Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly a year to go before the WH2016 primaries start and

2

Comments

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711

    Morning all,

    Good to see a thread on USA. Any one else got a punt on Jeb Bush? Looks like he will run.

    At what point does the American prejudice against “kings” in practice, as opposed to being “glamourous”, (cf Di, Kate) kick in?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited January 2015
    Why can't our politicians do this?

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/12/muslim-mayor-of-rotterdam-tells-islamists-to-f-off-on-live-television/

    “There may be a place in the world where you can be yourself, be honest with yourself and do not go and kill innocent journalists. And if you do not like it here because humorists you do not like make a newspaper, may I then say you can f*** off.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Soaraway cost of living crisis figures out at 9.30 aka inflation..
  • Well done on the Guardian and Independent for showing the front cover of Charlie Hebdo on their website along side the relevant story, while the likes of the Telegraph censors it again and the Mail wont show it.

    Slightly odd decision from BBC, willing to show it on Newsnight, but do everything not to on the website.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 16th December Projection) :

    Con 300 (-4) .. Lab 269 (NC) .. LibDem 36 (+2) .. SNP 19 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 26 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - TCTC
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Likely Con Hold
    Enfield - Likely Lab Gain
    Cornwall North - Likely LibDem Hold (From TCTC)
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochill and South Perthshire - Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 16 Dec - Cornwall North moves from TCTC to Likely LibDem Hold

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors

    My friend in the Labour Party in Cambridge doesn't think they'll unseat Hubbert (last year he was pretty sure it was a Labour gain).
    Over the past year the seat has moved from in the mid "Likely LibDem Hold" tier to very firmly in the HOLD column. Huppert is doing a Farron/Lamb during his first term.

    You have to factor in the Labour candidate , his previous antics, his links to the unions and Huppert doing a fair job. Perhaps Labour will be 3rd again like last time.
    I think we may be surprised by Huppert's majority and certainly his odds are most generous.

  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 16th December Projection) :

    Con 300 (-4) .. Lab 269 (NC) .. LibDem 36 (+2) .. SNP 19 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 26 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - TCTC
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Likely Con Hold
    Enfield - Likely Lab Gain
    Cornwall North - Likely LibDem Hold (From TCTC)
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochill and South Perthshire - Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 16 Dec - Cornwall North moves from TCTC to Likely LibDem Hold

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors

    My friend in the Labour Party in Cambridge doesn't think they'll unseat Hubbert (last year he was pretty sure it was a Labour gain).
    Over the past year the seat has moved from in the mid "Likely LibDem Hold" tier to very firmly in the HOLD column. Huppert is doing a Farron/Lamb during his first term.

    You have to factor in the Labour candidate , his previous antics, his links to the unions and Huppert doing a fair job. Perhaps Labour will be 3rd again like last time.
    I think we may be surprised by Huppert's majority and certainly his odds are most generous.

    His strong support for CAMRA and some high profile "save our pubs" campaigns hasn't done him any harm - puritan candidates take note !
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    No, this is bad news. This is the start of a deflationary spiral...
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    BenM said:

    I see JackW's predictions are falling into line.

    Still at least 20 seats to wipe from the Tory side, but getting there.

    I think you'll find other models (splutter !!) will fall my way. The ARSE projection has been remarkably stable for more than eighteen months.

  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    edited January 2015
    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    The next Tory slogan: Go Go deflation!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    BenM said:

    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    The next Tory slogan: Go Go deflation!
    You suggesting cheaper petrol is bad news Ben ?
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    CPI 0.5% December down from 1.0%
    RPI 1.6% down from 2%
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    UK inflation fell to 0.5% y-o-y in December, below forecast of 0.7% and down from 1% in November.

    That said: this is mostly due to energy. "Core", which excludes energy and food, remained a robust 1.3%, actually up 0.1% on the previous November reading.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    JohnO said:

    CPI 0.5% December down from 1.0%
    RPI 1.6% down from 2%

    I might suggest that wages are outstripping inflation now...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    Had a top up on Huppert this morning, 5-4 is a nice price.

    Doubt Bury North is going Tory though.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 16th December Projection) :

    Con 300 (-4) .. Lab 269 (NC) .. LibDem 36 (+2) .. SNP 19 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 26 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - TCTC
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Likely Con Hold
    Enfield - Likely Lab Gain
    Cornwall North - Likely LibDem Hold (From TCTC)
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochill and South Perthshire - Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 16 Dec - Cornwall North moves from TCTC to Likely LibDem Hold

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors

    My friend in the Labour Party in Cambridge doesn't think they'll unseat Hubbert (last year he was pretty sure it was a Labour gain).
    Over the past year the seat has moved from in the mid "Likely LibDem Hold" tier to very firmly in the HOLD column. Huppert is doing a Farron/Lamb during his first term.

    You have to factor in the Labour candidate , his previous antics, his links to the unions and Huppert doing a fair job. Perhaps Labour will be 3rd again like last time.
    I think we may be surprised by Huppert's majority and certainly his odds are most generous.

    His strong support for CAMRA and some high profile "save our pubs" campaigns hasn't done him any harm - puritan candidates take note !
    Didn’t the Tories used to be the Breweres party, not the old Libs? Or was it the other way round. Anyway, anyone who supports CAMRA’s efforts ....
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    Well done on the Guardian and Independent for showing the front cover of Charlie Hebdo on their website along side the relevant story, while the likes of the Telegraph censors it again and the Mail wont show it.

