Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And the winner of the PB Rochester and Strood competition i

SystemSystem Posts: 11,697
edited November 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » And the winner of the PB Rochester and Strood competition is…..

The winner will receive a copy of the new book edited by Philip Cowley and Rob Ford “Sex Lies & The Ballot Box” which was launched earlier this month and has attracted a fair bit of publicity.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Can I just say I guessed predicted 7.77% and was only out by 0.5%.

    *smug mode*
  • Options
    BenM said:
    You've got to love that capitalism.

    When there's no risk to employers of being stuck with useless costly employees, you take them on that much more readily.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited November 2014
    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
  • Options
    weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    BenM said:
    You've got to love that capitalism.

    When there's no risk to employers of being stuck with useless costly employees, you take them on that much more readily.
    Well just remember the figures are annualised - so for the US it is 1% a quarter whereas for the UK it is 0.7%. Not bad since the UK is chained to Europe for 55% of its trade - according to Europhiles and Europe is doing SFA.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    FPPT @niminoz

    My "rather privileged view of the world" is the British citizenship is an honour and a privilege, and that all people who have that status should have the same rights. However, with those rights come duties and obligations.

    I am comfortable with the idea of people having a safe harbour so that they do not need to undertake positive actions which are against their belief system. But, fundamentally, if you want to be part of our society you need to acknowledge the supremacy of the secular law in the UK - and that it applies equally to all citizens. You can't have a situation whereby you say "I am a Catholic/Muslim/Pastafarian/whatever: this law does not apply to me" - if you want to take advantage of the safe harbour then you need to provide people with an alternative way to exercise their rights under the law.

    * steps back and takes tissue from pocket, ready to wipe spittle from face *
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    How about a Morgan?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,879

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Worth going obliquely at it and seeing if anyone else is chatting about it on online websites - that will give a latest date.

  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    How about a Morgan?

    4-seater Morgan?

  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited November 2014

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    Mercedes SL. Mmmm. Sigh. I wish...

    [some were 4-seaters, no?]
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    BenM said:
    How is 0.95% quarterly growth "thrashing" 0.7% quarterly growth? Please tell me you don't think the US grew at 3.9% in a single quarter...
  • Options

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    My brother works for www.historics.co.uk they have a classic car auction at Brooklands this Saturday.

    Have a look through the catalogue and if there is anything you fancy then register, if not message me and I will give you my brothers contact details, he is a specialist and will be able to help.
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Worth going obliquely at it and seeing if anyone else is chatting about it on online websites - that will give a latest date.

    Look at the background carefully. Tree leaves often give the show away..
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited November 2014
    Anorak said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    Mercedes SL. Mmmm. Sigh. I wish...

    [some were 4-seaters, no?]
    Maybe I'm thinking of the SE
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    How about a Morgan?

    4-seater Morgan?

    My father blames me for the fact that he had to sell his Dino as he couldn't fit both my brother & my carry cot in the back seat...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,554
    edited November 2014
    Well done N Simms.

    Looks like one UKIP branch is proving David Cameron's maxim about twitter.

    The Kipper account is complaining about a BBC news report about UKIP/Farage taking place outside a Mosque.

    Except the Mosque, is well, Westminster Cathedral

    What makes it even funnier is well, it is the Thanet South branch of UKIP that is making themselves look like an idiot.

  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Charles said:

    FPPT @niminoz

    My "rather privileged view of the world" is the British citizenship is an honour and a privilege, and that all people who have that status should have the same rights. However, with those rights come duties and obligations.

    I am comfortable with the idea of people having a safe harbour so that they do not need to undertake positive actions which are against their belief system. But, fundamentally, if you want to be part of our society you need to acknowledge the supremacy of the secular law in the UK - and that it applies equally to all citizens. You can't have a situation whereby you say "I am a Catholic/Muslim/Pastafarian/whatever: this law does not apply to me" - if you want to take advantage of the safe harbour then you need to provide people with an alternative way to exercise their rights under the law.

