm thinking about other "nuclear" announcements that Cameron/Osborne could make next week"
they're divorcing their wives and getting married ?
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, .
Major didn't have as many Eastern European countries in the EU to deal with...
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
It's entirely accurate that we can't have sensible immigration levels without Brexit. But, even allowing for that, Cameron and May have still failed on immigration. Non-EU immigration is still way, way above it's share of the 100,000 Cameron aimed for. And that's before we even look at the constant cock-ups in illegal immigration which the government does not have a hold on.
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
.
.
Secondly, as you point out, it is creating tremendous pressure on our services and infrastructure although as a general rule these immigrants who are young, motivated, trained and employed will feed more into the system than they take out.
Thirdly, it is has turned London in particular into a foreign country which in very large parts is not even a part of Britain. It is more like a trading state like Singapore. The resonance of the "Westminster" issue in Scotland showed the widely held perception decisions are not being made in our country anymore.
Fixing this, when pretty much everyone who studies a second language on the continent will study English, within the EU is incredibly difficult. Given our low levels of unemployment we will not get a lot of sympathy if we seek to complain that Spaniards, Italians and Frenchmen who would otherwise be sitting at home unemployed are coming here instead. The worship of the great god GDP is problematic. These immigrants boost our GDP, beyond question. But are we any better off as a result?
I'm thinking about other "nuclear" announcements that Cameron/Osborne could make next week. One would be to admit failure to get as far with immigration as they'd like, and admit that they didn't have the tools to do it.
They then declare that reform of freedom of movement of workers is on the agenda post-2015 and set out their position.
This document is interesting. It holds its own counsel, but contains numerous suggestions:
I like the suggestions of David Goodhart (Demos) the most. The reinstatement of special privileges for national citizens in labour, welfare and public services should be on the list. Further, restrict the right to full time workers only (not any EU citizen) and job searches to 6 months. Require EU nationals to register.
It obviously doesn't go as far as some would like, but it gives a few more tools to control numbers.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, .
Major didn't have as many Eastern European countries in the EU to deal with...
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
It's entirely accurate that we can't have sensible immigration levels without Brexit. But, even allowing for that, Cameron and May have still failed on immigration. Non-EU immigration is still way, way above it's share of the 100,000 Cameron aimed for. And that's before we even look at the constant cock-ups in illegal immigration which the government does not have a hold on.
How many of that 100,000 or more are British citizens repatriating? Genuine question, don't know the answer.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Alanbrooke = Sarah Teather
John O = Vince Cable :-)
Baron-Elect John O to you, sunshine.
Put it in your memoirs, we can call them " The Story of O"
Hmm, interesting speculation, complete with names, of more possible defectors to the kippers tomorrow. I expect Mr. Gove and some constituency officers might be busy today.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Alanbrooke = Sarah Teather
You might not be aware that this is a kind of in-joke between the General and me.
The deficit, however, is "jobs, prospects, and kids".
Nope, it's the result of Bovine effluent emitter Osborne's failure on jobs, prospects and kids.
UK unemployment 2010: 8.1% UK unemployment 2014: 6.2% Eurozone unemployment 2010: 10.1% Eurozone unemployment 2014: 11.5%
Presumably if you think Osborne is a failure you must think the EU is a complete disaster on jobs and prospects?
.
.
Secondly, as you point out, it is creating tremendous pressure on our services and infrastructure although as a general rule these immigrants who are young, motivated, trained and employed will feed more into the system than they take out.
Thirdly, it is has turned London in particular into a foreign country which in very large parts is not even a part of Britain. It is more like a trading state like Singapore. The resonance of the "Westminster"
Fixing this, when pretty much everyone who studies a second language on the continent will study English, within the EU is incredibly difficult. Given our low levels of unemployment we will not get a lot of sympathy if we seek to complain that Spaniards, Italians and Frenchmen who would otherwise be sitting at home unemployed are coming here instead. The worship of the great god GDP is problematic. These immigrants boost our GDP, beyond question. But are we any better off as a result?
I'm thinking about other "nuclear" announcements that Cameron/Osborne could make next week. One would be to admit failure to get as far with immigration as they'd like, and admit that they didn't have the tools to do it.
They then declare that reform of freedom of movement of workers is on the agenda post-2015 and set out their position.
