That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
But trolling for years on PB and still being shamefaced enough to show your face on PB while part of the effectively terrorist #45 does
I really can't see how Jim Murphy is the answer to any of Scottish Labour's problems. He's a Blairite who's views are exactly the kind that have pushed away so many working-class Labour supporters (problems that Labour are facing everywhere in the UK with their working-class base, but are at a more advanced stage in Scotland simply because the SNP are more talented than any opponents Labour have to face elsewhere). And in speaking style he's always seemed incredibly dull and uncharismatic to me.
My thought also. One reason he wins in his seat is he is relatively right-wing and night otherwise be vulnerable to the Conservatives. Also I cannot understand the notion of a leader not in Holyrood - I support the Union - but to me that just speaks contempt for devolution and contempt for Scottish Labour.
That will make him a shoe in in labour thinking. They are not very bright.
Shoo - nothing to do with footwear.
none of your americanisms here logical, I prefer to think of it as a gentleman having his foot put into his shoe by a servant
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
But trolling for years on PB and still being shamefaced enough to show your face on PB while part of the effectively terrorist #45 does
Brisky , you must have had a few singing gingers to be so brave as to accuse me of trolling. If I was financier you would be in litigation by now and Perry Mason would be giving you a good talking to. Freedom is not far away so tread carefully.
People on the betting chain-letter, check your inbox.
What on earth is the betting chain letter, some sort of secret society where only a few are allowed in?
I put a couple of football bets and an X-Factor bet up this morning, if I'd known that not all bets are posted and some are kept secret I would not have bothered.
First rule of betting chain-letter club....never discuss betting chain-letter club....
Have you set up a competitor to PB and are trying to do a reverse take over from Mike S?
lol
Nah, vanilla has a messaging function which can be used by anyone. One consequence of political betting taking off is that decent tips posted on the site tend to get smashed pretty much immediately, often by lurkers. Either that or the bookies who monitor the site cut the odds before anyone can take advantage.
It's just the way it is.
Perhaps PB has reached a kinda critical mass whereby publicly sharing (or even discussing) tips with other posters, especially on illiquid markets, becomes impossible without the odds being immediately cut.
A couple of weeks ago some us were publically lamenting on here about the death of real betting tips. Punters who used to put up tips on horses, tennis, cricket (including me, occasionally!) and the like. And the reply came that nobody was interested any more ... indeed one prominent ex tipster of this parish said that he wouldn't bother writing any more thread headers about gambling because the interest wasn't there.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
But trolling for years on PB and still being shamefaced enough to show your face on PB while part of the effectively terrorist #45 does
Brisky , you must have had a few singing gingers to be so brave as to accuse me of trolling. If I was financier you would be in litigation by now and Perry Mason would be giving you a good talking to. Freedom is not far away so tread carefully.
I converse in a very similar attitude with Financier as I do to you Malcy. Admittedly he doesn't reply.
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Oh perhaps the unemployed in the area as this article from 2009 demonstrates:
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
But trolling for years on PB and still being shamefaced enough to show your face on PB while part of the effectively terrorist #45 does
Brisky , you must have had a few singing gingers to be so brave as to accuse me of trolling. If I was financier you would be in litigation by now and Perry Mason would be giving you a good talking to. Freedom is not far away so tread carefully.
I converse in a very similar attitude with Financier as I do to you Malcy. Admittedly he doesn't reply.
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
This, Malcolm, very true. YES/SNP and NO/Unionist votes will correspond statistically significantly ... but as you say it will be far from exclusive. Polling shows a number of pro-EU UKIP voters, as we've seen.
Nobody should draw too strong a correlation there. Equally I'm cautious about Danny565's "...because of the UK-wide trend of...". Scotland (and Wales, NI, London etc etc) have their own unique flavour and it's unusual to locate a true "UK wide trend" that doesn't involve some fudging or MOE to make it valid.
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
Didn't someone work out that there were more NO SNP voters than Tory NO voters?