    * steps back and takes tissue from pocket, ready to wipe spittle from face *

    Hear, hear.

    A lot of people seem to be under this mistaken impression that having a liberal democratic society is a sure thing that we are guaranteed in future. But history has shown that is not the case. Liberal democracy, while a great and wonderful thing, is a historical rarity, and a society can have it and later lose it. For it to be sustained, you need the right institutions, the right culture and people in those institutions respecting that culture. As places like Pakistan and Nigeria have shown, it doesn't matter if you put in British style institutions if the people are of a mindset that doesn't believe in them and don't fight to keep them. The American Founding Fathers, so ahead of their time in so many ways, recognised the danger that immigrants from more autocratic countries could pose, and stressed the important that immigrants should be those of a liberal mentality. We should be listening to their words that have come down through the ages.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    The 86 Acute Foundation Trusts in England are in deficit at 30/9/14 by £326m

    The Lansley reforms continue to bankrupt the Acute Sector.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    edited November 2014
    FPT@Norm


    "Alan you mentioned you wouldn't be voting Tory next time. In a a sense this is a vote against the performance of the coalition. Would not a majority Tory government, albeit an unlikely scenario, be a different beast? Cameron will only have a limited shelf life even if he wins - is that a factor to consider before discarding the Tories? And finally do you really think any alternative gov't - most likely a Lab minority or even majority one will be an improvement on what we now have? "

    I really can't see a majority Cameron government being that different. The LDs have been a convenient excuse for DC to ignore the things he doesn't like and let someone else take the blame. I'd argue the LDs want things too and if Cameron can't cut a sensible deal on things he wants then he's not suited to politics.

    I've already discounted Cameron as a failure on his own terms let alone mine, but don't see how voting for him on the grounds he will go makes much sense. I'd much rather see what replaces him and then decide, but if it's Boris or Osborne, then I'll still be sitting on my hands.

    wrt a Labour govt well I've sort of got one now ; Cameron hasn't really done much to reverse the Blair settlement and Miliband would do some dabbling to keep the troops happy; but really there's no money to do anything significant, so what's to fear ? So it might not be an improvement on what we have now but it won't be noticeably worse either.



  • Options
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Congratulations to Mr. Simms.
  • Options
    God bless thick Kippers obsessed with Muslims, they add to the gaiety of the nation.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    64 of 83 Acute FTs are now in deficit.

    In 2010 there was 1 in deficit
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    MaxPB said:

    BenM said:
    How is 0.95% quarterly growth "thrashing" 0.7% quarterly growth? Please tell me you don't think the US grew at 3.9% in a single quarter...
    I think he does -Labour economics for you:)
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    The 86 Acute Foundation Trusts in England are in deficit at 30/9/14 by £326m

    The Lansley reforms continue to bankrupt the Acute Sector.

    And you no doubt support the strikers who want those deficits added to with unaffordable public sector pay rises
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
    They abolished section 28, equalised the age of consent, they let a gay mafia run the country (really the Sun did a front page asking are we run by a gay mafia back in 1998 I think)
  • Options
    I appear to have beaten TSE again.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, we clearly were not run by a gay mafia. If we had, the Labour Government would've been fabulous.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985

    TOPPING said:

    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
    They abolished section 28, equalised the age of consent, they let a gay mafia run the country (really the Sun did a front page asking are we run by a gay mafia back in 1998 I think)
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ioHVrpJSUQA/UnqoJ4fdR8I/AAAAAAAAABE/xvCKv677L1I/s1600/gay+mafia.png

    Those bloody gays are everywhere.... (jk of course!)
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,554
    edited November 2014

    I appear to have beaten TSE again.

    Was your entry "Traitorous pigdogoutinMay"?

    Because I was hoping that would win.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,221
    3 rather random thoughts:-

    1. I like hearing from Labour people on here. So I hope those who are thinking of leaving don't.

    2. I wonder how long it will take for the name of the internet company through which the message about killing a soldier was posted to come out. Whatever the other arguments, that's a reputational minefield for the company.

