I wonder if a certain Lib-Dem inclined pernsioner from Bedford who is currently on holiday, might swingback the narrative of his PoliticalBetting website more towards "Dave" now that appears Labour intends to take all his freebies off him!
Not on this one. Definitely remember some gloating.
I can't even be arsed asking for the most vestigial proof of that. The only 'gloating' I can remember is one Nat poster betting against one of the smugger Tories that in his political judgement it was a point of principle for the SNP to have 16 & 17 year olds included in the referendum and it wouldn't be given up. He won his bet ergo some well deserved gloating.
It's not worth the hassle of going back to try and find the posts, but it was essential making the point that Salmond had run rings around Cameron in terms of the negotiation - and in particular the age extension was a masterstroke that Cameron had not understood.
But there are a couple of posters on here who take the view that everything Salmond does is masterful rather than (more realistically) looking at him as just another politician, probably better than average, but one that has only been tested in a relatively small pool
On the subject of Ed Balls's big speech, the Have Your Sayers are not inclined to give it a fair hearing. Here are the current top five comments by popularity:
"He'll spend more means testing people and correcting errors than he will save. He knows this. You know this. We all know this."
"Does Balls really think we believe this nonsense? For the 13 years he and his party were in power they spent money like it was going out of fashion. Now there is none left.
This gimmick will save virtually nothing when compared to the size of the deficit.
Nobody trusts them and nobody believes them."
"He was responsible with Brown for all the problems we have. Him, his wife and all MP's that fiddled their expenses should have been banned from standing for the last election"
"The solution to this is not MORE means-testing. It's reforming the tax and welfare system so that it is SIMPLE, and ensures that work pays, the vunerable are protected and honesty is rewarded. At present there are too many loopholes that the weakest fall through and the richest exploit."
"So 'discipline' is the new 'prudent'.
Heard it all before.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
How do those figures compare to similar polling in previous cycles? my recollection is that there is usually a degree of 'unwind' among Lib Dem voters but that many then return to the fold. I'd expect a very large proportion of the 'Undecideds' to end up going back to the Lib Dems, and that they'll pick up a good chunk of those currently saying Labour in their Tory facing marginals too. What really matters is what former Lib Dem voters decide to do in the Lab/Con marginals.
ED MILIBAND may not yet be seen by voters as a political joke but he is fast becoming Labour's new Neil Kinnock, which is almost as bad.
The accident-prone “Welsh Windbag” led his party to its knees in resounding election defeats, all the while convinced he was actually on the road to victory.
Whenever I hear Iron Discipline, I'm reminded of Warhammer invasion, and the Iron Discipline card
Action: Target one unit. Until the end of the turn, cancel any other action that targets this unit unless the action's controller pays an additional 4 resources (per action).
I wonder if a certain Lib-Dem inclined pernsioner from Bedford who is currently on holiday, might swingback the narrative of his PoliticalBetting website more towards "Dave" now that appears Labour intends to take all his freebies off him!
I seem to remember Mike supporting the removal of some pensioner benefits, after all it's Lib Dem policy isn't it?
I'm only joking.
I'm still waiitng to hear what Labour will do about the "Bedroom tax"
Very interesting report in the ST yesterday (read it on flight) that shows that energy companies can hit carbon targets and save cash with a "dash for gas".
"This report shows that current plans for investing in renewables and nuclear energy risks burdening the struggling British economy with unnecessarily high energy bills. The research, to be published this week, recommends instead investing in a new fleet of efficient gas-fired power stations.
A.T. Kearney estimates that the cost of building and operating new plants, mostly wind farms is £72.7bn compared with £32.5bn for the new gas-fired power stations that would release half the emissions of coal-fired plants.
Mark Powell, author of the AT Kearney report said, "We have headed down the road to green transition without fully thinking through the potential consequences and without considering how to achieve the transition at the lowest cost possible. We need to have the courage to stop the policy juggernaut."....
Cuadrilla Resources claims it has found enough gas in the Bowland shale to supply Britain for 70 years".
Problem is will Ed Davey and the Green-keen LDs agree or obstruct?
Sunday Times Business Page 1.
and on Page 7 - Why we have the world's costliest energy.
This concludes, "The upshot is that British industry will be lumbered with rising carbon charges while their European counterparts see their bills plummet."
A mate who is somewhat in the know has posted on FB the name he's been told. I have literally no idea who he is and even wikipedia hasn't really put any meat to the bones.
Olivia Colman would be superb tbh, but only if they bring back Romana's next incarnation. Played by Brian Blessed.
