Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open
If you’re Footloose, and fancy free tonight, why not relax, and converse into the night on the day’s events in PB NightHawks.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Thanks TSE for compiling these, will allow me to waste even more of my benefactors time.
FPT
''Many things get propped up as they can't stand on their own feet.'
You could add child benefit to your list,after all it's the decision of 'independent ' people to have children.
What other conclusions can you come to, when a policy that potentially closes down many excellent schools and costs the state an additional £ 4,350 per pupil is based on anything other than class hatred & envy?
For that matter UKIP don't hate anyone, although we despise socialists and fascists with equal vigour.
Total value of business rate reduction to schools is £165m a year, or 27,500 kids pulled out of the schools due to cost increases resulting, or 4.6% reduction in kids at private schools.
Everytime Labour comes out with another of its stupid new policy ideas, you have to think none of them have a GCSE in maths
I am not sure you have correctly judged the price elasticity of private education.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.
Many parents sacrifice a lot for their kids to go to private school, many will be prepared to pay a little extra, so not many will pull out from private school.
I know from personal experience. If the price goes up, all our Marxist class war chums will do is hurt the poorest parents who sacrifice all kinds of things to get their kids into the best possible school. They really don't care about kids, parents or education, or they'd be focusing on how they get the state system up to the standards of the private schools.
Since companies and charities don't get a vote, it might work in the short term - until people realise the consequences of such a policy.
So Labour can piss it up against the wall somewhere else. Again.
Anyway, the point I was going to make is that it becomes easier to afford lots of old people when you factor in that we have many fewer young people - who are also expensive in terms of healthcare, education, etc. The other thing is that people under the age of 16-18 are expected to live with their parents, because we wouldn't expect them to be able to live on their own.
The same could be said of many old people, who end up being expensively housed in communal establishments, or supported in their isolation by expensive visits. I remember there was talk a few days ago about child benefit, etc, but I wonder whether it would make sense to create a tax break for income tax payers who have their elderly parents living with them.
* Granted it includes 14-18 year olds in that chart, but that's a mere minor detail.
Bet confirmed.
You can have 17.5% if you want.
The difference would barely buy a swift half in London anyway :-(
9. No kidding. Hasn't it always been thus?
6. The occasional overexcited statement on revolution in that direction is understandable but can be irritating at times, but I can live with it, as it has made things more exciting.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/25/conspiracy-theories-secret-oil-fields-north-sea
Scratch the surface and it’s disturbing how common it is in Labour circles to believe that Britain’s newspaper editors gather in darkened rooms to plot the publication of Miliband’s many gaffes. Some, it seems, simply cannot accept that maybe their leader’s poor reputation is of his own making.
@Moses: thank you for your response on the previous thread.
But what was notable to me from this morning's interview was that the Shadow Education Secretary had absolutely nothing to say about how he was going to improve state schools where over 90% of our children are educated. Nothing. That ought to worry every Labour supporter and every parent in the country.
Alistair Heath describing Labour under Ed as anti capitalist class warriors
So, nothing new really
If Labour don't like them, and think they're socially divisive, they should have the courage of their convictions: commit to banning them in their manifesto. If they don't, or think that'd be counter-productive, they should instead focus on improving the quality state education instead, and drive the private schools out of business.
If this mood-music did become anything more than just grandstanding, all it would do is drive out of business the smaller private schools. It would leave larger public schools - those that charge much higher fees - with an even more commanding position in the market, taking in an ever greater proportion of their pupils from the international super-rich to compensate.
That would achieve nothing for British children, and win the respect of no-one.
Thanks for your pity - we are realists and ergo pragmatists. The only party that is not living in cloud-cuckoo land, including your own.
http://tapnewswire.com/2014/11/owen-paterson-versus-theresa-may-at-last-the-expected-tory-splits-over-fracking/
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/theresa-may-a-big-beast-in-kitten-heels/?preview=true
" ‘She doesn’t rate Cameron any more. She did, but not any more,’ confides a friend of the Home Secretary. ‘There was a time early on when she would want to please David, but slowly she has seen just how incompetent that operation is. How the PM will say he will do one thing, only to be drawn in another direction. She’s given up on him.’ "
The most weird thing considering her behavior lately (reckless not cautious) is this:
" But as the leadership speculation grows, so does the criticism. One phrase that never goes away is ‘risk averse’. ‘While some politicians fly by the seat of their pants, Theresa likes to have four parachutes next to the door,’ says a former staffer. Her supporters point out that this is just good practice, and planning is not the same as caution. She was nicknamed ‘Theresa May, or maybe not’, by detractors in opposition. "
If they can afford "x", they can afford "x+y" is obvious nonsense. All you have to do is go around the loop a few times - set it up as an iteration. First time round you have x0 and then you set x1 equal to x0+y
Either you reach a point (xn) where it breaks down, or you reach infinity.