This document is interesting. It holds its own counsel, but contains numerous suggestions:
I like the suggestions of David Goodhart (Demos) the most. The reinstatement of special privileges for national citizens in labour, welfare and public services should be on the list. Further, restrict the right to full time workers only (not any EU citizen) and job searches to 6 months. Require EU nationals to register.
It obviously doesn't go as far as some would like, but it gives a few more tools to control numbers.
Cheers, no problem.
Alanbrooke: perhaps, but is it an election winner?
Re the English Health Service does anyone know how much would a 1% pay award across the service cost and how much would the additional cost of all the proposed new staff in pay and pensions
If someone told me that I'd get clobbered with a Mansion Tax - I'd simply split it in two with the Land Registry and sell both bits to the same person.
Simples.
HMRC are not stupid. At best you'd be hit by CGT on one of the sales.
As ever Richard the moving goalposts to protect the mediocre CoE. Doesn't really matter which country is chosen you will always be a reason why it's different or not comparable. Simply put you can't face up to GO's failings, he is as I've pointed out several times an ordinary Chancellor in extraordinary times.
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
I'm not moving the golaposts at all. I'm looking for somewhere - anywhere in the world - where a finance minister has done better than Osborne in the last four or five years. Ben must be able to point to some high-spending lefty government which has shown the success of what he advocates.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
No Richard your basic premise is show me a country with the same economic conditions as the Uk and we can compare, knowing full well it doesn't exist.
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
What a pathetic, evasive typically Lib Dem answer.
Alanbrooke = Sarah Teather
John O = Vince Cable :-)
Baron-Elect John O to you, sunshine.
Put it in your memoirs, we can call them " The Story of O"
What ever happened to all those policy initiatives and thingies that Labour have been talking about for YEARS?
All just dust in the wind [to quote a Kansas song] ?
We've had Blue, Red, Black, Purple Labour - what's actually coming out of the sausage machine now? Nowt that I can see. And surely, Labour's Conf should have been the rallying call for the next 8 months - not the squibfest we saw.
The big point about this week is the dog that didn't bark.
We heard for 4 years that Ed had his poker hand hidden and that policy review teams were coming up with great ideas that would be revealed at the final conference before the GE.
We had nothing this week - nada.
Plato I'm impressed by your evident knowledge of Seventies rock and prog rock given you must have been quite young when that song was first released.. Kansas are a rare American example of that genre as most prog was very British (Tull, Genesis, Yes etc). The song you refer to is quite moving.
As for Labour I guess after the referendum their conference was always going to be an anti-climax. To state the obvious they need someone more charismatic than Ed to present new initiatives - with the right leader they could be polling 40% rather than mid 30's. Having their conference before both Government parties may also act to their disadvantage in the short term.
There’s street pantomime, too. Anti-G4S demonstrators pretending to be G4S contractors, forcing someone into a cage. How shocking can this be, given that we all know we’re watching the 10th matinee performance and that the older bloke who’s enjoying being the bully isn’t actually going to Taser the lad? No, I’m not saying make it it more real. I don’t want amateur dramatic cruelty. I’m saying that if you’re playing it out as street magic, throw a sheet over the cage and make the detainee disappear in a puff of smoke, then announce with a flourish: “Yeah, and THAT’s how easy it would be to end our contracts with G4S!” Whatever, I’ve had enough. I join the shuffling line of delegates meekly offering their passes for inspection by the G4S security guys.
I did a most unladylike snort at this
Outside the main hall are the fringe marquees, an odd collision of steampunk socialism and pop-up bubbles of celebrity air-kissers. There goes someone who looks like Lil down our road in a motorised wheelchair, a crude banner gaffa’d to the back, heading for the Unite the Union tent. A gaggle of guys straight out of a GQ spread on Wonk Chic head into the “London Lounge” for free Pimm’s and Andrew Marr launching his political thriller. There’s Eddie Izzard tottering around in high-heeled boots, nearly bumping into stubbly old Len McCluskey. Oh, and here’s John Prescott. Lord Munchkin. It’s worth bitterly remembering that in his mullet-punching, croquet-playing, chipolata-presenting pomp, when he was being yanked onstage as Blair’s working-class credibility gimp, Prescott was the one who championed PFI and put public sector procurement on tick for the next half-century, at payback rates that would shame Wonga.