For the new Doctor Who, they should go for someone much older and rather steelier than the last couple. If they want to challenge boundaries, then from that list Helen Mirren would be a fantastic choice (but not at 27/1). Andy Serkis at 50/1 would be good too. Tilda Swinton would also be a very unsettling Doctor Who, so again if the idea of a female Doctor Who is being pursued, she'd be good.
I'd avoid all the comics. Doctor Who needs to be a bit scary at times as well as clever and witty.
But I expect that Rupert Grint is fairly short odds for a reason. It's not as if he needs to do it for the money.
That poll is very interesting for a variety of reasons
1) It's by Market Research UK, whose polling on past Scottish elections makes them as accurate as an American war movie or Braveheart
Addendum: They don't seem to have improved much - the parents of the children questioned break down as c. 17% Yes, 59% No, 24% Undecided, way off normal adult polling.
Mr. Eagles, Hugh Laurie would be excellent, but I can't see it happening.
I don't think a woman should get the job. The Doctor's a bloke. Plus, if they want a female Time Lord then there's the obvious option of bringing back Romana.
Very interesting report in the ST yesterday (read it on flight) that shows that energy companies can hit carbon targets and save cash with a "dash for gas".
"This report shows that current plans for investing in renewables and nuclear energy risks burdening the struggling British economy with unnecessarily high energy bills. The research, to be published this week, recommends instead investing in a new fleet of efficient gas-fired power stations.
A.T. Kearney estimates that the cost of building and operating new plants, mostly wind farms is £72.7bn compared with £32.5bn for the new gas-fired power stations that would release half the emissions of coal-fired plants.
Mark Powell, author of the AT Kearney report said, "We have headed down the road to green transition without fully thinking through the potential consequences and without considering how to achieve the transition at the lowest cost possible. We need to have the courage to stop the policy juggernaut."....
Cuadrilla Resources claims it has found enough gas in the Bowland shale to supply Britain for 70 years".
Problem is will Ed Davey and the Green-keen LDs agree or obstruct?
Sunday Times Business Page 1.
and on Page 7 - Why we have the world's costliest energy.
This concludes, "The upshot is that British industry will be lumbered with rising carbon charges while their European counterparts see their bills plummet."
In another article German industy thinks of relocating to the USA for cheaper energy, being sandwiched beteen low wages to the East and high energy costs at home.
@Mr Dancer - Harry Lloyd also starred in the two part episodes about the Family of Blood with Tennant's Doctor, and the Doctor has to be a man, but I could cope if Karen Gillan became the 12th Doctor
@Antifrank - I'd like it to be a ginger Doctor, but my first choice would be Damian Lewis, but I suspect he's going to be starring in Homeland for quite a few years yet.
That poll is very interesting for a variety of reasons
1) It's by Market Research UK, whose polling on past Scottish elections makes them as accurate as an American war movie or Braveheart
Addendum: They don't seem to have improved much - the parents of the children questioned break down as c. 17% Yes, 59% No, 24% Undecided, way off normal adult polling.
Indeed, IIRC it was in the 2007 elections they were the official pollster for the Scotman, and had polling that was massively out of kilter with everyone else, and made the Scotsman look a bit silly when the final results were published.
Worries over the future of American stimulus measures were heightened by better-than-forecast economic data on Friday, which helped push the 30-stock Dow Jones Industrial Average down 1.4pc. The broader S&P 500 index was also under pressure and lost 1.4pc at the end of last week.
Are the markets addicted to central bank intervention rather than real growth?
I think I missed the Family of Blood two-parter. Not sure why.
There's precedent for characters to return, though. Martha previously appeared in a minor role when the cybermen and daleks tore up Canary Wharf, for example.
Calm down everyone, I've done a Telegraph blog which proves mine is the only really valid opinion in the UK. So we can save a lot of bother and close down pb.
I think I missed the Family of Blood two-parter. Not sure why.
There's precedent for characters to return, though. Martha previously appeared in a minor role when the cybermen and daleks tore up Canary Wharf, for example.
They were two of the best episodes of the Tennant era, really poignant,
Calm down everyone, I've done a Telegraph blog which proves mine is the only really valid opinion in the UK. So we can save a lot of bother and close down pb.
I've watched a few of the short-platform Matt Smith episodes and have enjoyed them (in a completely cartoonish fashion). His performance's match Pertwee's whilst just fail to be swivelled-eyed enough to be placed alongside Tom Baker [PBUDW].
But I like the vibes from antifrank: A steely-eyed, cold-and-calculating new Dr. It has to be the so-sh@gg@ble Tilda Swinton. As her assistant, someone electic: Eddie Izzard...?