I pay tax on all my income. This pays for my kids' education at state schools.
But the local schools are terrible.
So I pay for private schooling out of my taxed income.
This saves the state about £12K a year from what it would otherwise cost them to educate my kids.
It costs me just over £20K a year. Or what in the public sector would be called pension contributions from the public purse.
Who is subsidising who here?
By paying for private education I am already subsidising the state system by far more than the modest tax breaks given to my kids' school.
But this is not enough. The amount I subsidise the state system for out of my taxed income is to be increased so that the staff and resources I pay for are to be used free of charge by the public sector to supposedly compensate for their ineptitude.
Because this is fair.
Apparently.
What a depressing shower our politicians are.
Interesting she allegedly said this, "The PM (Cameron) will say he will do one thing, only to be drawn in another direction. She’s given up on him."
That confirms exactly what I said on here months ago.
I obviously spend too much time with lawyers (occupational hazard) but I think it is fair to say that she is extremely unpopular amongst them.
Clement Atlee was lobbied to do it in the 1945 Labour government, as Andrew Marr points out in his excellent book 'A History of Modern Britain'. He didn't because he had too much respect for Haileybury, his old school.
Marr postulates in his book just how different post-war British history might have been had he done so, although I disagree with his conclusions.
As if the only thing the state should spend money on is this.
It's pathetic. It's adolescent gesture politics.
EdM does not have a blank sheet of paper. He is recycling the policies of the 1970's and, to be fair, he told us a while ago in response to someone on the campaign trail who asked him to bring back socialism that that was exactly what he was doing.
I could write a better Labour manifesto than him.
But Labour can't really make that criticism since their whole spending policy is based on the magic money tree
The huge problem we have in this country is the loss of the paths to success for those bright kids that were lost with Grammar schools. Grammar schools have lots of problems but we have yet to find an alternative route for those from poorer backgrounds. This is a real and substantial problem that is adversely affecting our economic future. But Hunt has nothing useful to say about it.
Has an independent source said its not funded?
Also independent schools are not businesses. Most of them are charities and charity law will have something to say about it. As far as I can recall, when a charity is wound up it has to give all the money it has back to the charitable givers,
Pace NickPalmer's comment yesterday: the fact that schools have charitable status is not some recent "eccentricity" (as he put it). Education has been a charitable activity since the time of Queen Elizabeth the First.
There should be some bounceback by the start of next week - but I wouldn't be at all sure of any before then.
That and leaving the EU are my reasons for voting UKIP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England
(see legacy)
But the argument that these schools are being subsidised instead of actually subsidising the state sector is completely false. And dishonest. And pathetic.
But I guess that won't count, right?
The school were kind enough to provide a bursary as they recognised his need.
Nice eh.
From the Express a poll about which party was most in touch with ordinary WWC
Asked which party was most in touch with the views of white working class people, 27 per cent of people named Ukip compared to 21 per cent who pointed to Labour.
Just nine per cent identified the Conservatives and two per cent the Lib Dems, although 29 per cent said none of the parties was in touch.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead drops to one point: CON 32%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 16%, GRN 6%
Lab = Man City
Tories = Bayern
Tories = Depeche Mode
Lab = Joe Dolce
Or
Tories = The Wrath of Khan
Lab = The Final Frontier
The school provides far more than the State were prepared to provide to him.
Oh and I still provide a huge tax haul for the Government to piss up the wall.
Reforms of NHS going well then
It isn't a brilliant understanding and knowledge of history, but it was giving a lot of self confidence in oneself.
Tonights YG LAB 326 CON 277 LD 19 (UKPR)
EICIPM
If someone was to grab the EU by the scruff of its neck they would be able to have a showdown over this sort of thing and force France to back down. It might need some leader with the charisma and cross-European appeal to win a genuine democratic mandate, for example. That's roughly the way in which the veto power of the House of Lords was broken in the British political system, for example.
Instead the response is, a shrug of the shoulders, "the French have a veto", and nothing is done.
Thus the EU will die. Rejected by its populace for its manifest incompetence.
Where would the world be without it.