And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
. If it is right that workers across the land, though outside London, are prospering under the Conservatives, then Cameron will easily be returned to Number 10. If, on the other hand, these new jobs are mostly low-paid, part-time or fake self-employment, then Ed's missus can start measuring up the curtains.
Or the more likely case that workers are not yet prospering under the Conservatives and will likely do as badly or worse under Labour since they are going to make more or less all the same economic decisions, you will just get different mood music and a choice in the color of the linen.
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said." So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
In Leicester Interserve (the outsourced company) instantly wanted to force all the portering and catering staff onto Zero hours contracts, a good number handed in their notice. Real dedication to quality there...
Not the happiest of comparisons considering the public sector and the third sector are by far the biggest users of zero hours contracts, what was that about dedication to quality ?
Our hospital uses a lot of bank (zero hours) staff, but this does not suit everyone. Interserve wanted to force all portering and catering staff onto these contracts.
Anyone want to be that Balls gives public sector workers a nice fat pay rise in his first budget to cement the core vote, especially if a second election is looking possible? 5% for everyone to make up for the money they didn't get while those nasty Tories were eating babies in power. Public sector pay bill is around £200bn, so whats £10bn more structural spending between friends, anyway the *cough* Mansion Tax will cover it.
Balls has promised to maintain the freeze on public sector pay as recently as last week:
'Promised to maintain the freeze on public sector pay'
is not the same as 'won't commit to end the freeze'.
What he's committed to is holding to coalition spending plan in 2015/16, and if ministers want to go above the already announced 1% increases, they'll have to find the money themselves.....
"Galloway marching to protest defamation of his prophet"
I applaud his drawing attention the the hypocricy and double standards in the Charlie Hebdo affair. Britain marching arm in arm with the Saudis who everyone with any knowledge of the region knows is the most most mysoginystic country on the planet. What's more had these cartoons appeared as fliers in Riyadh the cartoonist would amost certainly have been publically executed.
This morning Indigo linked to an article about te pernicious effects of Islam in the UK castigating segregated classrooms found in six east London schools. Well the fastest growing religious sect is the Hasidim who are not permitted any contact with the opposite sex let alone to share a classroom with them. What's more all their marriages are 'arranged'. So what?
It's nothing short of blind prejudice which owes more to the 'foreignness' of most Muslims rather than their religious practices and I applaud Galloway for pointing it out.
There are plenty of small communities in the country who keep themselves to themselves, and maybe it would be better if they integrated, but as long as they aren't plotting to kill us all I'm ok with it
But I will make my point again. If the the jewish community that you speak of were to be 5% of the uk population, I have little doubt that the conflict between them and the rest of the country would increase to Islamic proportions. It is all about the numbers
"Galloway marching to protest defamation of his prophet"
I applaud his drawing attention the the hypocricy and double standards in the Charlie Hebdo affair. Britain marching arm in arm with the Saudis who everyone with any knowledge of the region knows is the most most mysoginystic country on the planet. What's more had these cartoons appeared as fliers in Riyadh the cartoonist would amost certainly have been publically executed.
This morning Indigo linked to an article about te pernicious effects of Islam in the UK castigating segregated classrooms found in six east London schools. Well the fastest growing religious sect is the Haidim who are not permitted any contact with the opposite sex let alone to share a classroom with them. What's more all their marriages are 'arranged'. So what?
It's nothing short of blind prejudice which owes more to the 'foreignness' of most Muslims than their religious practices and I applaud Galloway for pointing it out.
When we start being blown up and having our cartoonist machine gunned by the Haidim I imagine people will be more concerned. Liberal handwringing and human rights obsessions are ultimately going to get people killed, which was really the point of that article I think.
Dont you think we should be even a little upset about being the FGM capital of Europe, to the extent that little girls are being brought here in a kind of reverse health tourism to have it done to them. Or is the rights of that minority not to be offended and interfered with by our laws more important. Funnily enough when asked with an FoI what the total arrest numbers were the Met Police rejected the request on the basis that is was too expensive to find out! But the number of arrests is a small handful and the number of prosecutions would have been even easier to count, since its zero.
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said." So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
As a thought experiment, if Labour disappeared in a flash of light, how many of their voters would start voting Tory tomorrow? If UKIP likewise vanished in a flash of light, how many of their voters would be looking for a person with a blue rosette ?
The answer to the first is probably almost none, since Labour is near it core vote at the moment, they would all join the Greens, with a few to the LDs. The second might make 5% difference in the polls for the Cons. Ergo I dont believe Labour is a threat to the Tories at all, its not taking any of their votes, its just the consequence of them failing to inspire enough of their voters.
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said." So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
More accurately it is one news story that the BBC is reporting today a long way down it's home page:
And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
If they could dispute the facts cited then they could have done so. The CQC issue a draft report for accuracy checks before the final one.
Still not answered on which bits of the report you see as biased...
How could I know which bits are biased? All I can observe is that some of it is subjective and that one of the witnesses is a Labour parliamentary candidate, who no doubt made full disclosure of that in his interview.....How do you know which bits are impartial?