Not another young pretty boy (well, 'quirky' in Matt Smith's case) - antifrank is right - we need a shift to an older person - the reason the dynamic between the Doctor and Donna Noble (which I thought would be a disaster) worked so well was that the older character was prepared to stand up to him & call him out on things - something the younger side kicks rarely do.....what was John Hurt doing at the end of the last episode?
Not another young pretty boy (well, 'quirky' in Matt Smith's case) - antifrank is right - we need a shift to an older person - the reason the dynamic between the Doctor and Donna Noble (which I thought would be a disaster) worked so well was that the older character was prepared to stand up to him & call him out on things - something the younger side kicks rarely do.....what was John Hurt doing at the end of the last episode?
John Hurt is the Valeyard, I think.
Though I would like to see Matt Smith regenerate into John Hurt, but with John Hurt bursting out of Matt Smith's chest.
Mr. Eagles, possible, the other theories that seem to be doing the rounds are that he's the true ninth Doctor (who fought in the Time War), or that he's a precursor to the Doctor [I don't like that, though].
Damned shame Jacobi wasn't kept as the Master. Hurt as the Doctor and Jacobi as the Master would've been quite interesting to watch.
Mr. Eagles, possible, the other theories that seem to be doing the rounds are that he's the true ninth Doctor (who fought in the Time War), or that he's a precursor to the Doctor [I don't like that, though].
Damned shame Jacobi wasn't kept as the Master. Hurt as the Doctor and Jacobi as the Master would've been quite interesting to watch.
I like that theory, which would mean the next Doctor would be the 13th and final Doctor.
Mr. Eagles, I was more thinking of the aftermath of Logopolis and The Deadly Assassin. Wasn't the Master meant to run out of regenerations during Tom Baker's time?
Edited extra bit: The Deadly Assassin is a stupid title.
Mr. Eagles, I was more thinking of the aftermath of Logopolis and The Deadly Assassin. Wasn't the Master meant to run out of regenerations during Tom Baker's time?
Edited extra bit: The Deadly Assassin is a stupid title.
How can you say The Rani was before your time, but reference Tom Baker's Doctor?
I wonder if a certain Lib-Dem inclined pernsioner from Bedford who is currently on holiday, might swingback the narrative of his PoliticalBetting website more towards "Dave" now that appears Labour intends to take all his freebies off him!
That's a bit cheap. I've long supported curbing pensioner perks for the well off as many post on here will support.
I like my bus pass and if tax or charge is put on it then I would opt to pay.
Ed Balls and Nick Clegg are right on this. Cameron, who made a stupid pledge during the final TV debate in May 2010 is wrong
Mr. Eagles, I read some of the books, I have one or two DVDs, and as a child I watched repeats on BBC2 which mostly featured Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker.
You've sunk beneath the waves of anti-Obama paranoia, don't rely on me to pull you out by researching your conspiracy sites any further.
The story I linked was then reported by the Washington Times, who would have done their own fact-checking. Are you arguing the Washington Times is not a credible source?
The problem Labour have with their piddling U-turn on winter fuel payments is not just that it is a U-turn, it is that their entire approach has been confused and shrill. When Osborne made the very straightforward and (one would have thought) completely uncontroversial observation that it's wasteful to spend nearly £3bn a year on welfare payments to the very well-off in the form of Child Benefit, they made a ridiculous fuss about the so-called 'principle' of universality. Of course that was bonkers. There's no such principle, instead there was a largely painless £3bn saving to be made which affects precisely zero lower-income families - and there aren't many measures available to the government which are simultaneously painless and save a chunky sum.
With the winter fuel allowance, we have an example of a measure which, though equally painless, saves tuppence-ha'penny and is hardly worth the administrative hassle. OK, one can argue that, though small, it's a saving we might as well have, but it blows the 'principle' out of the water. If you can save £100m by abandoning universality, why not save £3bn? It's just a completely incoherent position - and an excellent example of the mess Miliband has got himself into with his so-called blank piece of paper. As I've observed before, it's not blank, it's full of sensible measures which the coalition have proposed but which Miliband has crossed out. The problem is that the savings which haven't been crossed out don't amount to a hill of beans; Labour's remaining room for manoeuvre literally doesn't add up.
Painless? Painless? Have you any idea what this has done to my Chablis budget?
Mullahs calling for Islamic rapes in Syria is not news. I can't be arsed to register at militaryphotos.net (nor find the relevant section) but it is old news. Maybe some people - recently "door-stepped" - should open their internet eyes...?