    3. I listened to Tristram Hunt this morning talking about private schools. What struck me most was the defeatism that permeated what he said about state schools. There seemed to be no sense from him that his job - assuming he becomes Education Secretarty - is to ensure that state schools become as good as possible. I would feel a bit depressed were I a state school teacher to feel that the Ed Sec''s view is that I could not teach my class to be good enough to apply for and get into Oxbridge but needed help from teachers in the private sector.

    Also - very late in the day, I know - a thank you to Fat Steve for organising the drinks on Friday and to all the various PBers I met who made it a most engaging evening for me.
  • Options
    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    edited November 2014

    I appear to have beaten TSE again.

    Was your entry "Traitorous pigdogoutinMay"?

    Because I was hoping that would win.
    You might ask that but I couldn't...
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    felix said:

    The 86 Acute Foundation Trusts in England are in deficit at 30/9/14 by £326m

    The Lansley reforms continue to bankrupt the Acute Sector.

    And you no doubt support the strikers who want those deficits added to with unaffordable public sector pay rises
    You know nothing.

    Zero % pay rises mean people are not prepared to cover shifts at NHS rates.



    The biggest single cause of the increase in costs is Agency staff costs that are on target to reach £1.7bn
  • Options

    I appear to have beaten TSE again.

    Was your entry "Traitorous pigdogoutinMay"?

    Because I was hoping that would win.
    You might ask that but I couldn't...
    Well I'm glad two of my phrases have entered PB lexicon, Dockside Hooker and Traitorous PigDog.
  • Options

    I appear to have beaten TSE again.

    Was your entry "Traitorous pigdogoutinMay"?

    Because I was hoping that would win.
    You might ask that but I couldn't...
    Well I'm glad two of my phrases have entered PB lexicon, Dockside Hooker and Traitorous PigDog.
    Balls deep?
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Anorak said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    Mercedes SL. Mmmm. Sigh. I wish...

    [some were 4-seaters, no?]
    Jensen Interceptor.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    felix said:

    The 86 Acute Foundation Trusts in England are in deficit at 30/9/14 by £326m

    The Lansley reforms continue to bankrupt the Acute Sector.

    And you no doubt support the strikers who want those deficits added to with unaffordable public sector pay rises
    The French NHS is in deficit (well debt). 10 billion euros I think.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TOPPING said:

    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
    I have the feeling he might be referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Partnership_Act_2004
  • Options
    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    felix said:

    The 86 Acute Foundation Trusts in England are in deficit at 30/9/14 by £326m

    The Lansley reforms continue to bankrupt the Acute Sector.

    And you no doubt support the strikers who want those deficits added to with unaffordable public sector pay rises
    You know nothing.

    Zero % pay rises mean people are not prepared to cover shifts at NHS rates.



    The biggest single cause of the increase in costs is Agency staff costs that are on target to reach £1.7bn
    Incorrect - as you know all staff got a 1% rise except theocratic already received a 3% annual increment! Many in other sectors have had pay cuts. Salaries are the biggest element of the NHS spend.
  • Options
    Mr. Eagles, neither have the charm nor wit of differential front end grip.
  • Options

    I appear to have beaten TSE again.

    Was your entry "Traitorous pigdogoutinMay"?

    Because I was hoping that would win.
    You might ask that but I couldn't...
    Well I'm glad two of my phrases have entered PB lexicon, Dockside Hooker and Traitorous PigDog.
    Balls deep?
    Doesn't count until I use it in a thread header.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Well done N Simms.

    Looks like one UKIP branch is proving David Cameron's maxim about twitter.

    The Kipper account is complaining about a BBC news report about UKIP/Farage taking place outside a Mosque.

    Except the Mosque, is well, Westminster Cathedral

    What makes it even funnier is well, it is the Thanet South branch of UKIP that is making themselves look like an idiot.