I personally wouldn't draw pictures of Mohammed just to annoy. That's just good manners. But if others do, that should not be a capital offence, or indeed any offence (unless it's against good taste).
In Pakistan, it would risk death. If you believe they are allowed to impose that style of justice here, then ... there's nothing more to be said, is there?.
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said." So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
More accurately it is one news story that the BBC is reporting today a long way down it's home page:
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
@isam - Press stories about right to buy always show flats in tower blocks. In Camden, a lot of the original council housing stock consisted of the Victorian terraced, semi and detached properties that now sell for millions. It was the same in Islington, Hackney and other parts of inner North London. I guess the same applied south of the river too. I know a fair few people who bought their nice Victorian four bedroomed council houses for a song and are now sitting pretty in houses worth well over a million. Something to bear in mind when the Mansion Tax is discussed, of course.
But I will make my point again. If the the jewish community that you speak of were to be 5% of the uk population, I have little doubt that the conflict between them and the rest of the country would increase to Islamic proportions. It is all about the numbers
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said." So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
More accurately it is one news story that the BBC is reporting today a long way down it's home page:
Of course, the further you drill into the BBC website the more prominent the story becomes. But that is very different from it being "the news that the BBC is promoting this morning".
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
"I have respect for religious observance. I don't have respect for forced subservience. Can you not see the difference?"
Of course I can. That's precisely the point I'm trying to make (obviously badly) In the hysteria people like Alison Pearson are deliberately blurring the edges and in their ignorance trying to make religious rituals and traditions part of a demonic cult which somehow all Muslims are a part of. Their ignorance is so great and their audience so willing they manage to get away with persuading even intelligent people that this is the case.
I happen to have a close relative who having come under the influence of a young charismatic rabbi at university is now at least as fundamentalist-though in a nice way-as any Muslim. It is to live in another world and to read the likes of Alison Pearson deliberately confusing issues is frankly depressing
"Galloway marching to protest defamation of his prophet"
I applaud his drawing attention the the hypocricy and double standards in the Charlie Hebdo affair. Britain marching arm in arm with the Saudis who everyone with any knowledge of the region knows is the most most mysoginystic country on the planet. What's more had these cartoons appeared as fliers in Riyadh the cartoonist would amost certainly have been publically executed.
This morning Indigo linked to an article about te pernicious effects of Islam in the UK castigating segregated classrooms found in six east London schools. Well the fastest growing religious sect is the Haidim who are not permitted any contact with the opposite sex let alone to share a classroom with them. What's more all their marriages are 'arranged'. So what?
It's nothing short of blind prejudice which owes more to the 'foreignness' of most Muslims than their religious practices and I applaud Galloway for pointing it out.
When we start being blown up and having our cartoonist machine gunned by the Haidim I imagine people will be more concerned. Liberal handwringing and human rights obsessions are ultimately going to get people killed, which was really the point of that article I think.
Dont you think we should be even a little upset about being the FGM capital of Europe, to the extent that little girls are being brought here in a kind of reverse health tourism to have it done to them. Or is the rights of that minority not to be offended and interfered with by our laws more important. Funnily enough when asked with an FoI what the total arrest numbers were the Met Police rejected the request on the basis that is was too expensive to find out! But the number of arrests is a small handful and the number of prosecutions would have been even easier to count, since its zero.
Sorry, what are Haidim?
Oh I see now, Hasidim. Well, Hasidim are a fast growing minority among British Jews, one incidentally, that I deplore and abhor. However Indigo is right in that they will never pick up arms to hurt a fellow man, they won't even go into the Israeli army to defend their country. In fact they would prefer that there be no Israel until the Messiah comes. I figure it another religious aberration of people who can see no bright future for themselves.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
I agree. One of the reforms the Tories were talking about - and I think was done by some councils but it has gone quite - was time limited tenancies (e.g. 5 years) with a review of need at the end.
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you will all have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
I agree. One of the reforms the Tories were talking about - and I think was done by some councils but it has gone quite - was time limited tenancies (e.g. 5 years) with a review of need at the end.
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
"I have respect for religious observance. I don't have respect for forced subservience. Can you not see the difference?"
Of course I can. That's precisely the point I'm trying to make (obviously badly) In the hysteria people like Alison Pearson are deliberately blurring the edges and in their ignorance trying to make religious rituals and traditions part of a demonic cult which somehow all Muslims are a part of. Their ignorance is so great and their audience so willing they manage to get away with persuading even intelligent people that this is the case.
I happen to have a close relative who having come under the influence of a young charismatic rabbi at university is now at least as fundamentalist-though in a nice way-as any Muslim. It is to live in another world and to read the likes of Alison Pearson deliberately confusing issues is frankly depressing
What is so depressing is that you cannot see the difference between fundamentalist in a nice way and fundamentalists who want to kill us all, including you.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
Yes.
Wikipedia:
Frank Dobson has been the subject of controversy for living in a council flat whilst on a six figure ministerial salary. He continues to live in it, despite owning a large property in Yorkshire. In an interview in July 2014, he responded to this criticism, saying: "I first lived there when we were subtenants of a subtenant of a private landlord. We were then sold to Camden council. What should I have done? Exercised the right to buy, which I voted against?"