One poster, probably worried about the effects on the UK of mass immigration by Muslims, demonises Islam while another stokes up the argument by refusing to condemn it at any cost.
One poster, probably worried about the effects on the UK of mass immigration by Muslims, demonises Islam while another stokes up the argument by refusing to condemn it at any cost.
Who knew?
The Road to National Suicide...
I won't demonise a whole a religion. There are very large numbers of Muslims who are decent people who support a humane, pluralistic, democratic society. All I seek to do is to get people to appreciate just how many don't.
One poster, probably worried about the effects on the UK of mass immigration by Muslims, demonises Islam while another stokes up the argument by refusing to condemn it at any cost.
Who knew?
The Road to National Suicide...
I won't demonise a whole a religion. There are very large numbers of Muslims who are decent people who support a humane, pluralistic, democratic society. All I seek to do is to get people to appreciate just how many don't.
Fair enough, sorry. "demonises Islamic extremism" would be more accurate
Depends on what you are looking for. If you want a Moonie-funded far right propaganda sheet that links Obama's health reforms to Nazi Germany I'm sure you'll regard it as sound
You do know Woodward and Bernstein wrote for the Post, not the Times do you?
But as you have been driven to the furthest reaches of the far right by your Muslim fixation I'm sure none of us are surprised by your sources any more.
As I say, no idea what the "Sheikh" said, but I know it's two months old and very popular on Infowars etc.
I will regularly disagree with their editorials, but I have not previously seen factual problems with their reporting sections. What is your evidence that the reporting of the newspaper is "far right"?
What is the issue with being funded by a member of the Unification Church?
The recovery remains patchy. The fall in business lending (despite Osborne's lending scheme) is a concern but if production can join consumption we can maintain lift off. OGH has really underestimated the implications of this for his bet.
I won't demonise a whole a religion. There are very large numbers of Muslims who are decent people who support a humane, pluralistic, democratic society. All I seek to do is to get people to appreciate just how many don't.
Wee-Timmy would appear to think only through a postal-vote filter. I, obviously, know more Muslims than he will see in his life-span. I also know more about "cultural" islam and the posited, political reality that dwells within his narrow-mind.
Wee-Timmy has a lot to offer this site but lacks a/any life-experience: He is fortunate in many ways but suffers in others. Whether pity or contempt should be delivered-unto-him as he-delivers-unto-others is debatable.
The best thing to do is challenge him when he is obviously clueless (as I did and expect him to pay £50 in July to OGH's site). What people have to accept is: When he is floundering for attention he is best read, threaded and ignored....
"Newspapers are wrong to give a “platform” for campaigners and groups that question whether climate change is caused by human activity, Ed Davey, the energy secretary, will say."
And he has trashed the principle of universality - and will get asked from here to the GE "What's next? Bus passes, Child Benefit, TV licences and so on and so on - we saw the start of it on R4 this morning at 7 and its continued on the Daily Politics.....
@SeanT I wouldn't overegg it. It's unlikely that any recovery is going to be very exciting.
It's also important to see where any recovery occurs. Right now it seems to be happening in exactly the places that are of least use to the Coalition electorally. They need to see some growth in the midlands and Lancashire.
For all that, Ed Balls's claim today that George Osborne's economic policies had "failed catastrophically" on growth, jobs and deficit reduction looks like a major hostage to fortune. He will be lucky if he doesn't live to regret saying that.
Ah, I see Labour have made a second - and much more significant - U-turn today, which no-one seems to have noticed.
Exactly as I predicted back in 2010 (to, IIRC, much derision from Labour supporters at the time, except from the ever-sensible Hopi Sen who agreed with me), Balls has finally got round to embracing the OBR in order to try to overcome Labour's credibility problem:
Instead, Labour will set out, in our general election manifesto, tough fiscal rules that the next Labour government will have to stick to – to get our country’s current budget back to balance and national debt on a downward path.
Tough rules, which will be independently monitored by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
The OBR is a major step forward, and will make it much harder for any future Gordon Brown to wreck the economy quite so comprehensively.
Cameron's entire EU policy is based on the idea that there will be a treaty of the full EU in the next parliament, because the Germans can't wait to hand powers to Brussels putting them on the hook for everybody else's debts...
I wonder if a certain Lib-Dem inclined pernsioner from Bedford who is currently on holiday, might swingback the narrative of his PoliticalBetting website more towards "Dave" now that appears Labour intends to take all his freebies off him!
That's a bit cheap. I've long supported curbing pensioner perks for the well off as many post on here will support.
I like my bus pass and if tax or charge is put on it then I would opt to pay.