    Slightly odd decision from BBC, willing to show it on Newsnight, but do everything not to on the website.

    How many viewers has Newsnight as opposed to BBC News 24?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Food and non alky drinks down 0.19%

    Cheaper fuel filtering through..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    rcs1000 said:

    UK inflation fell to 0.5% y-o-y in December, below forecast of 0.7% and down from 1% in November.

    That said: this is mostly due to energy. "Core", which excludes energy and food, remained a robust 1.3%, actually up 0.1% on the previous November reading.

    Never get how "core" EXCLUDES fuel and food, I'd have thought the opposite ;p
  • Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Falling gas prices as well today - how's Mili's idea of a freeze sounding now I wonder?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited January 2015
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Buzzfeed names and shames those too cowardly to print the new Charlie Hebdo cover:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/austinhunt/heres-who-is-and-isnt-publishing-the-new-charlie-hebdo-cover#.crJ42Z2KL

    I see the new BBC guidelines on depicting Mohammed lasted long in practice.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    TGOHF said:

    JohnO said:

    CPI 0.5% December down from 1.0%
    RPI 1.6% down from 2%

    I might suggest that wages are outstripping inflation now...
    More like coming round the penultimate bend three furlongs behind!
  • On topic, Joe Biden.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK inflation fell to 0.5% y-o-y in December, below forecast of 0.7% and down from 1% in November.

    That said: this is mostly due to energy. "Core", which excludes energy and food, remained a robust 1.3%, actually up 0.1% on the previous November reading.

    Never get how "core" EXCLUDES fuel and food, I'd have thought the opposite ;p
    It's actually a very good point. For someone at the 20% percentile on the income distribution (i.e. someone in a low wage job), a disproportionately high share of their income is spent on food and fuel.

    That said, the reason it's included is because food and fuel prices (both being internationally traded commodities) are beyond the control of the governments to influence. Putting up interest rates in response to rising oil and food prices ("to get inflation under control") would likely only make things worse.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Socrates said:

    Buzzfeed names and shames those too cowardly to print the new Charlie Hebdo cover:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/austinhunt/heres-who-is-and-isnt-publishing-the-new-charlie-hebdo-cover#.crJ42Z2KL

    I see the new BBC guidelines on depicting Mohammed lasted long in practice.

    Remember when we weren't Charlie ?

    http://news.stv.tv/west-central/211626-catholic-church-calls-for-hugh-dallas-to-be-sacked-if-he-sent-offensive-pope-email/

    "The letter, written by the director of the Scottish Catholic Media Office Peter Kearney, has been sent to the Scottish Football Association's (SFA) chief executive Stewart Regan.

    In it Mr Kearney states: "I am writing to you to express my concern at an allegation made recently against a senior official of the SFA, Mr Hugh Dallas, the Head of Referee development.

    "He has been accused of sending an email from his SFA email account on the day of the Pope’s visit to Scotland, which was totally unprofessional, gratuitously insulting to the Pope, deeply offensive to the Catholic community of Scotland, and an incitement to anti-Catholic sectarianism."
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,125

    Morning all,

    Good to see a thread on USA. Any one else got a punt on Jeb Bush? Looks like he will run.

    At what point does the American prejudice against “kings” in practice, as opposed to being “glamourous”, (cf Di, Kate) kick in?
    Who knows. It could be 'king' versus 'queen' at this rate. My betting logic is that Jeb will run and his odds will tumble from where they were six months ago when I bet.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,955
    felix said:

    Falling gas prices as well today - how's Mili's idea of a freeze sounding now I wonder?

    People forget but one company did freeze their prices in response to Miliband's brilliant announcement, of course they'd put their prices up by about 10% a few months before and were only too happy to commit themselves to maintaining the record price level.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    rcs1000 said:

    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    We have a five year plan, and more tractors comrades.

    David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 7m7 minutes ago
    The fall in #inflation is good news for families. Our long term economic plan is on track and helping hardworking taxpayers.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Pulpstar said:

    Had a top up on Huppert this morning, 5-4 is a nice price.

    Doubt Bury North is going Tory though.

    Any price north of 1/3 on Huppert is value. Get as much wonga on him as you're allowed.

    The Tories will do quite well in the Lancashire marginals. Close but a cigar for the Conservatives there.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements
    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,125
    dr_spyn said:

    We have a five year plan, and more tractors comrades.

    David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 7m7 minutes ago
    The fall in #inflation is good news for families. Our long term economic plan is on track and helping hardworking taxpayers.

    Do we actually make any tractors anymore?
  • dr_spyn said:

    We have a five year plan, and more tractors comrades.

    David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 7m7 minutes ago
    The fall in #inflation is good news for families. Our long term economic plan is on track and helping hardworking taxpayers.

    Do we actually make any tractors anymore?
    JCB still do.
  • Brent Oil slides another dollar and a half in early trading. Should go through $40 later this week.

    Where is the floor?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    dr_spyn said:

    We have a five year plan, and more tractors comrades.

    David Cameron ‏@David_Cameron 7m7 minutes ago
    The fall in #inflation is good news for families. Our long term economic plan is on track and helping hardworking taxpayers.