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
This, Malcolm, very true. YES/SNP and NO/Unionist votes will correspond statistically significantly ... but as you say it will be far from exclusive. Polling shows a number of pro-EU UKIP voters, as we've seen.
Nobody should draw too strong a correlation there. Equally I'm cautious about Danny565's "...because of the UK-wide trend of...". Scotland (and Wales, NI, London etc etc) have their own unique flavour and it's unusual to locate a true "UK wide trend" that doesn't involve some fudging or MOE to make it valid.
[will correspond statistically significantly]
Err, there's American Football on the Telly.
Try speaking English.
Apparently the hoi polloi accuse the politicians of not speaking it...
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Farm mechanisation is the future, in the meantime excellent work for our indebted students to do, as they do in Australia on gap years.
Same arguments were made by slave holders, sloppy.
On topic, I'm not sure some of these seats are quite as safe as they look.
For example Glasgow East was won with an 11.8k majority on a 52% turnout in 2010 but in the 2008 by-election the SNP won by 300 on a 42% turnout. Glasgow Shettleston at Holyrood was won by the SNP by 600 votes on a 38% turnout
If the SNP can get some former non-voters out they have a chance
That list of Labour's Scottish seats sorted by majority shows how their problems in Scotland are probably being a bit overstated, atleast for 2015. Most of their thin majorities are in places which strongly rejected independence. For example, some of the Edinburgh seats on paper look like good prospects for SNP gains, but I expect them to see much smaller Lab->SNP swings than the average, both because of Edinburgh voting "No", and because of the UK-wide trend of the metropolitan middle-class becoming more Labourish.
Labour's problems are concentrated mainly in the working-class Central Belt towns, but almost all of them have such formidable Labour majorites that they probably can't be taken down in just one election. The only ones which really seem to be in strking distance for the SNP for next year are Falkirk and Dundee West (probably Ochil & S Perthshire too, even though that was a strong "No" area you'd have to think the majority is so small that it will go by default).
Voting No in referendum does not mean in any way that they will not vote SNP
Didn't someone work out that there were more NO SNP voters than Tory NO voters?
On topic, I'm not sure some of these seats are quite as safe as they look.
For example Glasgow East was won with an 11.8k majority on a 52% turnout in 2010 but in the 2008 by-election the SNP won by 300 on a 42% turnout. Glasgow Shettleston at Holyrood was won by the SNP by 600 votes on a 38% turnout
If the SNP can get some former non-voters out they have a chance
If you'd followed @Antifrank's excellent blog you can now pick up profits by backing Labour in some of these seats.
Looking back on Sept 21, I said Poch would be gone by Xmas and that Pardew could relax.
Today has not exactly been unexpected.....
Wanke*s
Chopettino for the Poch! I was gutted when he left us in the summer, but I wouldn't want him back. At least you didn't spend c£50m on him like the scousers did on Lallana, Lambert & Lovren
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Oh perhaps the unemployed in the area as this article from 2009 demonstrates:
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
You must have missed the fact that we have stunningly good unemployment figures at present and that the percentage of workers in employment is nearing all time records. But so long as you can have a fact-free moan at the expense of hard workers from other countries, that's all that matters, isn't it?
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Oh perhaps the unemployed in the area as this article from 2009 demonstrates:
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
You must have missed the fact that we have stunningly good unemployment figures at present and that the percentage of workers in employment is nearing all time records. But so long as you can have a fact-free moan at the expense of hard workers from other countries, that's all that matters, isn't it?
We're quite close to full employment in this country Antifrank.
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Oh perhaps the unemployed in the area as this article from 2009 demonstrates:
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
You must have missed the fact that we have stunningly good unemployment figures at present and that the percentage of workers in employment is nearing all time records. But so long as you can have a fact-free moan at the expense of hard workers from other countries, that's all that matters, isn't it?
We're quite close to full employment in this country Antifrank.