    Except the Mosque, is well, Westminster Cathedral

    Well under the Lab/Lib/Con disasters, how long before Westminster Cathedral does become a mosque?
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    The ratio of pensions & benefits in the public sector should be benchmarked to what it is in the private sector. Pension sectors particularly are a way for governments to buy-off public sector unions in a way that never costs them, but some poor successor government a long time down the road.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,879
    Socrates said:

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    The ratio of pensions & benefits in the public sector should be benchmarked to what it is in the private sector. Pension sectors particularly are a way for governments to buy-off public sector unions in a way that never costs them, but some poor successor government a long time down the road.
    It was, and the pay then downgraded to allow for pensions and benefits.

  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
    The 1% pay rise was given. How does striking improve the patient experience?
  • Options

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    Indigo said:

    TOPPING said:

    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
    I have the feeling he might be referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Partnership_Act_2004
    Which was a huge step forward but did not give equivalence to homosexual and heterosexual unions. That was left to the Cons to do.

    As for @TheScreamingEagles‌' list, thanks - yes that works.

    Subject to the civil partnership/gay marriage huge imbalance....
  • Options

    Anorak said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    Mercedes SL. Mmmm. Sigh. I wish...

    [some were 4-seaters, no?]
    Jensen Interceptor.
    NO NO NO.

    You want to buy a car made twenty years ago - and that is yet unfashionable.

    Mercedes 500/600 SL http://tinyurl.com/ptkb854
  • Options

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    We should but a large portion of the voting public are still in complete denial about it.
  • Options

    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
    They must be earning enough already if they are not prepared to cover extra shifts.

    Millions of private sector workers would have loved n extra shift at normal rates over the last five years.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Carnyx said:

    Socrates said:

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    The ratio of pensions & benefits in the public sector should be benchmarked to what it is in the private sector. Pension sectors particularly are a way for governments to buy-off public sector unions in a way that never costs them, but some poor successor government a long time down the road.
    It was, and the pay then downgraded to allow for pensions and benefits.

    Not sure what you mean there. I have a public sector pension (since 2009) it is way better than anything achievable in the private sector. The recent changes are less good but still much better than in the private sector.
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    Neil said:

    FPT - "As an economically dry as dust and socially come-all-ye Tory, not to say great proponent of personal freedom, but then again not a huge Church of God person, I am delighted that DC introduced this, which Lab, shame on them, had not done during their enlightened 13 years in govt."

    Please, you can attack Labour for many things but the idea that they werent anything but incredibly good on LGBT issues is for the birds. Gay marriage is a trifling thing with little real impact on the lives of gay people compared to the measures Labour introduced from 1997 to 2010 (often in the face of fierce opposition from Tories including one D. Cameron).

    Well not accepting that homosexual relationships should be equal to heterosexual relationships while you saying how much they did for LGBT is a bit "apart from that, Mrs Lincoln..."

    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".
    They abolished section 28, equalised the age of consent, they let a gay mafia run the country (really the Sun did a front page asking are we run by a gay mafia back in 1998 I think)
    Attitudes toward homosexuality have changed massively, even in the last 15 years.
  • Options
    Mr. Royale, to be fair, that must be largely due to a media that is often less than impressive, and politicians deliberately obfuscating the issue so they can avoid the more stringent measures we really need.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    Lansley has fixed the system against the Acute Sector too.

    Massive conflict of interests GPs commission services. Many of those services can be carried out in an Acute or community environment (OR AT A GP)

    An experienced Nurse has had a real cut in pay of circa 15% in the five years of this Govt.

    They opt to work only at rates well above the standard rate.

    Since demand exceeds supply they succeed.

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TOPPING said:


    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".

    Are you kidding? Want to guess how many of these prominent Tories opposed?

    Abolished Section 28.
    Allowed gays to serve openly in the military.
    Civil partnerships.
    Allowing transgender people to change their gender.
    Equal age of consent.
    Outlawing discrimination in employment.
    Outlawing discrimination in provision of goods and services.