Ed Balls and Nick Clegg are right on this. Cameron, who made a stupid pledge during the final TV debate in May 2010 is wrong
It was not even in the Tory manifesto. Panic ! Panic ! Panic ! I think Dave should take advice from Boris how to win !
The creation of an independent OBR is, for me, a strong reason to vote Conservative. They deserve to be rewarded for such a great policy. Unfortunately, they deserve to be punished for other things, so it's going to be a fine balance.
Further to my previous post, here's what Labour were saying at the time I suggested they'd end up embracing the OBR:
"Right from the start the Tories used the OBR not just as part of the government but as part of the Conservative party. They have succeeded in strangling what could have been a good idea at its birth."
Osborne took just a couple of years to puncture the idea that:
1. The OBR is independent 2. That its existence will stop future economic problems.
You're off-message, Ben. Do keep up. Rubbishing the OBR is so 2010. Ed Balls is now telling us how independent it is, and how we can trust Labour because the OBR will independently monitor his plans.
Labour's line on borrowing is as convincing as a sex addict asserting that by spending thousands of pounds and days in a brothel he'll get it out of his system and be able to abstain after that.
Not that the Coalition has cut as much as it should've, but the basis of coalition is policy by the lowest common denominator.
@SeanT I wouldn't overegg it. It's unlikely that any recovery is going to be very exciting.
It's also important to see where any recovery occurs. Right now it seems to be happening in exactly the places that are of least use to the Coalition electorally. They need to see some growth in the midlands and Lancashire.
For all that, Ed Balls's claim today that George Osborne's economic policies had "failed catastrophically" on growth, jobs and deficit reduction looks like a major hostage to fortune. He will be lucky if he doesn't live to regret saying that.
Is that a sad, lickle, under-powered Koenigs...? A camp, hide-it-in-your-pocket, motor that brings 'the elite' to pleasure?
Or is it all down to an inbred six-fingered scribble over some dank blackboard of terror and youth? [I can hear the screeches now...!]
Perchance, it may also be, for Norfolk-sake, that you could not be bothered to use punctuation! I know, from our English Londinium, you despise all those around you; but, please, respect our language...!
Labour's line on borrowing is as convincing as a sex addict asserting that by spending thousands of pounds and days in a brothel he'll get it out of his system and be able to abstain after that.
Not that the Coalition has cut as much as it should've, but the basis of coalition is policy by the lowest common denominator.
When I was younger, I started attending a self-help group for sex addicts.
Labour's line on borrowing is as convincing as a sex addict asserting that by spending thousands of pounds and days in a brothel he'll get it out of his system and be able to abstain after that.
Of course he will. Not only does Ed M not have the cullions to ditch him, it would actually be a very bad idea to do so, since it would be an admission that Osborne was right all along. (The second of those arguments applies in reverse to those who think Cameron might ditch Osborne, although it's academic anyway.)
Shadow Treasury minister Chris Leslie insisted on the Today programme this morning that Labour had no plans to means-test other pensioner benefits such as free TV licences and free bus passes
The gang rape of women in wars - from what happens to women in Congo to the deliberate rape of Muslim women by Serb soldiers during the Yugoslavian civil wars to the rape of women in Syria - is an appalling crime, far too serious for petty point scoring by Tim or Socrates or anyone else, frankly.
It should go without saying that any decent person including, I hope, all on this blog, condemn it unreservedly, though it wouldn't go amiss, occasionally, for this to be said.
Is that a sad, lickle, under-powered Koenigs...? A camp, hide-it-in-your-pocket, motor that brings 'the elite' to pleasure?
Or is it all down to an inbred six-fingered scribble over some dank blackboard of terror and youth? [I can hear the screeches now...!]
Perchance, it may also be, for Norfolk-sake, that you could not be bothered to use punctuation! I know, from our English Londinium, you despise all those around you; but, please, respect our language...!
Gowers' "The Complete Plain Words" says:
"The author of the style-book of the Oxford University Press of New York (quoted in Perrin's Writer's Guide) says 'If you take hyphens seriously you will surely go mad'. You should not take hyphens seriously."
Osborne being "right all along" while going into an election with all his forecasts in tatters, deficit reduction stalled and living standards falling?
That's Balls' line, so ditching Balls would suggest that Balls has been wrong and therefore Osborne has been right.
Which is why Balls ain't going to be ditched. Well, that and the other reason.
Osborne being "right all along" while going into an election with all his forecasts in tatters, deficit reduction stalled and living standards falling?
That's Balls' line, so ditching Balls would suggest that Balls has been wrong and therefore Osborne has been right.