Please analyse my statement.
The proportion of working people on minimum wage is also rising.
People on the betting chain-letter, check your inbox.
What on earth is the betting chain letter, some sort of secret society where only a few are allowed in?
I put a couple of football bets and an X-Factor bet up this morning, if I'd known that not all bets are posted and some are kept secret I would not have bothered.
First rule of betting chain-letter club....never discuss betting chain-letter club....
Have you set up a competitor to PB and are trying to do a reverse take over from Mike S?
lol
Nah, vanilla has a messaging function which can be used by anyone. One consequence of political betting taking off is that decent tips posted on the site tend to get smashed pretty much immediately, often by lurkers. Either that or the bookies who monitor the site cut the odds before anyone can take advantage.
It's just the way it is.
Perhaps PB has reached a kinda critical mass whereby publicly sharing (or even discussing) tips with other posters, especially on illiquid markets, becomes impossible without the odds being immediately cut.
A couple of weeks ago some us were publically lamenting on here about the death of real betting tips. Punters who used to put up tips on horses, tennis, cricket (including me, occasionally!) and the like. And the reply came that nobody was interested any more ... indeed one prominent ex tipster of this parish said that he wouldn't bother writing any more thread headers about gambling because the interest wasn't there.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
Many posters said the Conservatives were big value in Rochester at 6/4, lots more said they were value at 10/3... @AudreyAnne explained why these were the bets to have with her list of facts...what more do you want?!
Labour were tipped at 10z1 to come through the middle in Clacton, if the Tory bet at 3/1 didn't pay off, while turnout under 50% was explained in detail as the value in Clackers too
I see the bovine ex Liberal Democrat Liz Truss has shoved her size 12 wellies in her gob.
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive
UKIP, thanks the Environment Minster for her rash unthinking comment which we all understand the implications of and no doubt UKIP will use it as appropriate in leaflets from Lincoln to Hastings and beyond.
I suspect Cameron will seriously regret putting an Urban Liberal in charge of rural matters!
Unless UKIP think that it's better to leave agricultural produce rotting in the fields, I don't see what's exceptionable about what Ms Truss has said. It's simply a statement of fact. Who else do you think is going to pick it?
Oh perhaps the unemployed in the area as this article from 2009 demonstrates:
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
You must have missed the fact that we have stunningly good unemployment figures at present and that the percentage of workers in employment is nearing all time records. But so long as you can have a fact-free moan at the expense of hard workers from other countries, that's all that matters, isn't it?
We're quite close to full employment in this country Antifrank.
Please analyse my statement.
The proportion of working people on minimum wage is also rising.
I agree. I would make the assumption that most PBers are already aware of this fact.
People on the betting chain-letter, check your inbox.
What on earth is the betting chain letter, some sort of secret society where only a few are allowed in?
I put a couple of football bets and an X-Factor bet up this morning, if I'd known that not all bets are posted and some are kept secret I would not have bothered.
First rule of betting chain-letter club....never discuss betting chain-letter club....
Have you set up a competitor to PB and are trying to do a reverse take over from Mike S?
lol
Nah, vanilla has a messaging function which can be used by anyone. One consequence of political betting taking off is that decent tips posted on the site tend to get smashed pretty much immediately, often by lurkers. Either that or the bookies who monitor the site cut the odds before anyone can take advantage.
It's just the way it is.
Perhaps PB has reached a kinda critical mass whereby publicly sharing (or even discussing) tips with other posters, especially on illiquid markets, becomes impossible without the odds being immediately cut.
A couple of weeks ago some us were publically lamenting on here about the death of real betting tips. Punters who used to put up tips on horses, tennis, cricket (including me, occasionally!) and the like. And the reply came that nobody was interested any more ... indeed one prominent ex tipster of this parish said that he wouldn't bother writing any more thread headers about gambling because the interest wasn't there.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
Many posters said the Conservatives were big value in Rochester at 6/4, lots more said they were value at 10/3... @AudreyAnne explained why these were the bets to have with her list of facts...what more do you want?!