    That was some record. Except for decriminalisation no Government can really compare to what Labour achieved for LGBT rights between 1997 and 2010.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884

    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
    They must be earning enough already if they are not prepared to cover extra shifts.

    Millions of private sector workers would have loved n extra shift at normal rates over the last five years.
    They dont refuse the shift they agree to do it via Agency.

    The hospital cant get it covered for NHS rates by anyone

    FFS when will this Govt learn the 15% cut in wages in real terms is counter productive and is bankrupting the NHS and leading to higher pay costs per hour.

    Its not rocket science
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    felix said:

    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
    The 1% pay rise was given. How does striking improve the patient experience?
    No it wasn't given why do you think NHS staff are so angry?
  • Options

    Mr. Royale, to be fair, that must be largely due to a media that is often less than impressive, and politicians deliberately obfuscating the issue so they can avoid the more stringent measures we really need.

    I'm not sure about that. Cameron/Osborne tried the honest 'age of austerity' speech in October 2009. It went down like a bag of cold sick; they soon changed tack afterwards.

    I think a lot of people (including very intelligent and educated people) simply don't want it to happen so invent reasons as to why it doesn't have to happen. People pick the facts that support their world-view, and find reasons to dismiss the rest.

    Others (far fewer) make an argument on closing big-business tax loopholes, and raising taxation in general, which is at least engaging with the argument although both fiscally inadequate and economically damaging.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,325
    edited November 2014

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That includes me, but only just!)

    Double Carpet runs an Election Game competition with a small elite field of professional pundits and political anoraks. All seventeen entries overestimated the size of UKIPs win, most by a good deal more than me. The wisdom of the PB crowd was much wiser in this case.

    Nice to meet up at the drinks bash. Was it your first visit to DD's? I have the feeling we have met before but those evenings are often a hazy blur afterwards.
  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,041

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    We should but a large portion of the voting public are still in complete denial about it.
    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...
  • Options
    Mr. Royale, perhaps.

    Very often people decide their opinion and then look for facts to fit it.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Casino_Royale
    If I follow the line of reasoning on PB, the country is in the crapper because the rich are too poor to bear more taxes, and the poor are too rich to be given help.
    The clarity of thought is stunning.
  • Options


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    Neil said:

    TOPPING said:


    I've no idea what they did for LGBT people 1997-2010 and a cursory google got me nowhere - I am genuinely interested. Do tell.

    And please, no "initiatives" or "strategies".

    Are you kidding? Want to guess how many of these prominent Tories opposed?

    Abolished Section 28.
    Allowed gays to serve openly in the military.
    Civil partnerships.
    Allowing transgender people to change their gender.
    Equal age of consent.
    Outlawing discrimination in employment.
    Outlawing discrimination in provision of goods and services.

    That was some record. Except for decriminalisation no Government can really compare to what Labour achieved for LGBT rights between 1997 and 2010.
    fair enough it's a good list.
  • Options
    murali_s said:

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    We should but a large portion of the voting public are still in complete denial about it.
    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...
    I hope writing that made you feel better.

    Is capping executive pay your proposed solution to closing our £100bn deficit?
  • Options

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That includes me, but only just!)

    Double Carpet runs an Election Game competition with a small elite field of professional pundits and political anoraks. All seventeen entries overestimated the size of UKIPs win, most by a good deal more than me. The wisdom of the PB crowd was much wiser in this case.

    Nice to meet up at the drinks bash. Was it your first visit to DD's? I have the feeling we have met before but those evenings are often a hazy blur afterwards.
    Nice to meet you too. It was my first visit to DD, but we hadn't met before.

    I had met OGH before, who has an astonishing memory and not only remembered meeting me before, but exactly where, when and my name, even though it was over 5 years ago!
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Talking of which, our man Shadsy has allowed me £25@100/1 on me to win Islington South and Finsbury Borough for UKIP next May

    Just wait til PP go up 250s!

  • Options
    isam said:


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Talking of which, our man Shadsy has allowed me £25@100/1 on me to win Islington South and Finsbury Borough for UKIP next May

    Just wait til PP go up 250s!