    Do we actually make any tractors anymore?
    JCB are still at it. Not sure how many other manufacturers are left. @Tim late of PB might know...

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,125
    Oil now at less than $45 according to Bloomberg.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Freezing tax credits could very well end up being a real terms rise at this rate.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited January 2015
    Tim_B said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Also, I don't buy this "hollowed out" by Obama narrative. What backs this up?

    The statistics quoted by Tim_B downthread for a start. If you really want to be depressed look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors

    As I said, a thin field.
    All but 1 of the Republican pickups have come at mid-term elections. The problem is not that Obama has hollowed out the party, it is that the Democratic voters don't vote at mid-terms.
    The problem is that that when everyone wanted pro-jobs policies,
    Unemployment numbers are doing better than the CBO forecast and way better than Republicans predicted (in a massive blow to Laffer curve proponents).
    Tim_B said:


    Obama spent almost 18 months, and exhausted all his political capital on., Obamacare, which nobody wanted.

    This is a crazy statement, he ran on a platform of health insurance reform and got a massive mandate for it. The policies that make up Obamacare poll favourably (even amongst republicans) - when you poll for 'Obamacare' which has been not stop trailled as worst than the antichrist then it polls less favorably. But even with that provisio it was polling so favorably in 2012 that Republicans stopped calling it Obamacare and started calling it the ACA.

    The majority of Americans want the ACA improved rather than repealed, the current net faourable rating is -5%, hardly a devastating repudiation of the policy

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,125

    Brent Oil slides another dollar and a half in early trading. Should go through $40 later this week.

    Where is the floor?

    Perhaps they will be giving it away shortly.
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    I hope that Senator does stand and becomes President. If she managed to get her way with Banking reforms, it could make a real difference. It might give the UK and other countries the opportunity to also implement reforms and to go back to sensible sober Banking, not the casino gambling we have seen.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements
    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    Ye but if I owe £100 tommorow and that gets changed to £97 over 10 years I'll take it every day and twice on sundays, any rational person would.

    Seems like voting Syriza is the sensible choice in Greece as they'll most likely drive the hardest bargain.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,380
    edited January 2015
    Low inflation, low interest rates, petrol falling, unemployment dropping...

    Not great news for Labour!
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Elephant in the room for the deficit is the Pensioner Triple Lock.

    How do you carry on giving them 2.5% rises when there is no price inflation?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Socrates said:

    Buzzfeed names and shames those too cowardly to print the new Charlie Hebdo cover:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/austinhunt/heres-who-is-and-isnt-publishing-the-new-charlie-hebdo-cover#.crJ42Z2KL

    I see the new BBC guidelines on depicting Mohammed lasted long in practice.

    Anyone else think that the cartoonist has hidden two cock-and-balls in the image?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited January 2015
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements
    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    If they reduce interest payments presumably the IMF in total gets back less money on the loan that in otherwise would, and certainly less over a given timeframe, so the countries backing the IMF "lose" that interest.

    The other thing that concerns me is don't these sort of IMF loans imply a moral hazard, since it means that a developing country borrower is paying the sort of interest rates only open to the safest most developed economies, much better than it would ever get on the world market, so there must be a temptation to continuously default and get all that nice cheap money.
  • I see the BBC has a piece on why low inflation is bad....
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Socrates said:

    Buzzfeed names and shames those too cowardly to print the new Charlie Hebdo cover:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/austinhunt/heres-who-is-and-isnt-publishing-the-new-charlie-hebdo-cover#.crJ42Z2KL

    I see the new BBC guidelines on depicting Mohammed lasted long in practice.

    Anyone else think that the cartoonist has hidden two cock-and-balls in the image?
    Oh my. If that's intentional it's brilliant, and of course entirely deniable.
  • Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Indigo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    By the way, anyone who wants to know what the Greek debt restructuring is going to look like should take a look at Belize.

    Here, the IMF initially bailed out the country in 2006, but by 2012 it was clear that the debt level was still not sustainable. Belize missed a couple of interest payments, and so there was protracted negotiations between the IMF and the country. (As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims.)

    The 2029 maturity on the existing Belize bond (16 years) was pushed back a decade, and the interest rate was cut by between 1.5% and 4%, depending on the year. There was also a 3% haircut on the face value of the debt. The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%.

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements
    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    If they reduce interest payments presumably the IMF in total gets back less money on the loan that in otherwise would, and certainly less over a given timeframe, so the countries backing the IMF "lose" that interest.

    The other thing that concerns me is don't these sort of IMF loans imply a moral hazard, since it means that a developing country borrower is paying the sort of interest rates only open to the safest most developed economies, much better than it would ever get on the world market, so there must be a temptation to continuously default and get all that nice cheap money.
    Well, IMF loans come with massive strings attached, so no-one likes to take them.

    In return for taking the cash, you accept:

    1. That the IMF can confiscate your foreign assets
    2. That the IMF has essentially complete control over your budget - it will tell you structural reforms, tax rates, spending levels, etc - that you have to stick to
    3. And if you don't stick to them... 1...

    Also, if you are funded by the IMF it's very hard to raise money from the private sector, because the IMF is senior in the credit structure than the private sector bond holders.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046

    Well done on the Guardian and Independent for showing the front cover of Charlie Hebdo on their website along side the relevant story, while the likes of the Telegraph censors it again and the Mail wont show it.