Consumers are being denied energy price cuts of as much as £130 a year because of Ed Miliband’s price freeze proposal, experts have claimed.
Energy companies are failing to pass on the full falls in wholesale prices because they are afraid they will not be able to cover their costs if prices rise again under a Labour Government, industry analysts say.
Companies should be able to afford to cut prices by "a double-figures percentage", Ann Robinson of price comparison site uswitch said, with average gas and electricity bills currently about £1,300 a year.
This has played out EXACTLY as I predicted within hours of Miliband announcing it in his 2013 conference speech.
I said at the time that come the election, it would be clear that if you wanted to cut energy prices, you should vote Conservative. Energy companies were always going to build a war chest to combat the uncertainty to long-term planning that Labour's cack-handed policy would make inevitable.
What is so depressing is that you cannot see the difference between fundamentalist in a nice way and fundamentalists who want to kill us all, including you.
"A liberal is a conservative that hasn't been mugged", or possibly shot at for drawing the wrong sort of cartoons.
Still looking at the VI/Leader ratings from IPSOS MORI
To achieve Farage like levels of popularity, Cameron would need to have a positive leader rating of 15 while the Tories VI is 33
A work in progress perhaps...
If David Cameron had positive leader ratings of 15, the Conservatives would not be on 33.
For the major two parties, leader ratings and party polling are heavily interconnected. This is less true of minor party leaders, as Nick Clegg found out in 2010.
"I have respect for religious observance. I don't have respect for forced subservience. Can you not see the difference?"
Of course I can. That's precisely the point I'm trying to make (obviously badly) In the hysteria people like Alison Pearson are deliberately blurring the edges and in their ignorance trying to make religious rituals and traditions part of a demonic cult which somehow all Muslims are a part of. Their ignorance is so great and their audience so willing they manage to get away with persuading even intelligent people that this is the case.
I happen to have a close relative who having come under the influence of a young charismatic rabbi at university is now at least as fundamentalist-though in a nice way-as any Muslim. It is to live in another world and to read the likes of Alison Pearson deliberately confusing issues is frankly depressing
Do stop telling people that you know what they think, better than they themselves do. This stuff about demonic cults is just plain silly, and your what=about-the-Jews obsession is beginning to look seriously creepy.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
If they could dispute the facts cited then they could have done so. The CQC issue a draft report for accuracy checks before the final one.
Still not answered on which bits of the report you see as biased...
How could I know which bits are biased? All I can observe is that some of it is subjective and that one of the witnesses is a Labour parliamentary candidate, who no doubt made full disclosure of that in his interview.....How do you know which bits are impartial?
A lot of the facts are In the report. DNR orders not documented, equipment not serviced, staff training inadequate etc.
Failure to document such things before a planned CQC visit shows a casual attitude at best, and in itself points to poor management control. All very easy to disprove if the records exist.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
If they could dispute the facts cited then they could have done so. The CQC issue a draft report for accuracy checks before the final one.
Still not answered on which bits of the report you see as biased...
How could I know which bits are biased? All I can observe is that some of it is subjective and that one of the witnesses is a Labour parliamentary candidate, who no doubt made full disclosure of that in his interview.....How do you know which bits are impartial?
A lot of the facts are In the report. DNR orders not documented, equipment not serviced, staff training inadequate etc.
Failure to document such things before a planned CQC visit shows a casual attitude at best, and in itself points to poor management control. All very easy to disprove if the records exist.
Still looking at the VI/Leader ratings from IPSOS MORI
To achieve Farage like levels of popularity, Cameron would need to have a positive leader rating of 15 while the Tories VI is 33
A work in progress perhaps...
If David Cameron had positive leader ratings of 15, the Conservatives would not be on 33.
For the major two parties, leader ratings and party polling are heavily interconnected. This is less true of minor party leaders, as Nick Clegg found out in 2010.
Yes, clever clogs, that was the implication of "A work in progress perhaps..."
William Hill have now put up prices for quite a lot of Scottish constituencies.
I've put up quite enough posts on Scotland recently and don't intend putting up another in the near future, but I thought others might find this useful.
I think that there are still some bargains here. The SNP are second favourites in the bulk of these seats, in stark contrast to what you would expect from their current poll ratings.
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
And a Labour PCC is a disinterested observer.......
He was not part of the CQC team, he was a doctor at the Trust who was interviewed.
That still does not make him a 'disinterested observer'.
I have no doubt he declared his political ambitions to the CQC.
Yes I did read the report - while some of it was objective (like the poor DNR processes) other parts were subjective - lets see what emerges with time.
I am sure we are all concerned about the patients.
The Labour PC tweeted his concern about the staff.......
Circle could have disputed its accuracy if they wanted, but they did not do so.
A spokesman for Circle added: “We intend to request a ratings review.
“We believe the report was unbalanced and does not reflect the hospital.”