Which is why Balls ain't going to be ditched. Well, that and the other reason.
Nabavi, you try to pass off as an intelligent person. So, why do you occasionally fall into the partisan idiotic phase ?
Only on Europe, you seem to use your considerable grey matter.
Osborne being "right all along" while going into an election with all his forecasts in tatters, deficit reduction stalled and living standards falling?
That's Balls' line, so ditching Balls would suggest that Balls has been wrong and therefore Osborne has been right.
Which is why Balls ain't going to be ditched. Well, that and the other reason.
Nabavi, you try to pass off as an intelligent person. So, why do you occasionally fall into the partisan idiotic phase ?
Only on Europe, you seem to use your considerable grey matter.
Agree or disagree, at least he has the guts to put his real name and not be the archetypal internet anonymous abuser.
When you see the bar chart above, you begin to wonder, what happened behind the scenes at the special Birmingham conference just after the elections. Whatever made the LD's join the coalition ?
Either the membership is unrepresentative of their voters or, more likely, in the immediate aftermath of Cleggasm they were giving Clegg the benefit of the their collective doubts.
Even the "protest" element seems to prefer UKIP. Only 5% prepared to vote Tory.
I cannot see another Tory-LD coalition. Otherwise, the party will simply implode and Alexander, Laws will join the Tories, since they are Tories.
Nabavi, you try to pass off as an intelligent person. So, why do you occasionally fall into the partisan idiotic phase ?.
Eh? I wasn't being partisan at all, I was pointing out that the political cost of ditching Ed Balls would be very significant, as it would hand an easy argument to Labour's opponents (and that the same applies in reverse to Osborne). That's a betting point more than a partisan point - indeed I've advocated betting on Balls as Next Chancellor on several occasions in the past. (Still an excellent bet at 7/2 for anyone who can get on with Paddy Power - Ladbrokes have this at a much more realistic 7/4).
Comments
"Do you have any children that will sixteen years old in September 2014"
But there are a couple of posters on here who take the view that everything Salmond does is masterful rather than (more realistically) looking at him as just another politician, probably better than average, but one that has only been tested in a relatively small pool
"He'll spend more means testing people and correcting errors than he will save. He knows this. You know this. We all know this."
"Does Balls really think we believe this nonsense? For the 13 years he and his party were in power they spent money like it was going out of fashion. Now there is none left.
This gimmick will save virtually nothing when compared to the size of the deficit.
Nobody trusts them and nobody believes them."
"He was responsible with Brown for all the problems we have. Him, his wife and all MP's that fiddled their expenses should have been banned from standing for the last election"
"The solution to this is not MORE means-testing. It's reforming the tax and welfare system so that it is SIMPLE, and ensures that work pays, the vunerable are protected and honesty is rewarded. At present there are too many loopholes that the weakest fall through and the richest exploit."
"So 'discipline' is the new 'prudent'.
Heard it all before.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
I doubt even Ed came out of the womb wibbling on about the means of production!
That editorial is likely to resonate with its readers in my opinion.
Action: Target one unit. Until the end of the turn, cancel any other action that targets this unit unless the action's controller pays an additional 4 resources (per action).
http://deckbox.org/whi/Iron Discipline
I'm still waiitng to hear what Labour will do about the "Bedroom tax"
http://www.oddschecker.com/novelty/next-doctor-who/winner
Very interesting report in the ST yesterday (read it on flight) that shows that energy companies can hit carbon targets and save cash with a "dash for gas".
"This report shows that current plans for investing in renewables and nuclear energy risks burdening the struggling British economy with unnecessarily high energy bills. The research, to be published this week, recommends instead investing in a new fleet of efficient gas-fired power stations.
A.T. Kearney estimates that the cost of building and operating new plants, mostly wind farms is £72.7bn compared with £32.5bn for the new gas-fired power stations that would release half the emissions of coal-fired plants.
Mark Powell, author of the AT Kearney report said, "We have headed down the road to green transition without fully thinking through the potential consequences and without considering how to achieve the transition at the lowest cost possible. We need to have the courage to stop the policy juggernaut."....
Cuadrilla Resources claims it has found enough gas in the Bowland shale to supply Britain for 70 years".
Problem is will Ed Davey and the Green-keen LDs agree or obstruct?
Sunday Times Business Page 1.
and on Page 7 - Why we have the world's costliest energy.
This concludes, "The upshot is that British industry will be lumbered with rising carbon charges while their European counterparts see their bills plummet."
His commentary (with a few other cast members) was one of the most entertaining on the season 1 Game of Thrones DVD.