    Slightly odd decision from BBC, willing to show it on Newsnight, but do everything not to on the website.

    I'm not sure whether publishing this relatively innocuous cartoon gives people a proper impression of what Charlie Hebdo is all about. I think Charlie Hebdo should be including some of its most offensive material eg "A star is born", so that the reader can really judge for themselves. If Charlie Hebdo themselves are not prepared to republish their most offensive cartoons that speaks volumes.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
    Is Nelson the right's Blanchflower? To be fair, no one saw the oil price collapse coming.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Scrapheap, reminds me a shade of when the first year and a half of Labour's epic recession was called a 'downturn'.

    Meanwhile, the Conservatives have a contemptible opening gambit of using the Paris attacks to get through the snooper's charter. Miliband strikes back impressively, with the despicable claim that leaving the EU would put as at greater risk of terrorism, death, woe, doom and horror.

    Oaf.

    In unrelated news: why has Chrome stuck a new button next to the minimise button? I don't think it's dodgy, but it does seem pointless.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements

    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    If they reduce interest payments presumably the IMF in total gets back less money on the loan that in otherwise would, and certainly less over a given timeframe, so the countries backing the IMF "lose" that interest.

    The other thing that concerns me is don't these sort of IMF loans imply a moral hazard, since it means that a developing country borrower is paying the sort of interest rates only open to the safest most developed economies, much better than it would ever get on the world market, so there must be a temptation to continuously default and get all that nice cheap money.
    Well, IMF loans come with massive strings attached, so no-one likes to take them.

    In return for taking the cash, you accept:

    1. That the IMF can confiscate your foreign assets
    2. That the IMF has essentially complete control over your budget - it will tell you structural reforms, tax rates, spending levels, etc - that you have to stick to
    3. And if you don't stick to them... 1...

    Also, if you are funded by the IMF it's very hard to raise money from the private sector, because the IMF is senior in the credit structure than the private sector bond holders.
    It's quite right they come with hawsers strings. By that stage no one in the private will touch you with a barge pole, and the huge assumption of risk by the IMF needs to be balanced by huge concessions from the country in question.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
    Is Nelson the right's Blanchflower? To be fair, no one saw the oil price collapse coming.
    Fraser Nelson is about as lefty as a so called conservative can be. Not much between him and the usual Guardianista.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    edited January 2015
    Tennis: seems the excellent Betfair stats page may be gone forever. I hope it comes back, as I don't follow the sport closely enough to bet without being able to check on recent form, and the stats page was very convenient and well laid out.

    F1 in shock news, excepting the engine idiocy, it seems pretty much every change to the rules is good:
    http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/9591144/fia-scraps-double-points-at-f1-finale-among-a-host-of-rule-changes-for-2015

    Admittedly, that's mostly because they're scrapping stupid 2014 rules or 2015 proposals, but still.

    Edited extra bit: watched Battlestar Galactica: Razor last night. No spoilers, but if you did you may wish to check the Wikipedia page which actually includes important [not quite critical] bits that were cut from the broadcast. No idea why they were cut.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    I see the BBC has a piece on why low inflation is bad....

    "Paul Hollingsworth of Capital Economics said inflation looked likely to fall further to about 0.2% in February"

    Think of the wailing and gnashing of teeth if inflation goes that low.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    In unrelated news: why has Chrome stuck a new button next to the minimise button? I don't think it's dodgy, but it does seem pointless.

    I don't have that. The check says it's up to date. So you have add-ins/extensions?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Anorak, only Googledocs.

    Hmm. Others on Twitter seem to have it. Incidentally, I'm using a PC [may show up otherwise on other devices, I'd guess].
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    Mr. Anorak, only Googledocs.

    Hmm. Others on Twitter seem to have it. Incidentally, I'm using a PC [may show up otherwise on other devices, I'd guess].

    On mine it says my name, seems to have something to do with your Google account if you are logged in.

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:


    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements

    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    If they reduce interest payments presumably the IMF in total gets back less money on the loan that in otherwise would, and certainly less over a given timeframe, so the countries backing the IMF "lose" that interest.

    The other thing that concerns me is don't these sort of IMF loans imply a moral hazard, since it means that a developing country borrower is paying the sort of interest rates only open to the safest most developed economies, much better than it would ever get on the world market, so there must be a temptation to continuously default and get all that nice cheap money.
    Well, IMF loans come with massive strings attached, so no-one likes to take them.

    In return for taking the cash, you accept:

    1. That the IMF can confiscate your foreign assets
    2. That the IMF has essentially complete control over your budget - it will tell you structural reforms, tax rates, spending levels, etc - that you have to stick to
    3. And if you don't stick to them... 1...

    Also, if you are funded by the IMF it's very hard to raise money from the private sector, because the IMF is senior in the credit structure than the private sector bond holders.
    Pakistan has been borrowing pretty much every year since 1958, thats hardly a short term fix for an economic crisis, that's 50 years of credit!
    http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/tad/extarr2.aspx?memberKey1=760&date1key=2014-12-31
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    edited January 2015
    rcs1000 said:

    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    No, this is bad news. This is the start of a deflationary spiral...
    I find that very unlikely. Once the lower oil price has worked its way through the system, inflation will begin to creep up again. If Brent stabilises at $40-45 and therefore petrol at around 95-99p/l it will take until around August for inflation to start rising again.