If they could dispute the facts cited then they could have done so. The CQC issue a draft report for accuracy checks before the final one.
Still not answered on which bits of the report you see as biased...
How could I know which bits are biased? All I can observe is that some of it is subjective and that one of the witnesses is a Labour parliamentary candidate, who no doubt made full disclosure of that in his interview.....How do you know which bits are impartial?
A lot of the facts are In the report. DNR orders not documented, equipment not serviced, staff training inadequate etc.
Failure to document such things before a planned CQC visit shows a casual attitude at best, and in itself points to poor management control. All very easy to disprove if the records exist.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Still looking at the VI/Leader ratings from IPSOS MORI
To achieve Farage like levels of popularity, Cameron would need to have a positive leader rating of 15 while the Tories VI is 33
A work in progress perhaps...
If David Cameron had positive leader ratings of 15, the Conservatives would not be on 33.
For the major two parties, leader ratings and party polling are heavily interconnected. This is less true of minor party leaders, as Nick Clegg found out in 2010.
Yes, clever clogs, that was the implication of "A work in progress perhaps..."
I was trying to be helpful. It's an interesting problem: how to correlate the two bits of information to get comparative performance. I'm not yet convinced you can do more than look at the headline leadership ratings. But I concede that doesn't identify how much support a leader gets simply by being leader of his party.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Still looking at the VI/Leader ratings from IPSOS MORI
To achieve Farage like levels of popularity, Cameron would need to have a positive leader rating of 15 while the Tories VI is 33
A work in progress perhaps...
If David Cameron had positive leader ratings of 15, the Conservatives would not be on 33.
For the major two parties, leader ratings and party polling are heavily interconnected. This is less true of minor party leaders, as Nick Clegg found out in 2010.
Yes, clever clogs, that was the implication of "A work in progress perhaps..."
I was trying to be helpful. It's an interesting problem how to correlate the two bits of information to get comparative performance. I'm not yet convinced you can do more than look at the headline leadership ratings. But I concede that doesn't identify how much support a leader gets simply by being leader of his party.
I am sorry, that read worse than I meant it to sound.. imagine someone you liked and get on with saying it in person?
From June-Nov 2010 Cameron did indeed have a positive rating of between 15-31
At the time the Conservatives were polling / Cameron was rated
Jun 39 +21 Jul 40 +23 Sep 37 +24 Oct 39 +15 Nov 36 +1
Using my method only in July would he have topped the current Farage rating.. I think there is something to be gleaned from this, but doint think I have found it yet.
It seems it should be harder to be popular as PM , but I don't buy that Farage "should" be more popular, given the polling that shows UKIP as the least liked party etc.
Also the basic maths means the bigger parties have a bigger pool of supporters and fewer that don't support them which should be to their advantage
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Moses- pre 2010 we had 3 quarters of growth unmatched since. Since 2010, deficit has barely reduced (just a third and stalling) and debt has almost doubled. I'd suggest this govt is not running the economy very well.
Welcome , sure you will be getting brickbats pretty soon from the Tory fan boys on here for daring to suggest that they should encourage fairness rather than filling their chums pockets.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
I don't buy that. Terrorism is at least as common in parts of the world where Muslims are in the majority and even in government.
I dont buy it either, only today we had a group of people killed in rioting about Charlie Hebdo in Niger, a country so Islamic you could almost count the population of Christians on your fingers. One wonders how they people in the streets there knew about a magazine published to small circulation several thousand miles away in another country, could be a collection of religious leaders telling people they should be outraged about it could it ? As coincidence had it they vented their anger on one Catholic and two Protestant churches part of a religion that represents less than 1% of the population.
How many deep south baptists in the USA after hearing about the shootings in France from their fire and brimstone pastor, decided to run out and burn down the local mosque...
"I don't buy that. Terrorism is at least as common in parts of the world where Muslims are in the majority and even in government. "
Yes that's because it's not always muslims that are the terrorists. Terrorists are ususally the significant minorities.. the fact that significant minorities at this stage of world history are muslims is incidental
How do you explain
(a) Countries with extremism and violence where there are not a significant amount of Muslims
(b) Countries where there are lots of Muslims and not much terrorism
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Apart from the middle classes 'employed' in the third sector who with the aid of their Labour chums are milking it big time.
Mr. Wisemann, entirely unfair and factually wrong, given the blues and reds are more or less tied in the current polling.
Mildly amused you attacked Mr. Herdson for his 'partisan' article in a post attacking 'PB Tories' and suggesting their worldview is as popular as ebola. You silly sausage, you.
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
I tell you what. Put some nice big taxes on the rich, 60% on over 100k, 75% over 250k why not. Might as well tax capital gains as income as well. Put on the mansion tax, add a couple more band at the top of council tax. Really soak the rich and spend it on equalising society.
For about 10 minutes, once most of the rich 1% leave the country, the rich 1% that pay 30% of the tax, you might find you have to close the NHS, and stop paying most of the welfare.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
It’s daft isn’t it. And I’m one who can buy the damn’ things!
Must be up there with half-crowns to voters in the pub 150 years ago!