Olivia Colman would be superb tbh, but only if they bring back Romana's next incarnation. Played by Brian Blessed.
I'd avoid all the comics. Doctor Who needs to be a bit scary at times as well as clever and witty.
But I expect that Rupert Grint is fairly short odds for a reason. It's not as if he needs to do it for the money.
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/3/islamic-cleric-decrees-it-ok-syrian-rebels-rape-wo/
http://www.news.com.au/world-news/teenage-rape-victim-destined-to-be-killed/story-fndir2ev-1226653694764
I don't think a woman should get the job. The Doctor's a bloke. Plus, if they want a female Time Lord then there's the obvious option of bringing back Romana.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/european-commission-set-to-fight-german-energy-subsidies-a-902269.html
In another article German industy thinks of relocating to the USA for cheaper energy, being sandwiched beteen low wages to the East and high energy costs at home.
@Antifrank - I'd like it to be a ginger Doctor, but my first choice would be Damian Lewis, but I suspect he's going to be starring in Homeland for quite a few years yet.
Worries over the future of American stimulus measures were heightened by better-than-forecast economic data on Friday, which helped push the 30-stock Dow Jones Industrial Average down 1.4pc. The broader S&P 500 index was also under pressure and lost 1.4pc at the end of last week.
Are the markets addicted to central bank intervention rather than real growth?
They should bring back the Rani.
There's precedent for characters to return, though. Martha previously appeared in a minor role when the cybermen and daleks tore up Canary Wharf, for example.
Isn't she widely disliked? Better to bring back Romana.
Incidentally, when's the 50th Anniversary special due?
I mean Why on earth are they having a meeting in the dingy sooks of Watford?
I mean Watford, FFS
http://news.sky.com/story/1098701/bilderberg-2013-at-watfords-grove-hotel
Nice turn of phrase
The 50th Anniversary airs the 23rd of November
I've watched a few of the short-platform Matt Smith episodes and have enjoyed them (in a completely cartoonish fashion). His performance's match Pertwee's whilst just fail to be swivelled-eyed enough to be placed alongside Tom Baker [PBUDW].
But I like the vibes from antifrank: A steely-eyed, cold-and-calculating new Dr. It has to be the so-sh@gg@ble Tilda Swinton. As her assistant, someone electic: Eddie Izzard...?
lucy manning @lucymanning 22s
Michael Adebolajo asks in court to be called Mujaheed Abu Hamza.
Quite a posh hotel even if they did let me in.
Though I would like to see Matt Smith regenerate into John Hurt, but with John Hurt bursting out of Matt Smith's chest.
Presumably, this is the point when your condemnation goes to the person sharing the story rather than the evil men encouraging rape and murder?
Damned shame Jacobi wasn't kept as the Master. Hurt as the Doctor and Jacobi as the Master would've been quite interesting to watch.
http://order-order.com/2013/06/03/exclusive-police-hold-suspected-downing-street-lovers/
Hardly. The Master proved that 13 is only unlucky for some.
Do you have evidence it's untrue?
But I can't imagine the BBC ending their most commercially successful show based on a throwaway line from 40 years ago.
The Beeb's favourite girl is Miranda Hart, and so if it was to be a laydeh, it wouldn't suprise me if it were her (complete with ironic humour).
Edited extra bit: The Deadly Assassin is a stupid title.
Woman kept awake at night by ants ringing doorbell
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/odd/news/a486325/woman-kept-awake-at-night-by-ants-ringing-doorbell.html
I like my bus pass and if tax or charge is put on it then I would opt to pay.
Ed Balls and Nick Clegg are right on this. Cameron, who made a stupid pledge during the final TV debate in May 2010 is wrong
And in strict Whovian mythology, William Hartnell wasn't the first incarnation.
Do not doubt the word of the Dancer!
Otherwise I agree.
:wee-timmy-wrong-again:
Who knew?
The Road to National Suicide...
1) Winter Fuel for millionaires
2) Free schools
3) Police commissioners.
Total savings ? Less than £0.5Bn?
Balls is a laughing stock.
You should read "The Road To National Suicide"
What is the issue with being funded by a member of the Unification Church?
Also this is really excellent news on manufacturing: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10095373/UK-manufacturing-output-jumps-in-May.html
The recovery remains patchy. The fall in business lending (despite Osborne's lending scheme) is a concern but if production can join consumption we can maintain lift off. OGH has really underestimated the implications of this for his bet.
Wee-Timmy has a lot to offer this site but lacks a/any life-experience: He is fortunate in many ways but suffers in others. Whether pity or contempt should be delivered-unto-him as he-delivers-unto-others is debatable.