    Also given that Tesco threw down the pricing gauntlet in September of last year which has led to the latest round of food price deflation that will begin to work its way out of the system around the same time.

    Finally, given that we have our own currency, there is always a final resort of QE should the indicators all start flashing red and the economy starts to falter.

    Also, looking at the factory prices, companies aren't exactly passing on their cost savings to consumers, PPI input prices fell by over 10% YoY and output prices fell by just under 1% YoY. Companies are taking the opportunity to restore battered margins rather than pass their savings on to consumers which will blunt any deflationary effect of falling oil prices.

    Look at energy prices, EO.n thinks they are doing us all a favour by cutting bills by 4% when wholesale gas prices have fallen by almost a third over the past few months.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Relatively high inflation would have been a good thing in our present indebted circumstances. It's a shame it didn't come to pass. Oh well.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. D, that's what Twitter suggested.

    Unasked for sudden changes, whether updates or not, are the work of Satan.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    No, this is bad news. This is the start of a deflationary spiral...
    I find that very unlikely. Once the lower oil price has worked its way through the system, inflation will begin to creep up again. If Brent stabilises at $40-45 and therefore petrol at around 95-99p/l it will take until around August for inflation to start rising again.

    Also given that Tesco threw down the pricing gauntlet in September of last year which has led to the latest round of food price deflation that will begin to work its way out of the system around the same time.

    Finally, given that we have our own currency, there is always a final resort of QE should the indicators all start flashing red and the economy starts to falter.
    I was being ironic.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Mr. Anorak, only Googledocs.

    Hmm. Others on Twitter seem to have it. Incidentally, I'm using a PC [may show up otherwise on other devices, I'd guess].

    PC - me too; Windows 7. How odd.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
    Is Nelson the right's Blanchflower? To be fair, no one saw the oil price collapse coming.
    Blanchflower was guilty of hyperbole once - but generally gets stuff right.

    Nelson mostly gets it wrong unless he's spearing Osborne about the way he talks about national debt.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Which inflation figure takes into account rent/mortgage costs?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    No, this is bad news. This is the start of a deflationary spiral...
    I find that very unlikely. Once the lower oil price has worked its way through the system, inflation will begin to creep up again. If Brent stabilises at $40-45 and therefore petrol at around 95-99p/l it will take until around August for inflation to start rising again.

    Also given that Tesco threw down the pricing gauntlet in September of last year which has led to the latest round of food price deflation that will begin to work its way out of the system around the same time.

    Finally, given that we have our own currency, there is always a final resort of QE should the indicators all start flashing red and the economy starts to falter.
    Imagine the shrieking and finger-pointing that will follow the inevitable food & oil price rises, when inflation bumps up for a few quarters.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Anorak, that is odd...

    This is what I dislike about technology. Pointless, small, unnecessary and unannounced changes can be either standard updates (which may nevertheless make things worse), or dubious in nature. Bah.

    Mr. M, when Nelson compared the Osborne reality with the Darling 'plan', assuming Darling would've attempted what he said, it was utterly ludicrous, to the point of amusement. Nelson entirely failed to consider not only political implications but also the impact of the eurozone sovereign debt crisis. It was a bit disappointing, to be honest.

    I think he fails to consider the affect of politics upon the potential for economic policies.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    edited January 2015
    Alistair said:

    Which inflation figure takes into account rent/mortgage costs?

    CPIH + 0.6% down from +1.0%

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_390953.pdf

    The specific Owner Occupier sub component inflation rate actually increase from 1.0% to 1.1%
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Financier said:

    With petrol nearing £1 per litre, ~75p of that will be tax. On R4 Today, a man from the Midlands was saying that the latest petrol prices save him about £300 per month. Also domestic heating oil has significantly reduced in price - but has not been so well publicised.

    So will EdM propose an increase in fuel taxes (or restore the escalator) to help fill his large budget gap?

    No, this is bad news. This is the start of a deflationary spiral...
    I find that very unlikely. Once the lower oil price has worked its way through the system, inflation will begin to creep up again. If Brent stabilises at $40-45 and therefore petrol at around 95-99p/l it will take until around August for inflation to start rising again.

    Also given that Tesco threw down the pricing gauntlet in September of last year which has led to the latest round of food price deflation that will begin to work its way out of the system around the same time.

    Finally, given that we have our own currency, there is always a final resort of QE should the indicators all start flashing red and the economy starts to falter.
    I was being ironic.
    It's hard to get it over the internet. :/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Indigo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:


    "The impact of this was to cut the NPV of what Belize owed by 33%, while only taking an "official" haircut of 3%."

    "As an aside, the IMF always gets paid back - in one way or another, and never drops claims"

    I can't reconcile those two statements

    I should have said: the IMF will negotiate to allow you to have longer to pay back, or to reduce your interest payments. But has never walked away from a claim.

    If I recall correctly, the terms of the IMF loan contracts allow them to confiscate and sell your embassies abroad if you don't pay them back. And your country can't have money in a US (or European) bank account, because they will bring a suit to freeze the assets, and then have them removed. When you agree to an IMF loan, you give up an extraordinary degree of sovereignty.
    If they reduce interest payments presumably the IMF in total gets back less money on the loan that in otherwise would, and certainly less over a given timeframe, so the countries backing the IMF "lose" that interest.