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Another risible Labour shill crawls out the woodwork. I guess we should expect a plague of them until May....
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
It is when they do not have smaller alternatives to offer them. Also looks good being done by people who have multiple spare rooms in all of their multiple houses. Always seems fair as you suck on your silver spoon as Jeeves polishes your shoes, pondering which of your houses you will stay in next week irritated that the peasants expect to only have one person per bedroom.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
I agree. One of the reforms the Tories were talking about - and I think was done by some councils but it has gone quite - was time limited tenancies (e.g. 5 years) with a review of need at the end.
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
Are Tory MP's still milking their publicly paid free second or third houses.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
Last week I went to a photographic exhibition of Oscar winning actors and actresses. The phototographs were all shot in studio and had obviously taken quite a bit of the sitters time. i hadn't heard of the photographer and wondered how an unknown was able to assemble such a stellar cast
Apparantly he'd written to 300 Oscar winning actors and actresses and had only received one reply. It was from Joss Ackland who agreed to sit. During the session he asked Joss who his favourite Oscar winning actor was and then wrote to that actor saying Joss Ackland had chosen him as his favourite actor and could he do a portrait. He repeated this technique for the next two years until he ended up with this unique body of work.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
It is when they do not have smaller alternatives to offer them. Also looks good being done by people who have multiple spare rooms in all of their multiple houses. Always seems fair as you suck on your silver spoon as Jeeves polishes your shoes, pondering which of your houses you will stay in next week irritated that the peasants expect to only have one person per bedroom.
Ah yes, a policy piloted by that notorious blue blooded aristocrat Eric Pickles.
@MarqueeMark At least we have your unbiased and astute obsevations to balance the smears and lies of the rabid communists.
My immediate analysis of the consequences of Ed's energy price freeze was pretty damn bang on the money. What is your contribution here outside of endless smart-arsery?
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Another risible Labour shill crawls out the woodwork. I guess we should expect a plague of them until May....
LOL, another example shows how nasty Tories really are , vile twisted bitter nasty c****
My point though isn't to excuse anyone from terrorist acts, but to try and say that the structure of society is to blame for conflicts not the philosophies of the groups that make up society
Cowboys & Indians White & Black South Africans Nazis & Jews Australians & Aboriginees Prtestants & Catholics Mormons & Christians
All have been the players in power struggles over time, and now it seems to be muslims vs...
But I am saying it is wrong to analyse the Koran and pick out bits that justify terrorism because
a) You could do that with any religious book b) Why are there so many muslims, to the point that you could say almost all of them, that aren't terrorists if it is so?
Its all about numbers..
I love the book "The Count of Monte Cristo" and would like it if people lived according to the Counts teachings.. but if enough people did, there is enough in there that condones violence as well as rejects it that if 1.2bn people followed it, thousands would be terrorists in the name of Edmond Dantes
@MarqueeMark Usually to read the utter drivel from a minority of posters for my amusement, and to discuss with the others. What's your excuse for oxygen usage?
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
It is when they do not have smaller alternatives to offer them. Also looks good being done by people who have multiple spare rooms in all of their multiple houses. Always seems fair as you suck on your silver spoon as Jeeves polishes your shoes, pondering which of your houses you will stay in next week irritated that the peasants expect to only have one person per bedroom.
Ah yes, a policy piloted by that notorious blue blooded aristocrat Eric Pickles.
The fat trougher will have his pockets full for sure, I do not imagine he is short of bedrooms or much else given the evidence. The silver spoon boys always need a few greedy grasping roughs to justify themselves as not being out of touch rich moronic cretins.
Last week I went to a photographic exhibition of Oscar winning actors and actresses. The phototographs were all shot in studio and had obviously taken quite a bit of the sitters time. i hadn't heard of the photographer and wondered how an unknown was able to assemble such a stellar cast
Apparantly he'd written to 300 Oscar winning actors and actresses and had only received one reply. It was from Joss Ackland who agreed to sit. During the session he asked Joss who his favourite Oscar winning actor was and then wrote to that actor saying Joss Ackland had chosen him as his favourite actor and could he do a portrait. He repeated this technique for the next two years until he ended up with this unique body of work.
What a waste of time chasing a bunch of arse wipes to take pictures of their ugly mushes. Who other than cretins would be interested.
@MarqueeMark Usually to read the utter drivel from a minority of posters for my amusement, and to discuss with the others. What's your excuse for oxygen usage?
To pay vast amounts of Income Tax, so you can stay home in your pants being such a decorated keyboard warrior.....
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog)
David is one of the blogs most regular and most appreciated writers and commentators
Last week I went to a photographic exhibition of Oscar winning actors and actresses. The phototographs were all shot in studio and had obviously taken quite a bit of the sitters time. i hadn't heard of the photographer and wondered how an unknown was able to assemble such a stellar cast
Apparantly he'd written to 300 Oscar winning actors and actresses and had only received one reply. It was from Joss Ackland who agreed to sit. During the session he asked Joss who his favourite Oscar winning actor was and then wrote to that actor saying Joss Ackland had chosen him as his favourite actor and could he do a portrait. He repeated this technique for the next two years until he ended up with this unique body of work.