    He's all heart, Isam!
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    murali_s said:

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    We should but a large portion of the voting public are still in complete denial about it.
    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...
    CEOs of FTSE companies are not paid out of our taxes, so it is none of the government's business.

    That said, I wish shareholders would be far more actively engaged in governance - and clamp down on the greed of many executives in public companies
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    isam said:


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Talking of which, our man Shadsy has allowed me £25@100/1 on me to win Islington South and Finsbury Borough for UKIP next May


    If you pull it off, your winnings from Shadsy will be the least of your celebrations.

  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    felix said:

    felix said:

    The FT Acute sector is now missing more A&E waiting, inpatient waiting times and Cancer waits than at anytime since FTs were put in place.

    And yet only yesterday staff were on strike seeking unaffordable wage hikes and affecting non-emergency services and inconvenienced patients. Labour supports NHS staff not he NHS patients.
    If a 1% pay rise is unaffordable then people opting to get paid triple as an agency shift will proliferate.

    Supply and demand i think.

    The FTs were planning to spend £13.4bn by q2 in staff costs and £0.4bn on agency staff

    They cannot get staff to cover shifts at frozen since 2010 rates (15% down in real terms) so pay a massive £831m on agency shifts to the end of September
    The 1% pay rise was given. How does striking improve the patient experience?
    No it wasn't given why do you think NHS staff are so angry?
    As you know it was given to all except those who had already received 3% increment rises. I think they are being greedy and uncaring to the patients. The doctors are even worse.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,554
    edited November 2014
    Time to privatise the NHS and let an FTSE 100 company run it?
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @felix
    The country is full of lazy greedy people, and only the Tories and their friends keep us from utter disaster?
  • Options


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Yes, beating Shadsy is almost as good as winning real money!

    I understand Lads lost a small amount on the nite, but would have won big time had the Tories won. Considering how close they came you have to say that backing them was certainly the value bet. UKIP may have won, but if I back a 1/33 shot, I expect it to win by the length of the home straight, not a hard-pressed few lengths.
  • Options
    What a disgrace. Sack him.

    FAI chief executive John Delaney has apologised after being recorded performing a song written in tribute to an IRA hunger striker of the 1980s

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/republic-of-ireland/11250106/Ireland-football-chief-sparks-controversy-by-singing-pro-Republican-song.html
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,884
    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience would get £24554 at GE2010
    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience at 31 March 2015 will earn £24799

    £249 extra in 5 years gross

    Their pension contribution has risen from 6% TO 7.1% IE £272.79 more

    So even in cash terms they are £23 worse off in NHS pay and pension.

    Real Terms at least a 15% reduction.

    No wonder the opt to rip the NHS off by only agreeing to work at agency rates


    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,965
    isam said:


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Talking of which, our man Shadsy has allowed me £25@100/1 on me to win Islington South and Finsbury Borough for UKIP next May

    Just wait til PP go up 250s!

    Is that iSam or UKIP :) ?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That includes me, but only just!)

    Double Carpet runs an Election Game competition with a small elite field of professional pundits and political anoraks. All seventeen entries overestimated the size of UKIPs win, most by a good deal more than me. The wisdom of the PB crowd was much wiser in this case.

    Nice to meet up at the drinks bash. Was it your first visit to DD's? I have the feeling we have met before but those evenings are often a hazy blur afterwards.
    Nice to meet you too. It was my first visit to DD, but we hadn't met before.

    I had met OGH before, who has an astonishing memory and not only remembered meeting me before, but exactly where, when and my name, even though it was over 5 years ago!
    A name like Casino is hard to forget ;)
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,554
    edited November 2014

    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience would get £24554 at GE2010
    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience at 31 March 2015 will earn £24799

    £249 extra in 5 years gross

    Their pension contribution has risen from 6% TO 7.1% IE £272.79 more

    So even in cash terms they are £23 worse off in NHS pay and pension.

    Real Terms at least a 15% reduction.