    The other thing that concerns me is don't these sort of IMF loans imply a moral hazard, since it means that a developing country borrower is paying the sort of interest rates only open to the safest most developed economies, much better than it would ever get on the world market, so there must be a temptation to continuously default and get all that nice cheap money.
    Well, IMF loans come with massive strings attached, so no-one likes to take them.

    In return for taking the cash, you accept:

    1. That the IMF can confiscate your foreign assets
    2. That the IMF has essentially complete control over your budget - it will tell you structural reforms, tax rates, spending levels, etc - that you have to stick to
    3. And if you don't stick to them... 1...

    Also, if you are funded by the IMF it's very hard to raise money from the private sector, because the IMF is senior in the credit structure than the private sector bond holders.
    Pakistan has been borrowing pretty much every year since 1958, thats hardly a short term fix for an economic crisis, that's 50 years of credit!
    http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/tad/extarr2.aspx?memberKey1=760&date1key=2014-12-31
    There have been quite a lot of Pakistan deals in the last 70 years, although some of them get multiple entries on that web page (as in they are multi-stage arrangements). There is a tiny amount of money owing on the 2008 programme, and quite a lot owing on the 2013 one. All previous ones have been repaid in full.

    I would advise you read this LSE research paper (http://www.lse.ac.uk/asiaResearchCentre/_files/ARCWP57-AhmadMohammed.pdf) to understand the peculiar circumstances of Pakistan's relationship with the IMF.
  • Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
    FYI - I've gone balls deep on Burnley winning/qualifying tomorrow night.

    You can thank me now.

    Umming and ahhing about backing Everton tonight.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064
    On whether Greece should go it alone and go to the IMF, I think they have to. At least with the IMF they will get real debt relief, with the current method they are being asked to pay back 100% of what they owe with an economy 30% smaller.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited January 2015
    School place crisis looming, no doubt exacerbated (or caused in the main) by immigration and the corresponding bump in children per family.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30780126

    Best thing to do is to attack the expanding private school sector by challenging their charitable status. © E. Miliband.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400


    I think he fails to consider the affect of politics upon the potential for economic policies.

    Yep, he can't seem to decide whether he wants to be a journalist, economist or politician with the result that he is a bit rubbish at all of them.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Also, I don't buy this "hollowed out" by Obama narrative. What backs this up?

    The statistics quoted by Tim_B downthread for a start. If you really want to be depressed look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors

    As I said, a thin field.
    All but 1 of the Republican pickups have come at mid-term elections. The problem is not that Obama has hollowed out the party, it is that the Democratic voters don't vote at mid-terms.
    It is part of the price of being in power. Look at what happened to the tories and Labour in the 90s and 00s respectively in local government. Look at what has happened to the Lib Dems in this Parliament.

    When you look at the demographics it is hard to see a future for the Republicans. The fastest growing segment of the vote is the Hispanics which are strongly democratic. The white middle classes are shrinking as a percentage of the whole into minority status. Republicans struggle to reach out beyond that. And yet they have the House, the Senate and the vast majority of governor's mansions. Weird isn't it?
    Demographics aren't destiny. 50 years ago, White "ethnic" voters. (ie Italians, Irish, Poles) heavily favoured the Democrats. Now, White voters as a whole favour the Republicans.

    As well as the normal vote against the party that holds the Presidency, there's also the fact that voters in States that are Red at Presidential level seem now to be voting Republican at almost every other level, rather than splitting their ticket. That won't make any difference in Presidential elections, but will make it easier for the Republicans to win the Senate and most Legislatures if it continues.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    edited January 2015
    calum said:

    Well done on the Guardian and Independent for showing the front cover of Charlie Hebdo on their website along side the relevant story, while the likes of the Telegraph censors it again and the Mail wont show it.

    Slightly odd decision from BBC, willing to show it on Newsnight, but do everything not to on the website.

    I'm not sure whether publishing this relatively innocuous cartoon gives people a proper impression of what Charlie Hebdo is all about. I think Charlie Hebdo should be including some of its most offensive material eg "A star is born", so that the reader can really judge for themselves. If Charlie Hebdo themselves are not prepared to republish their most offensive cartoons that speaks volumes.
    Turn the cartoon upside down ^_~

    Good to see Charlie Hebdo will not be cowed.

    Personally I think the editor with the biggest decision to make in Britain right now is - Ian Hislop. Another randy Andy front page won't cut it for sure.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    Socrates said:

    Buzzfeed names and shames those too cowardly to print the new Charlie Hebdo cover:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/austinhunt/heres-who-is-and-isnt-publishing-the-new-charlie-hebdo-cover#.crJ42Z2KL

    I see the new BBC guidelines on depicting Mohammed lasted long in practice.

    I'm not sure whether publishing this relatively innocuous cartoon gives people a proper impression of what Charlie Hebdo is all about. I think Charlie Hebdo should be including some of its most offensive material eg "A star is born", so that the reader can really judge for themselves. If Charlie Hebdo themselves are not prepared to republish their most offensive cartoons that speaks volumes.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Also, I don't buy this "hollowed out" by Obama narrative. What backs this up?