What a waste of time chasing a bunch of arse wipes to take pictures of their ugly mushes. Who other than cretins would be interested.
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Another risible Labour shill crawls out the woodwork. I guess we should expect a plague of them until May....
LOL, another example shows how nasty Tories really are , vile twisted bitter nasty c****
It still hurts doesn't it, being told by a southern turnip how you would fail to get Independence - and why.
We feel your pain. It gives us turnips a good laugh, knowing we have a better handle on the Scottish mind-set than you.
(b) Countries where there are lots of Muslims and not much terrorism
Name five
Ha well...
Thats what I thought. How can I put it, there are 25 countries with 95% or greater islamic population. ALL of those currently have Home Office terrorism warnings out on them.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
It is when they do not have smaller alternatives to offer them. Also looks good being done by people who have multiple spare rooms in all of their multiple houses. Always seems fair as you suck on your silver spoon as Jeeves polishes your shoes, pondering which of your houses you will stay in next week irritated that the peasants expect to only have one person per bedroom.
The constraints on supply are the biggest issue, but they have tried house-swapping in the past and, typically, people don't move unless they have an incentive to do so.
As for the rest of your post: I'm planning to stay in my 2 bedroom flat, as I usually do...
The SNP have started publishing the YouGov/Sun aggregation for Scotland. No big change at the top - SNP 44% (+ 2%) - Labour 27 % (n/c). Interestingly UKIP are up 2% to 7%, I think they will continue to strengthen, would be interesting to know how this breaks down geographically.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
I agree. One of the reforms the Tories were talking about - and I think was done by some councils but it has gone quite - was time limited tenancies (e.g. 5 years) with a review of need at the end.
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
Are Tory MP's still milking their publicly paid free second or third houses.
There is a fundamental difference.
I don't agree with the expenses system for MPs. But it is not the same as a very well paid individual living in housing that is provided for the poor.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
I very occasionally watch celebrity versions of programmes, but they are inevitably spoiled by the presenters trying to push their tongue firmly up the celebrities' bums. Usually someone I've never heard of, who was an extra in a soap once, but has a pantomime appearance to plug.
They seldom know the rules of the game show or listen to anyone's answer, happy to bask in the mutual adoration from their fellow 'artists'.
There must be a few genuinely nice ones but they seem scarce.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
I read The Clash of Civilizations at university and had to write about it in an exam. I generally gave it quite a positive review and agreed with a lot of what Huntington said.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
I read The Clash of Civilizations at university and had to write about it in an exam. I generally gave it quite a positive review and agreed with a lot of what Huntington said.
Naturally I didn't get a very good mark!
It's difficult agreeing with controversial theories!
(I only read it because the alternative was the Metro...)
Snowing, again, but despite that just got a large (A4 and folded over twice) piece which is from the Conservatives [although they don't plaster their image over it]. The 'front' a picture of Miliband and Cameron, either side of Downing Street. I wonder if Miliband will be more prominent on blue than red literature.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
Mony a mickle makes a muckle, Charles, and I was highlighting an absurdity rather than making a serious proposal.
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
For 10 days or so I have been trying to make the point that it isn't necessarily the teachings of Islam to blame for the fact that most terrorists are Muslims, but the fact that they are the the significant minority
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
I read The Clash of Civilizations at university and had to write about it in an exam. I generally gave it quite a positive review and agreed with a lot of what Huntington said.
Naturally I didn't get a very good mark!
It's difficult agreeing with controversial theories!
(I only read it because the alternative was the Metro...)
I can't remember what Huntington has to say on how we should approach the situation, but what really annoys me is the denial that the situation exists.
What the met elite don't get is how unusual the West's tolerance towards people of other faiths is. I think it's great that we are tolerant. But the rest of the world is very different and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.
"Galloway marching to protest defamation of his prophet"
I applaud his drawing attention the the hypocricy and double standards in the Charlie Hebdo affair. Britain marching arm in arm with the Saudis who everyone with any knowledge of the region knows is the most most mysoginystic country on the planet. What's more had these cartoons appeared as fliers in Riyadh the cartoonist would amost certainly have been publically executed.
This morning Indigo linked to an article about te pernicious effects of Islam in the UK castigating segregated classrooms found in six east London schools. Well the fastest growing religious sect is the Hasidim who are not permitted any contact with the opposite sex let alone to share a classroom with them. What's more all their marriages are 'arranged'. So what?
It's nothing short of blind prejudice which owes more to the 'foreignness' of most Muslims rather than their religious practices and I applaud Galloway for pointing it out.
While there may be double standards here, "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Just because we cosy up to nasty governments that suppress free speech, it doesn't follow that we should restrict free speech in this country.
Last week I went to a photographic exhibition of Oscar winning actors and actresses. The phototographs were all shot in studio and had obviously taken quite a bit of the sitters time. i hadn't heard of the photographer and wondered how an unknown was able to assemble such a stellar cast
Apparantly he'd written to 300 Oscar winning actors and actresses and had only received one reply. It was from Joss Ackland who agreed to sit. During the session he asked Joss who his favourite Oscar winning actor was and then wrote to that actor saying Joss Ackland had chosen him as his favourite actor and could he do a portrait. He repeated this technique for the next two years until he ended up with this unique body of work.