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, .
Major didn't have as many Eastern European countries in the EU to deal with...
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
It's entirely accurate that we can't have sensible immigration levels without Brexit. But, even allowing for that, Cameron and May have still failed on immigration. Non-EU immigration is still way, way above it's share of the 100,000 Cameron aimed for. And that's before we even look at the constant cock-ups in illegal immigration which the government does not have a hold on.
How many of that 100,000 or more are British citizens repatriating? Genuine question, don't know the answer.
Well the 100,000 is the target. I guess you mean of the 240,000? It's negative, because there's net emigration of British citizens.
On topic: I'm not backing Labour at the current odds. By-elections frequently produce major upsets, and in this case there is a volatile combination of factors which are hard to assess. Jim Dobbin's majority was big but not overwhelming, John Bickley is a candidate likely to appeal to Labour voters, tactical voting both for and against UKIP is an unpredictable factor, there was a quite big BNP chunk in 2010 which will mainly go UKIP, the former LibDem voters here may well be NOTA-style LibDems who may break towards UKIP, and there is the wild card of the grooming scandal.
Yes - it also may swing i) tactical anti-Labour voters, ii) those who thought a UKIP vote was wasted, iii) those who felt a personal allegiance to Dobbin, but not to the new candidate (tho in fairness it looks like the local party dodged a major bullet in rejecting the HQ drop ins and selecting local: Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, who represents the neighbouring constituency for Labour, said: This sends a clear message to the Metropolitan lovey fixers in the Labour party that party members in the north will not put up with the higher echelons fixing it for the party ranks in the south.”
I don't find it so odd that people view companion animals differently from livestock.
There's much to be said for eating free-range, though. I recently bought a free range pig, and the meat was delicious.
I don't know.... There's part of me that is a radical anti meat eater, that is disgusted by the whole process but hypocritically I do still eat it, though not as much as I used to, and not mammals.... Except bacon which I have just fallen off the wagon after 18 months abstinence
Then again other animal eat animals.... And maybe we are just supposed to
Ones man meat is another mans companion though, depends on where you were brought up in the world
On topic: I'm not backing Labour at the current odds. By-elections frequently produce major upsets, and in this case there is a volatile combination of factors which are hard to assess. Jim Dobbin's majority was big but not overwhelming, John Bickley is a candidate likely to appeal to Labour voters, tactical voting both for and against UKIP is an unpredictable factor, there was a quite big BNP chunk in 2010 which will mainly go UKIP, the former LibDem voters here may well be NOTA-style LibDems who may break towards UKIP, and there is the wild card of the grooming scandal.
I agree it's hard to call. The feedback I'm getting is that the grooming scandal is not featuring prominently, but a general alienation from Westminster is. I don't know the area well but my impression is that a chunk of the LibDem vote in the north is right-wing anyone-but-Labour, so they may not switch in the way that we expect in the Midlands. On the other hand, Heywood is close to Manchester, where there is a big army of Labour activists, who made an important difference to the previous by-election.
I suspect the majority may not be that close - either UKIP will really get traction or they won't, and nobody else is going to come close to Labour. A poll would be handy :-).
Unemployment is clearly low given the difficult situation and it's reasonable to give some credit for that, but it's the flip side of the acceptance of real falls in income, which in turn is a primary reason why Osborne isn't making serious inroads on the deficit
I loove the way you criticise Osborne for failing to solve the problem you caused quickly enough.
You are rather confirming my suspicion that Labour actually wants periods of Conservative government. You need the Tories in to fix the economy for you, so you can get back in and f>ck it all over again. There's no point for Labour to being in power if there isn't a supply of wealth for you to pillage.
This explains rather well the lack of enthusiasm for winning in 2015 that pervaded the Labour party conference. You need at least another term of the Coalition or better so there'll be some money to piss away.
I don't find it so odd that people view companion animals differently from livestock.
There's much to be said for eating free-range, though. I recently bought a free range pig, and the meat was delicious.