The best thing to do is challenge him when he is obviously clueless (as I did and expect him to pay £50 in July to OGH's site). What people have to accept is: When he is floundering for attention he is best read, threaded and ignored....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/10095188/Ed-Davey-attacks-papers-who-report-destructive-climate-sceptics.html
"Newspapers are wrong to give a “platform” for campaigners and groups that question whether climate change is caused by human activity, Ed Davey, the energy secretary, will say."
Liberal my rear end.
The flashback to potential previous doctors as in The Brain of Morbius.
That's the easy bit. The 'Don;t Let Ed In By Voting For Nigel Farage' campaign could prove much trickier.....
It's also important to see where any recovery occurs. Right now it seems to be happening in exactly the places that are of least use to the Coalition electorally. They need to see some growth in the midlands and Lancashire.
For all that, Ed Balls's claim today that George Osborne's economic policies had "failed catastrophically" on growth, jobs and deficit reduction looks like a major hostage to fortune. He will be lucky if he doesn't live to regret saying that.
Exactly as I predicted back in 2010 (to, IIRC, much derision from Labour supporters at the time, except from the ever-sensible Hopi Sen who agreed with me), Balls has finally got round to embracing the OBR in order to try to overcome Labour's credibility problem:
Instead, Labour will set out, in our general election manifesto, tough fiscal rules that the next Labour government will have to stick to – to get our country’s current budget back to balance and national debt on a downward path.
Tough rules, which will be independently monitored by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
The OBR is a major step forward, and will make it much harder for any future Gordon Brown to wreck the economy quite so comprehensively.
http://labourlist.org/2013/06/ed-balls-reuters-speech-striking-the-right-balance-for-the-british-economy/
I don't understand the strategy at all.
The creation of an independent OBR is, for me, a strong reason to vote Conservative. They deserve to be rewarded for such a great policy. Unfortunately, they deserve to be punished for other things, so it's going to be a fine balance.
"Right from the start the Tories used the OBR not just as part of the government but as part of the Conservative party. They have succeeded in strangling what could have been a good idea at its birth."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jul/09/obr-public-sector-job-losses
Osborne took just a couple of years to puncture the idea that:
1. The OBR is independent
2. That its existence will stop future economic problems.
@toadmeister
@roadto326 @AGilinsky I think the Cons will pull ahead of Labour on education policy by 2015
Well the truth is... I am....
And I like it sweet cheeks.
Exactly as I predicted.
@edballsmp where was "iron discipline" when you gave us the deepest peacetime bust; biggest G20 deficit; and, world's largest bank bailout?
If so, the the Tory attack lines about Labour always borrowing more write themselves.
I'm remembering this polling
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/03/19/nearly-three-years-after-the-coalition-was-formed-lab-is-still-getting-most-blame-for-the-cuts/
Not that the Coalition has cut as much as it should've, but the basis of coalition is policy by the lowest common denominator.
Is that a sad, lickle, under-powered Koenigs...? A camp, hide-it-in-your-pocket, motor that brings 'the elite' to pleasure?
Or is it all down to an inbred six-fingered scribble over some dank blackboard of terror and youth? [I can hear the screeches now...!]
Perchance, it may also be, for Norfolk-sake, that you could not be bothered to use punctuation! I know, from our English Londinium, you despise all those around you; but, please, respect our language...!
I didn't have an addiction.
It was just a great way of meeting sluts.
Can anyone explain why not?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/peter-hain-attacks-labour-plan-remove-winter-fuel-payments-wealthy-pensioners
It should go without saying that any decent person including, I hope, all on this blog, condemn it unreservedly, though it wouldn't go amiss, occasionally, for this to be said.
"The author of the style-book of the Oxford University Press of New York (quoted in Perrin's Writer's Guide) says 'If you take hyphens seriously you will surely go mad'. You should not take hyphens seriously."
Hyphens are the UKIP of the punctuation world.
Which is why Balls ain't going to be ditched. Well, that and the other reason.
Im sure hell change his mind on lots of other benfits too in the next couple of years.
GO has won the argument - the welfare state is to be reigned in by all parties.
Only on Europe, you seem to use your considerable grey matter.
Either the membership is unrepresentative of their voters or, more likely, in the immediate aftermath of Cleggasm they were giving Clegg the benefit of the their collective doubts.
Even the "protest" element seems to prefer UKIP. Only 5% prepared to vote Tory.
I cannot see another Tory-LD coalition. Otherwise, the party will simply implode and Alexander, Laws will join the Tories, since they are Tories.