Labour were tipped at 10z1 to come through the middle in Clacton, if the Tory bet at 3/1 didn't pay off, while turnout under 50% was explained in detail as the value in Clackers too
LOL, yes. With analysis and a "list of facts" like that, who needs anything else
The proportion of working people on minimum wage is also rising.
Those who insist on a "minimum wage" must accept that it will become the default wage for the low skilled and low productivity group. An employer has no incentive or need to pay just slightly above.
The proportion of working people on minimum wage is also rising.
Those who insist on a "minimum wage" must accept that it will become the default wage for the low skilled and low productivity group. An employer has no incentive or need to pay just slightly above.
People on the betting chain-letter, check your inbox.
What on earth is the betting chain letter, some sort of secret society where only a few are allowed in?
I put a couple of football bets and an X-Factor bet up this morning, if I'd known that not all bets are posted and some are kept secret I would not have bothered.
First rule of betting chain-letter club....never discuss betting chain-letter club....
Have you set up a competitor to PB and are trying to do a reverse take over from Mike S?
lol
Nah, vanilla has a messaging function which can be used by anyone. One consequence of political betting taking off is that decent tips posted on the site tend to get smashed pretty much immediately, often by lurkers. Either that or the bookies who monitor the site cut the odds before anyone can take advantage.
It's just the way it is.
Perhaps PB has reached a kinda critical mass whereby publicly sharing (or even discussing) tips with other posters, especially on illiquid markets, becomes impossible without the odds being immediately cut.
A couple of weeks ago some us were publically lamenting on here about the death of real betting tips. Punters who used to put up tips on horses, tennis, cricket (including me, occasionally!) and the like. And the reply came that nobody was interested any more ... indeed one prominent ex tipster of this parish said that he wouldn't bother writing any more thread headers about gambling because the interest wasn't there.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
Many posters said the Conservatives were big value in Rochester at 6/4, lots more said they were value at 10/3... @AudreyAnne explained why these were the bets to have with her list of facts...what more do you want?!
Labour were tipped at 10z1 to come through the middle in Clacton, if the Tory bet at 3/1 didn't pay off, while turnout under 50% was explained in detail as the value in Clackers too
Some real corkers there. I'll admit I've backed the Tories at what supposedly were "long" prices in Rochester... 3-1 etc But they have just got longer. Taking 11-2 would be throwing good money away now.
People on the betting chain-letter, check your inbox.
What on earth is the betting chain letter, some sort of secret society where only a few are allowed in?
I put a couple of football bets and an X-Factor bet up this morning, if I'd known that not all bets are posted and some are kept secret I would not have bothered.
First rule of betting chain-letter club....never discuss betting chain-letter club....
Have you set up a competitor to PB and are trying to do a reverse take over from Mike S?
lol
Nah, vanilla has a messaging function which can be used by anyone. One consequence of political betting taking off is that decent tips posted on the site tend to get smashed pretty much immediately, often by lurkers. Either that or the bookies who monitor the site cut the odds before anyone can take advantage.
It's just the way it is.
Perhaps PB has reached a kinda critical mass whereby publicly sharing (or even discussing) tips with other posters, especially on illiquid markets, becomes impossible without the odds being immediately cut.
A couple of weeks ago some us were publically lamenting on here about the death of real betting tips. Punters who used to put up tips on horses, tennis, cricket (including me, occasionally!) and the like. And the reply came that nobody was interested any more ... indeed one prominent ex tipster of this parish said that he wouldn't bother writing any more thread headers about gambling because the interest wasn't there.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
Many posters said the Conservatives were big value in Rochester at 6/4, lots more said they were value at 10/3... @AudreyAnne explained why these were the bets to have with her list of facts...what more do you want?!