I don't know.... There's part of me that is a radical anti meat eater, that is disgusted by the whole process but hypocritically I do still eat it, though not as much as I used to, and not mammals.... Except bacon which I have just fallen off the wagon after 18 months abstinence
Then again other animal eat animals.... And maybe we are just supposed to
Ones man meat is another mans companion though, depends on where you were brought up in the world
I'm fine with eating pretty much any breed of animals, although I'd prefer them not to be cruelly treated in how they are raised or killed. If the're free range, then they get a fairly decent life where they otherwise wouldn't have existed. It's cruel deaths like cutting their throats while still alive that I find disgusting, and should be banned, religion be damned.
And if it was "unrealistic" to reduce immigration by more than 10,000, why did Cameron target a reduction of 150,000? How come you didn't call this out as unrealistic (to the scale of 15) at the time?
On topic: I'm not backing Labour at the current odds. By-elections frequently produce major upsets, and in this case there is a volatile combination of factors which are hard to assess. Jim Dobbin's majority was big but not overwhelming, John Bickley is a candidate likely to appeal to Labour voters, tactical voting both for and against UKIP is an unpredictable factor, there was a quite big BNP chunk in 2010 which will mainly go UKIP, the former LibDem voters here may well be NOTA-style LibDems who may break towards UKIP, and there is the wild card of the grooming scandal.
I agree it's hard to call. The feedback I'm getting is that the grooming scandal is not featuring prominently, but a general alienation from Westminster is. I don't know the area well but my impression is that a chunk of the LibDem vote in the north is right-wing anyone-but-Labour, so they may not switch in the way that we expect in the Midlands. On the other hand, Heywood is close to Manchester, where there is a big army of Labour activists, who made an important difference to the previous by-election.
I suspect the majority may not be that close - either UKIP will really get traction or they won't, and nobody else is going to come close to Labour. A poll would be handy :-).
The lack of polls has made it more volatile betting wise. I managed to lay labour at 1/10 and ukip at 11/4 yesterday
Except even in areas where the Conservatives have had huge failures, like in getting immigration down, you simply shrug your shoulders and say "oh well".
Yes, I'm realistic about what is possible in the real world. Looking back over 50 years, I realise the limits of what governments can do, and the timescales required to make change. The Nabavi Challenge remains unanswered: name a better government, apart from the very special case of Maggie, in the last half-century. There wasn't one. But there were certainly some dramatically worse ones!
Major's was better: kept us out the Euro, low immigration, .
Major didn't have as many Eastern European countries in the EU to deal with...
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
It's entirely accurate that we can't have sensible immigration levels without Brexit. But, even allowing for that, Cameron and May have still failed on immigration. Non-EU immigration is still way, way above it's share of the 100,000 Cameron aimed for. And that's before we even look at the constant cock-ups in illegal immigration which the government does not have a hold on.
This is really a legacy problem. The huge increase of immigration in the last 20 years along with the gift of citizenship has created a group of several million Britons who were either born abroad or whose parents were born abroad and a good number of these were from outside the EU.
When this is combined with the disaster of multi-culturalism and the failure to integrate these immigrants they have a strong tendency to want to bring spouses as well as other relatives to this country. Either we severely restrict such rights or we have to accept that there will continue to be large scale immigration from the sub-continent and elsewhere outside the EU for decades to come. Claiming this could be materially changed was simply dishonest.
The government has cut back on fake colleges, has forced citizenship requirements on people, has intruded more than slightly offensively into how genuine a person's marriage is, has imposed a stricter point based system for those without the family connection and made more of an effort to both improve our border checks and chase out those already here illegally. None of this is likely to affect underlying trends arising from those already here and British.
Comments
Many thanx for the linky. I'd have my head in my hands if I were on PR his team.
But you can't spell "affect". :-)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100287639/eurosceptics-should-support-ukrainian-sovereignty/
"I wish I could dismiss such comments as a different form of provokatsiya carried out by EU supporters in an attempt to discredit their opponents, but I’ve heard the same sentiments from UKIP parliamentary candidates.
Well, as the saying goes, not in my name. We are an internationalist, forward-looking, optimistic nation. An independent Britain will be free-trading, pluralist, open-minded, fully engaged in the affairs of every continent, including Europe. That’s my kind of Euro-scepticism. It leaves no place for Putin."
Revaluation and higher council tax bands is something I can see working - but that, of course, puts the money into the hands of the local authorities....
Birth rates in Spain and Greece have ticked up post Eurozone crisis.