    The statistics quoted by Tim_B downthread for a start. If you really want to be depressed look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors

    As I said, a thin field.
    All but 1 of the Republican pickups have come at mid-term elections. The problem is not that Obama has hollowed out the party, it is that the Democratic voters don't vote at mid-terms.
    It is part of the price of being in power. Look at what happened to the tories and Labour in the 90s and 00s respectively in local government. Look at what has happened to the Lib Dems in this Parliament.

    When you look at the demographics it is hard to see a future for the Republicans. The fastest growing segment of the vote is the Hispanics which are strongly democratic. The white middle classes are shrinking as a percentage of the whole into minority status. Republicans struggle to reach out beyond that. And yet they have the House, the Senate and the vast majority of governor's mansions. Weird isn't it?
    Demographics aren't destiny. 50 years ago, White "ethnic" voters. (ie Italians, Irish, Poles) heavily favoured the Democrats. Now, White voters as a whole favour the Republicans.

    As well as the normal vote against the party that holds the Presidency, there's also the fact that voters in States that are Red at Presidential level seem now to be voting Republican at almost every other level, rather than splitting their ticket. That won't make any difference in Presidential elections, but will make it easier for the Republicans to win the Senate and most Legislatures if it continues.
    Whites are voting more as a block now, negates immigration effects, but only for so long. If young whites vote Republican now, imagine the percentage that will vote Republican as they mature.

    Also Romney lost the election in the rust belt where there are few immigrants, barely getting a majority of whites.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    calum said:

    Well done on the Guardian and Independent for showing the front cover of Charlie Hebdo on their website along side the relevant story, while the likes of the Telegraph censors it again and the Mail wont show it.

    Slightly odd decision from BBC, willing to show it on Newsnight, but do everything not to on the website.

    I'm not sure whether publishing this relatively innocuous cartoon gives people a proper impression of what Charlie Hebdo is all about. I think Charlie Hebdo should be including some of its most offensive material eg "A star is born", so that the reader can really judge for themselves. If Charlie Hebdo themselves are not prepared to republish their most offensive cartoons that speaks volumes.
    Well, it says that they are (clearly correctly) concerned for their safety if they publish material which they have every right to publish.

    These two articles by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (a interesting and brave lady from what I can see) are fascinating incidentally, the first written after the firebombing in 2012, and the second a couple of days or so ago.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/ayaan-hirsi-ali/prophet-muhammad_b_1079880.html
    Of course, Charlie Hebdo has employed similarly "childish" and "petulant" satire to mock figures from all political and religious orientations, without ever being accused of "begging for" a violent reaction. Previous issues of the magazine have featured scatological cartoons of world leaders and caricatures of Jesus and the Pope. Time magazine itself, like all media, also delights in caricaturing religious and secular icons. Individuals offended by these images, however, have never reacted with violence, and therein lies the inescapable upshot of Mr. Crumley's piece: In a free society, a newspaper can ridicule and stigmatize whomever it chooses, except those who demonstrate a willingness to respond with violence. Extremist groups must be exempt from satire and criticism -- or the blame for the ensuing carnage falls squarely on the shoulders of the offending publication.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ayaan-hirsi-ali/how-to-respond-to-paris-attack_b_6433260.html
    "The more we oblige, the more we self-censor, the more we appease, the bolder the enemy gets."
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689
    I see Cameron is off again

    "There should be no "means of communication" which "we cannot read""

    and then the Nabavi's and the flightpaths of this world wonder why no one with half a brain will vote for the ****

    Source of quote http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424

  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Nice to see the terrorists got the response they wanted from the pathetic Western media. Charlie Hebdo should be ashamed of themselves, endangering mine and others lives. Al Qaeda recruiting sergeant.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Also, I don't buy this "hollowed out" by Obama narrative. What backs this up?

    The statistics quoted by Tim_B downthread for a start. If you really want to be depressed look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors

    As I said, a thin field.
    All but 1 of the Republican pickups have come at mid-term elections. The problem is not that Obama has hollowed out the party, it is that the Democratic voters don't vote at mid-terms.
    It is part of the price of being in power. Look at what happened to the tories and Labour in the 90s and 00s respectively in local government. Look at what has happened to the Lib Dems in this Parliament.

    When you look at the demographics it is hard to see a future for the Republicans. The fastest growing segment of the vote is the Hispanics which are strongly democratic. The white middle classes are shrinking as a percentage of the whole into minority status. Republicans struggle to reach out beyond that. And yet they have the House, the Senate and the vast majority of governor's mansions. Weird isn't it?
    Demographics aren't destiny. 50 years ago, White "ethnic" voters. (ie Italians, Irish, Poles) heavily favoured the Democrats. Now, White voters as a whole favour the Republicans.

    As well as the normal vote against the party that holds the Presidency, there's also the fact that voters in States that are Red at Presidential level seem now to be voting Republican at almost every other level, rather than splitting their ticket. That won't make any difference in Presidential elections, but will make it easier for the Republicans to win the Senate and most Legislatures if it continues.
    I predicted five years ago we were entering a period where the Democrats win presidential years and the Republicans win midterms. Florida is getting increasingly out of reach for the GOP, and it's an absolute must-win for them. I think Jeb could win it, due to home state advantage, but he's going to struggle in Ohio.