Labour were tipped at 10z1 to come through the middle in Clacton, if the Tory bet at 3/1 didn't pay off, while turnout under 50% was explained in detail as the value in Clackers too
I put some football bets up earlier, Rafael has already been booked so the card bets are in profit 45 minutes still to come.
The proportion of working people on minimum wage is also rising.
Those who insist on a "minimum wage" must accept that it will become the default wage for the low skilled and low productivity group. An employer has no incentive or need to pay just slightly above.
Unless there is a labour shortage, of course.
Except of course that for many people being on minimum wage means that there income is topped up through in work benefits so as to get something like a liveable wage. So even when there is a labour shortage, as arguably there has been in the South East for quite a while, wages don't go up and nor does the welfare bill fall.
We end up in the crazy situation, we saw the other week, where there are not enough employees at Gatwick Airport to unload the aeroplanes but with the employers making big profits because the taxpayers are subsiding their work force.
Employers no longer need to play the market rate because the taxpayers will subsidise them. the minimum is becoming the default.
I live in Dunbartonshire West - one of the safest seats on that list - and the hatred for Labour is absolutely palpable. This was one of the only regions to vote yes to independence. Labour are so close to a collapse here and if they can lose one of their safest seats why not a whole host of other ones on big swings too?
Comments
You thinking of Syria or Iraq??????
PS - I am not being sarcastic.
Now it appears instead that the topic has gone underground. Well that's nice. I can (and do) talk about politics in many other forums. The only thing that made this one stand out from the crowd was the betting element. A shame that bit is now by invitation only.
Have a teeny hole in my Kipper betting position there
Mind you I could just leave it...
Make of that what you want lurkers!!!
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/14/seasonal-work-immigrants-fruit-picking
Of course as that article and others I have read indicate the minimum wage is only loosely applied when it comes to foreign labour. Perhaps that's what Truss was referring to?
That you and your ilk prefer not see that is why there is so much resentment in this country toward cheap foreign labour and why UKIP is prospering and people like you haven't a clue what to do about them except abuse them and sneer at them.......
Stilll as long as you can pop into the local Tescos and get your nice cheap tomatoes that's all that matters isn't it?
Was thinking more 10-1 or so ^_~
Nobody should draw too strong a correlation there. Equally I'm cautious about Danny565's "...because of the UK-wide trend of...". Scotland (and Wales, NI, London etc etc) have their own unique flavour and it's unusual to locate a true "UK wide trend" that doesn't involve some fudging or MOE to make it valid.
https://twitter.com/Joey7Barton just live on C4...
Err, there's American Football on the Telly.
Try speaking English.
Apparently the hoi polloi accuse the politicians of not speaking it...
Same arguments were made by slave holders, sloppy.
For example Glasgow East was won with an 11.8k majority on a 52% turnout in 2010 but in the 2008 by-election the SNP won by 300 on a 42% turnout. Glasgow Shettleston at Holyrood was won by the SNP by 600 votes on a 38% turnout
If the SNP can get some former non-voters out they have a chance
#skynewsfan
Today has not exactly been unexpected.....
Wanke*s
Same song coming up!!!!
PS - don't think this will be corrected.
Nae worries - I'll just take down Atos again.
Give me a couple of months...
PS - PLEASE STATE CLEARLY IN CAPITAL LETTERS WHICH COUNTRY YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO BOMB
Please analyse my statement.
And managed to break C4...
Labour were tipped at 10z1 to come through the middle in Clacton, if the Tory bet at 3/1 didn't pay off, while turnout under 50% was explained in detail as the value in Clackers too
PS - It would be logically unlikely that J Briskin esquire could wield such power.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11187602/The-wealth-tax-a-tax-on-the-rich-that-cripples-the-poor.html
We end up in the crazy situation, we saw the other week, where there are not enough employees at Gatwick Airport to unload the aeroplanes but with the employers making big profits because the taxpayers are subsiding their work force.
Employers no longer need to play the market rate because the taxpayers will subsidise them. the minimum is becoming the default.