Birth rates in China, Hong Kong and Singapore, where things are booming, are in decline. In Beijing province, for example, TFRs are a staggeringly low 0.68.
So, while Socrates' theory is intellectually compelling, there is no empiricial evidence to support it. And in fact, the evidence would seem to suggest the opposite.
"I think it is absolutely wrong to introduce a tax of this sort knowing that it will force people to sell family homes"
I thought you lot were in favour of forcing people out of homes if they couldn't afford them?
That's why I hate the Lefty All Must Have Prizes attitude - it doesn't work in the real world and it's misleading kids into thinking that mediocre is *good*. Well, anyone with eyes knows that isn't true in any walk of life.
Remind me, how is growth in Germany going?
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/848/economics/savings-ratio-uk/
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=NRJS&dataset=qna&table-id=J3
If someone told me that I'd get clobbered with a Mansion Tax - I'd simply split it in two with the Land Registry and sell both bits to the same person.
Simples.
Three economies whose base is exports rather than financial services.
How are we getting on with "rebalancing"?
Builders and the DIY industry are going to love you....
He doesn't reform, he dabbles in other people's domains and he kids himself debt is wealth.
Swerving questions
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/513962/Labour-boo-Express-reporter-who-asked-EU-referendum-question
Germany is a bizarre case due to the Eurozone giving it an undervalued currency. It's the flip-side of the south being overvalued and unable to export, so every strength Germany has here is counter-balanced for being on the hook for depression in the south.
I only asked?
Untangle your nether garments before you do yourself a mischief dear boy.
;-)
We would use the money raised by a mansion tax to reintroduce a lower 10 pence starting rate of tax, with the size of the band depending on the amount raised. Ed Miliband, 14 February 2013
And in order to pay for [extra spending on the NHS] we won’t borrow an extra penny. Or raise taxes on ordinary working families. We will clamp down on tax avoidance including tax loopholes by the hedge funds to raise over £1 billion. We will use the proceeds from a mansion tax on homes above £2 million. Ed Miliband, 23 September 2014
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ed-miliband-10p-tax-rate-and-mansion-tax-full-text-his-speech
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/the-spectator/2014/09/ed-milibands-ten-year-plan-speech-full-text-and-audio/
All just dust in the wind [to quote a Kansas song] ?
We've had Blue, Red, Black, Purple Labour - what's actually coming out of the sausage machine now? Nowt that I can see. And surely, Labour's Conf should have been the rallying call for the next 8 months - not the squibfest we saw.
Those aren't fired up activists.
In-work benefits are the biggy.
Also perhaps £3-5bn out of international aid. Plus you can probably get a couple of billon out of various sweeties .
But beyond that there needs to be a rethink about what the government should be doing. I don't think salami slicing will cut it anymore.
East Asia's falling birth rates are due to stupidly long working hours and, in China, the gender imbalance from the OCP.
Are the hedge fund employees, more honest than our bankers then? ;-)
I think we actually agree on a lot more than that, Nick. As usual, politics accentuates the differences rather than the similarities in positions.
Speaking of which, I must apologise for last night; I was a bit hard on you on a topic I've got very angry about. But I also disagree with your characterisation of me: the reason I argue strenuously for some things (such as the 'train line' you mentioned) is because I've done a heck of a lot of research into them.
The main things I'm worried about in this policy are the implementation, which will have to be done well, and the problems it will cause many asset-rich but income-poor people such as pensioners. But ISTR both Labour's and the Lib Dem's proposals had ways to help them.
Mrs J mischievously suggested it should be gathered on all an individual's property rather than just on each individual property. Hence if you're a buy to let landlord, you'd be in trouble.
I will say this for Ben - at least he makes it clear what he thinks Osborne has done wrong. You have spent the last four years saying how useless Osborne is, but I still don't know what you think he should actually have done differently.
Or maybe Obama Beach? Or being booed by war veterans?
As for what has Osborne not done I've posted that enough times to you over the years and either you don't read it or you pull a bag over your head until the thread has changed. Face it you're just a tribal animal.
Ed Miliband is no longer favourite with the bookies to be PM after the next election. Paddypower now have both him and Cameron at 10/11.
George Osbourne could surely give them a run for their money with this gem?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-gY20Xjrws
Being *forted out* wasn't something I expected. A bit like my banana poisoning in Jamaica. And yes, it's possible - if you consume as many daiquiris as I did. Urgh.