    No wonder the opt to rip the NHS off by only agreeing to work at agency rates


    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...

    You forget when Labour kicked the poor in the knackers by abolishing the 10p tax rate to give higher earners a tax cut.

    Who can forget the Labour MPs cheering when that policy was announced in the commons.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,965
    edited November 2014

    What a disgrace. Sack him.

    FAI chief executive John Delaney has apologised after being recorded performing a song written in tribute to an IRA hunger striker of the 1980s

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/republic-of-ireland/11250106/Ireland-football-chief-sparks-controversy-by-singing-pro-Republican-song.html

    ♪Oooh ah up th♪
    ♫ Saaaaaaaaam missiilees in the♫

    Errm Yes quite right.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,971


    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That me, but only just!).

    Don't want to blow my own trumpet, but, since you ask...1.26%

    The main thing is that I beat Shadsy. Not often one can say that!

    Yes, beating Shadsy is almost as good as winning real money!

    I understand Lads lost a small amount on the nite, but would have won big time had the Tories won. Considering how close they came you have to say that backing them was certainly the value bet. UKIP may have won, but if I back a 1/33 shot, I expect it to win by the length of the home straight, not a hard-pressed few lengths.
    Backing them at what price was the value bet?
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TheScreamingEagles
    How much do we owe you for that bit of advice at your current rates?
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That includes me, but only just!)

    Double Carpet runs an Election Game competition with a small elite field of professional pundits and political anoraks. All seventeen entries overestimated the size of UKIPs win, most by a good deal more than me. The wisdom of the PB crowd was much wiser in this case.

    Nice to meet up at the drinks bash. Was it your first visit to DD's? I have the feeling we have met before but those evenings are often a hazy blur afterwards.
    Nice to meet you too. It was my first visit to DD, but we hadn't met before.

    I had met OGH before, who has an astonishing memory and not only remembered meeting me before, but exactly where, when and my name, even though it was over 5 years ago!
    A name like Casino is hard to forget ;)
    He remembered better than I did - I got both the year and the location wrong.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience would get £24554 at GE2010
    A qualified nurse with 5 years experience at 31 March 2015 will earn £24799

    £249 extra in 5 years gross

    Their pension contribution has risen from 6% TO 7.1% IE £272.79 more

    So even in cash terms they are £23 worse off in NHS pay and pension.

    Real Terms at least a 15% reduction.

    No wonder the opt to rip the NHS off by only agreeing to work at agency rates


    Meanwhile CEOs of FTSE 100 companies get significant double digit rises in additional to the 10% tax cut the Tories 'imposed' on them.

    One rule for the rich, one rule for the poor - 'twas always the Tory way...

    As ever you forget the impact of the very big increases in the personal allowance since then. And the fact that many private sector workers have had pay cuts. You also forget the millions of new jobs created at the most difficult time when dealing with the enormous debt left by the last Labour govt.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,879
    felix said:

    Carnyx said:

    Socrates said:

    Mr. Owls, the private sector is also not seeing pay rises. The difference is that NHS staff have guaranteed jobs and pensions, and those pensions are funded by the private sector workers also have to try and fund their own pensions.

    NHS staff do great work. That doesn't mean money we don't have should be flung their way whenever they decide they should be paid more.

    [As a related aside, we really should be doing more to tackle the deficit].

    The ratio of pensions & benefits in the public sector should be benchmarked to what it is in the private sector. Pension sectors particularly are a way for governments to buy-off public sector unions in a way that never costs them, but some poor successor government a long time down the road.
    It was, and the pay then downgraded to allow for pensions and benefits.

    Not sure what you mean there. I have a public sector pension (since 2009) it is way better than anything achievable in the private sector. The recent changes are less good but still much better than in the private sector.
    This was in 1993, admittedly, when I looked into getting a job in the civil service. The salary was set by a pay review board which looked at comparable private sector jobs and then deducted a proportion to allow for the public sector pension. At that time, the civil service pension did not have a contributory element (other than a small element for surviving spouse pension), and the deduction was to give the effect as of paying a final salary scheme in a private sector company, or indeed in some public sector schemes, I now realise, so my statement may only apply to the civil service in terms of that deduction. However, I believe that similar basic benchmarking was applied.