What a waste of time chasing a bunch of arse wipes to take pictures of their ugly mushes. Who other than cretins would be interested.
Happy new year, Malcolm.
Ishmael, thankyou , same to you I hope it is a happy and prosperous one for you and your family.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
The 4% interest on the pensioner bond is taxable. So borrowing at 3.6% to fund the purchase, you are likely to end up making a loss.
I very occasionally watch celebrity versions of programmes, but they are inevitably spoiled by the presenters trying to push their tongue firmly up the celebrities' bums. Usually someone I've never heard of, who was an extra in a soap once, but has a pantomime appearance to plug.
They seldom know the rules of the game show or listen to anyone's answer, happy to bask in the mutual adoration from their fellow 'artists'.
There must be a few genuinely nice ones but they seem scarce.
CD , totally agree, a few nice ones for sure but majority are obnoxious grasping nonentities.
Mr. Charles, reminds me of a theory, think it was by Roy F. Baumeister, that, collectively, men have a flatter normal curve with higher extremities, and women have a bit more of a spike in the middle. In other words, men vary more and are likelier to be atrocious or amazing, whereas women vary less and are more reliable.
I mentioned it (years ago now) on another site. Many of the women who replied had no problem agreeing men were likelier to be rapists, murderers, generally violent, stupid or have learning disabilities, but were angered and utterly disagreed with the notion men were likelier to be geniuses, heroic or amazing leaders.
When we see prison populations have more than 10 men for every woman everyone agrees men are just more violent. When we see FTSE 100 boards being dominated by men, there's a consensus that's sexism preventing women reaching their full potential.
The same thing happened with education when boys did better it was because the exams were wrong (so they changed from one-off massive exams to modular examinations and much coursework). Girls did better, and that's because boys are less intelligent. Apparently.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Indeed, it's absolutely outrageous that market leading returns on cash are only on offer to pensioners.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
The 4% interest on the pensioner bond is taxable. So borrowing at 3.6% to fund the purchase, you are likely to end up making a loss.
Point already made. I did indeed miss it, thinking the bonds were tax-free like indexed bonds. But lots of over 65 yos are non-taxpayers, including some very well-heeled ones with everything stashed in ISAs.
You could also get your children to borrow the money for you on a 1.99% 2 year mortgage and go for the one year bond. You then still make even after 20% tax.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
Mony a mickle makes a muckle, Charles, and I was highlighting an absurdity rather than making a serious proposal.
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
Mr. Charles, reminds me of a theory, think it was by Roy F. Baumeister, that, collectively, men have a flatter normal curve with higher extremities, and women have a bit more of a spike in the middle. In other words, men vary more and are likelier to be atrocious or amazing, whereas women vary less and are more reliable.
I mentioned it (years ago now) on another site. Many of the women who replied had no problem agreeing men were likelier to be rapists, murderers, generally violent, stupid or have learning disabilities, but were angered and utterly disagreed with the notion men were likelier to be geniuses, heroic or amazing leaders.
When we see prison populations have more than 10 men for every woman everyone agrees men are just more violent. When we see FTSE 100 boards being dominated by men, there's a consensus that's sexism preventing women reaching their full potential.
The same thing happened with education when boys did better it was because the exams were wrong (so they changed from one-off massive exams to modular examinations and much coursework). Girls did better, and that's because boys are less intelligent. Apparently.
Many people demand equal treatment, up to the point that it becomes inconvenient, when they demand special treatment. Some feminists will argue that women should not face the same degree of criminal responsibility that men face, which was essentially the position in medieval England.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
If people can afford to buy property in London - even with a £100,000 subsidy - they do not need council accommodation and can be moved out of it.
I agree. One of the reforms the Tories were talking about - and I think was done by some councils but it has gone quite - was time limited tenancies (e.g. 5 years) with a review of need at the end.
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
Are Tory MP's still milking their publicly paid free second or third houses.
There is a fundamental difference.
I don't agree with the expenses system for MPs. But it is not the same as a very well paid individual living in housing that is provided for the poor.
I am not sure social housing is allocated based on whether you are poor or not , even if it should be. However given that Tories are willing to pay money to people in social housing that can afford to borrow to buy and so make a killing, whilst taking money off really really poor people for being unfortunate enough o have a spare room kind of points out the reality. Only millionaires with so many rooms and so much money they never have to think about it could ever think that this is fair. This is why Tories are so hated and reviled, they will happily give largesse to their chums and equals whilst berating any poor person and taking what meagre amount they have off them just for being poor. I am right wing and do not think people should get a free lifestyle for nothing but Tories just seem to be so petty and nasty and only ever pick on the poorest and weakest in society.