Alanbrooke = Sarah Teather
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Story_of_O
For Brent, higher output from Libya and Iraq overshadowed the start of U.S.-led air strikes against Islamist groups in Syria. U.S. crude rallied after earlier falling close to 17-month lows.
Global oil prices have fallen steeply since June as geopolitical fears waned and strong supply, including from the United States, swamped markets.
Libyan oil output has risen to 800,000 barrels per day, with the key El Sharara oilfield restarting, a National Oil Corp (NOC) spokesman said on Tuesday, from 700,000 bpd at the weekend.
Perhaps wee Eck had a lucky escape!
And if it was "unrealistic" to reduce immigration by more than 10,000, why did Cameron target a reduction of 150,000? How come you didn't call this out as unrealistic (to the scale of 15) at the time?
But still, a puzzle that plays on my mind quite a lot
'The Manchester dogs’ home fire has shown up our strange attitude to animal suffering'
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9322632/the-manchester-dogs-home-fire-has-shown-up-our-strange-attitude-to-animal-suffering/
If they trigger further defections among Conservative (or even Labour) MPs, then they will be very big.
Basically the current gov can't do much without Brexit..
Do try to remember that Labour's recession was deeper than first thought - the figure has been revised a number of times as the data became available.
Who's it kidding, really?
It's like EdM claiming that the Tories have failed to deliver a balanced economy after his lot crippled us.
Mote from your own eye, me thinks.
They then declare that reform of freedom of movement of workers is on the agenda post-2015 and set out their position.
This document is interesting. It holds its own counsel, but contains numerous suggestions:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/335088/SingleMarketFree_MovementPersons.pdf
I like the suggestions of David Goodhart (Demos) the most. The reinstatement of special privileges for national citizens in labour, welfare and public services should be on the list. Further, restrict the right to full time workers only (not any EU citizen) and job searches to 6 months. Require EU nationals to register.
It obviously doesn't go as far as some would like, but it gives a few more tools to control numbers.
they're divorcing their wives and getting married ?
At least he scored later on or else his confidence would have been at an all time low... His record, pre spurs, was fantastic for getafe and Valencia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2768798/Ukip-claims-two-Tories-ready-defect-Party-secretary-says-MPs-unveiled-days.html
And I don't tend to lose an argument.
Alanbrooke: perhaps, but is it an election winner?
There's much to be said for eating free-range, though. I recently bought a free range pig, and the meat was delicious.
turnip. :-)
As for Labour I guess after the referendum their conference was always going to be an anti-climax. To state the obvious they need someone more charismatic than Ed to present new initiatives - with the right leader they could be polling 40% rather than mid 30's. Having their conference before both Government parties may also act to their disadvantage in the short term.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/lancashire-councillor-liz-mcinnes-stand-7776975
Then again other animal eat animals.... And maybe we are just supposed to
Ones man meat is another mans companion though, depends on where you were brought up in the world
I suspect the majority may not be that close - either UKIP will really get traction or they won't, and nobody else is going to come close to Labour. A poll would be handy :-).
You are rather confirming my suspicion that Labour actually wants periods of Conservative government. You need the Tories in to fix the economy for you, so you can get back in and f>ck it all over again. There's no point for Labour to being in power if there isn't a supply of wealth for you to pillage.
This explains rather well the lack of enthusiasm for winning in 2015 that pervaded the Labour party conference. You need at least another term of the Coalition or better so there'll be some money to piss away.
As a senior root vegetable of PB may I cordially announce that Mrs JackW and I are now off for a month in search of that turnip beyond the rainbow.
See you all at harvest festival ....
When this is combined with the disaster of multi-culturalism and the failure to integrate these immigrants they have a strong tendency to want to bring spouses as well as other relatives to this country. Either we severely restrict such rights or we have to accept that there will continue to be large scale immigration from the sub-continent and elsewhere outside the EU for decades to come. Claiming this could be materially changed was simply dishonest.
The government has cut back on fake colleges, has forced citizenship requirements on people, has intruded more than slightly offensively into how genuine a person's marriage is, has imposed a stricter point based system for those without the family connection and made more of an effort to both improve our border checks and chase out those already here illegally. None of this is likely to affect underlying trends arising from those already here and British.