    All the analysis by race in the US also needs to appreciate the big difference between southern Whites and non-southern whites. The GOP running up their white margin is almost entirely in the south and Appalachia, where they're absolutely killing it, but there's not much evidence they're more competitive in places like Virginia (no longer majority southern in culture), Ohio and Michigan.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Sunday Times economist David Smith and his mad bunch of "shadow MPC" fools having their pants pulled down by these inflation numbers.

    Perhaps time to bet on a rate cut?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I really like the Google Sync with Firefox - my browser and bookmarks copy themselves to each other so whatever device I use, it looks the same. Great add-on gadget thingy.
    JonathanD said:

    Mr. Anorak, only Googledocs.

    Hmm. Others on Twitter seem to have it. Incidentally, I'm using a PC [may show up otherwise on other devices, I'd guess].

    On mine it says my name, seems to have something to do with your Google account if you are logged in.

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Anorak said:

    School place crisis looming, no doubt exacerbated (or caused in the main) by immigration and the corresponding bump in children per family.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30780126

    Best thing to do is to attack the expanding private school sector by challenging their charitable status. © E. Miliband.

    Give him the opportunity, and Miliband will have a go at private healthcare next.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Anorak said:

    In unrelated news: why has Chrome stuck a new button next to the minimise button? I don't think it's dodgy, but it does seem pointless.

    I don't have that. The check says it's up to date. So you have add-ins/extensions?
    Welcome to the world of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A/B_testing

    A small percentage of users get the new feature, and they watch the metrics to see if people like it or hate it, if it reduces complains or improves hits/usability/profit choose your poison. If it looks good they roll it out to a larger group and check their findings, if it looks bad they ditch it.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    ZenPagan said:

    I see Cameron is off again

    "There should be no "means of communication" which "we cannot read""

    and then the Nabavi's and the flightpaths of this world wonder why no one with half a brain will vote for the ****

    Source of quote http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424

    Buffoon Clegg tied himself up in knots arguing about this on Today earlier. Worth a listen, for a laugh.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,955
    ZenPagan said:

    I see Cameron is off again

    "There should be no "means of communication" which "we cannot read""

    and then the Nabavi's and the flightpaths of this world wonder why no one with half a brain will vote for the ****

    Source of quote http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424

    It's such a stupid idea for so many reasons. Just one of them is that it is going to make British software and services look as suspect as their Chinese equivalents if they are perceived as having a UK government backdoor built in.

    I shall almost certainly be spoiling my ballot paper come May, I can not in good conscience vote for any of the mainstream parties, I now hate the lot of them. Not that it will make much difference, as I've never voted for someone who went on to win. :)

  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    antifrank said:

    Relatively high inflation would have been a good thing in our present indebted circumstances. It's a shame it didn't come to pass. Oh well.

    Except that quite a lot of recent Government debt has been linked to the rate of inflation.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    edited January 2015
    Mr. Pagan, I agree entirely.

    Boris was being an authoritarian oaf the other day as well. Fighting terrorism isn't just about stopping them killing people, it's about preserving our way of life.

    Miss Plato, d'you have that new button thingummyjig? It seems pretty widespread (and unwanted).

    Edited extra bit: Mr. Indigo, now I feel victimised.
  • Remember when Osborne was accused of stoking inflation ?

    All those pieces on the Spectator from Fraser Nelson about the certainty of high inflation etc....
    FYI - I've gone balls deep on Burnley winning/qualifying tomorrow night.

    You can thank me now.

    Umming and ahhing about backing Everton tonight.
    quite agree - we're still enjoying the 5-3 and having failed to win against burnley and palace since then, quite expecting defeats tonight and vs sunderland at the weekend too....

    still .... 5-3!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    JonathanD said:

    Alistair said:

    Which inflation figure takes into account rent/mortgage costs?

    CPIH + 0.6% down from +1.0%

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_390953.pdf

    The specific Owner Occupier sub component inflation rate actually increase from 1.0% to 1.1%
    So its bad news for people who rent but don't eat ?

    That evil GO !
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited January 2015
    @Zen_Pagan @Morris_Dancer

    Cameron is being deliberately dishonest here. Everyone supports the intelligence services being able to read communication when there is grounds to do so and with a warrant. But he doesn't just want the government being able to read it. He wants them to be able to do it without any checks and balances. It's a disgrace to centuries of English and Scots constitutionalism.

    The man's a charlatan that no genuine conservative should vote for. He goes on about liberal democracy, but he has only the most superficial understanding of the concept.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    BenM said:

    Sunday Times economist David Smith and his mad bunch of "shadow MPC" fools having their pants pulled down by these inflation numbers.

    Perhaps time to bet on a rate cut?

    Whilst a rate cut would save me a few pennies I think it is very unlikely - what on earth would we cut to ?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited January 2015
    Socrates said:

    He wants them to be able to do it without any checks and balances.

    Really? Citation needed.

    You could start here:

    Previous governments had backed away from going down such a route, Mr Cameron said, but he believed this would have to change so that, "in extremis", such material could be obtained with a signed warrant from the home secretary.

    He said this would mirror existing powers enabling the police to get hold of conventional forms of communications, such as letters and other correspondence, in criminal investigations if legally sanctioned.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424
This discussion has been closed.