    As far as I can recall, that the link with private sector pay was broken to suit the government of the day who then imposed a contributory element to the pension scheme. So, in effect, the civil servants were then paying something approaching twice over for their pension.

  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited November 2014

    Anorak said:

    RobD said:

    O/T

    Does anyone know of a way of finding out how long a web page has been up unaltered?

    I am interested in a certain Aston Martin, which I think the seller has had on their web page at least a month. Is there any way - wayback machine or whatever - to look back and see how long they've been trying to sell it for?

    Trouble with waybackmachine is that it doesn't snapshot a page regularly. You could try the cache on google search. If I remember correctly, it say what time and date the cache was saved.
    Thanks.

    Having with deep sorrow parted with a beautiful but hopelessly unreliable Stag, I have been looking at 4-seater classic convertibles. All there is - when you eliminate second-hand BMWs that wanker BMW owners consider classics because their tiny minds and enormous egos can;t handle the idea that what they are selling is a ratty old second-hand car - is a late-run XJS or a DB7. The latter is more a second hand car than a classic but on the other hand an Aston's an Aston. Of course one doesn't want to pay up a lot if one can avoid....
    Mercedes SL. Mmmm. Sigh. I wish...

    [some were 4-seaters, no?]
    Jensen Interceptor.
    Agree, but convertibles in good condition are well out of my budget ( about £30k). For that money, I might get a ratty coupé.


    NO NO NO.

    You want to buy a car made twenty years ago - and that is yet unfashionable.

    Mercedes 500/600 SL http://tinyurl.com/ptkb854

    Suffers from the "it's not a classic, it's just a second-hand car" syndrome.

    The thing about German convertibles is that really someone else should drive it while I stand up in the back. The only open-top 4-seater German car I'd really consider would be this classic:
    https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3135/2895342321_5e1eb1ebea.jpg
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Smarmeron said:

    @felix
    The country is full of lazy greedy people, and only the Tories and their friends keep us from utter disaster?

    You're getting there:) at least about the last bit.
  • Options
    isam said:

    Talking of which, our man Shadsy has allowed me £25@100/1 on me to win Islington South and Finsbury Borough for UKIP next May

    May the best man win!
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Very impressive entry to the competition and interesting just how many posters outperformed the polls.

    Many more names there than I recognised. Would be nice to see more lurkers posting, if only occasionally.

    Thanks Mark for your efforts. You got the support you deserved.

    Agreed. We clearly have lots of astute lurkers here.

    I predicted (in the comments thread, not the competition) Tory 34.34% and UKIP 43.43% - a 9.09% lead, so take some consolation from the fact I'd have come in the top 60 or so!
    Anybody who got within 5% of the right answer can feel some pride in their effort. (That includes me, but only just!)

    Double Carpet runs an Election Game competition with a small elite field of professional pundits and political anoraks. All seventeen entries overestimated the size of UKIPs win, most by a good deal more than me. The wisdom of the PB crowd was much wiser in this case.

    Nice to meet up at the drinks bash. Was it your first visit to DD's? I have the feeling we have met before but those evenings are often a hazy blur afterwards.
    Nice to meet you too. It was my first visit to DD, but we hadn't met before.

    I had met OGH before, who has an astonishing memory and not only remembered meeting me before, but exactly where, when and my name, even though it was over 5 years ago!
    A name like Casino is hard to forget ;)
    He remembered better than I did - I got both the year and the location wrong.
    And the best thing about Friday, you got to meet me and hear one of my best chat up lines.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,554
    edited November 2014
    Smarmeron said:

    @TheScreamingEagles
    How much do we owe you for that bit of advice at your current rates?

    All my work on PB is pro bono publico.

    For example teaching classical history to PBers is its own reward.
This discussion has been closed.