Here's a double standard for you: the government will subsidise someone up to £100,000 to buy their council accommodation in Camden and will not take a second look at the number of bedrooms that person needs or the accommodation provides. However, if that same person was out of work and had a bedroom he/she did not immediately need the government would cut his/her benefits. Lovely.
Because they are different policies to achieve different things.
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
It is when they do not have smaller alternatives to offer them. Also looks good being done by people who have multiple spare rooms in all of their multiple houses. Always seems fair as you suck on your silver spoon as Jeeves polishes your shoes, pondering which of your houses you will stay in next week irritated that the peasants expect to only have one person per bedroom.
The constraints on supply are the biggest issue, but they have tried house-swapping in the past and, typically, people don't move unless they have an incentive to do so.
As for the rest of your post: I'm planning to stay in my 2 bedroom flat, as I usually do...
Yes and I bet it is bigger than 5 social houses and will be just one of many.
PS Charles, the shortage is due to them selling them off at rock bottom prices and squandering the proceeds. They are good at selling stuff they do not own and wasting the cash mind you. Most of them will be in hands of Tory Rachmann's by now ,milking the public purse on huge rents.
Mr. F, aye. The Corston Report of over a decade ago suggested women should never go to prison but should live together in little communities of something like 8-20, spending their time doing things like shopping and cooking.
It also suggested prisoners were designed for men, that women could be coerced into crime and that women being incarcerated could mean they might not see their children.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
Mony a mickle makes a muckle, Charles, and I was highlighting an absurdity rather than making a serious proposal.
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
Who are your solicitors?
If I could find any that cheap...
PROFIT, not hourly rate. If your solicitors are clearing 250 an hour they must be charging you 750+. Are they?
Isam "But I will make my point again. If the the jewish community that you speak of were to be 5% of the uk population, I have little doubt that the conflict between them and the rest of the country would increase to Islamic proportions. It is all about the numbers".
Off the top of my head, Christians represent over 5% of the population in Syria, Egypt, Iraq (until recently), Jordan, Malaysia and Indonesia. Not to mention lots of countries dominated by other religions (Sri Lanka etc). But I don't recall reading about any terrorist threat from them
For PB Tories (including the writer of this execrable article whose ideologically partisan tenor and narrow-minded assumptions do not seem at home on this blog) it would appear that the main problem is the seeming inability to imagine any world other than one in which a tiny minority of feral rich continue to concentrate wealth and resources ad infinitum whilst the living standards of the middle classes are left to collapse. There is no question where 'there is no alternative' is not the answer. And they wonder why this worldview is about as popular as Ebola.
Another risible Labour shill crawls out the woodwork. I guess we should expect a plague of them until May....
LOL, another example shows how nasty Tories really are , vile twisted bitter nasty c****
It still hurts doesn't it, being told by a southern turnip how you would fail to get Independence - and why.
We feel your pain. It gives us turnips a good laugh, knowing we have a better handle on the Scottish mind-set than you.
The only handle you had was on the cash to bribe people. Will not be so lucky next time.
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
Mony a mickle makes a muckle, Charles, and I was highlighting an absurdity rather than making a serious proposal.
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
Who are your solicitors?
If I could find any that cheap...
PROFIT, not hourly rate. If your solicitors are clearing 250 an hour they must be charging you 750+. Are they?
Pre-tax profit margins are much higher than that for professional service firms!
(I generally avoid using lawyers. The US tax specialists that I have to work with charge £600 an hour and that's not even for a partner!)
Not a big vote winner for the non baby boomers who aren't eligible. Just another example of the Government featherbedding the past while it whips the present.
Yes. And a sale of £5 notes for £4 each to the over-65s, or any other segment of society, would also be "hugely successful".
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
Although that only works if you're not a taxpayer. Otherwise, you'll pay tax on interest receieved, which will make you a loser.
And also if you underprice your time and effort: a 0.3% spread on £10,000 is worth about £30 per year
Mony a mickle makes a muckle, Charles, and I was highlighting an absurdity rather than making a serious proposal.
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
Who are your solicitors?
If I could find any that cheap...
PROFIT, not hourly rate. If your solicitors are clearing 250 an hour they must be charging you 750+. Are they?
They know he is so loaded he would not even look at the bill, it would be a flunky writing the cheque so would not matter.
Comments
Still not answered on which bits of the report you see as biased...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30860010
"The Tories should be much more worried about Labour leader Ed Miliband than UKIP's Nigel Farage during the general election campaign, former Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said."
So sayeth pompous Patten; a real greaseball if ever there was one.
'Promised to maintain the freeze on public sector pay'
is not the same as 'won't commit to end the freeze'.
What he's committed to is holding to coalition spending plan in 2015/16, and if ministers want to go above the already announced 1% increases, they'll have to find the money themselves.....
But I will make my point again. If the the jewish community that you speak of were to be 5% of the uk population, I have little doubt that the conflict between them and the rest of the country would increase to Islamic proportions. It is all about the numbers
The answer to the first is probably almost none, since Labour is near it core vote at the moment, they would all join the Greens, with a few to the LDs. The second might make 5% difference in the polls for the Cons. Ergo I dont believe Labour is a threat to the Tories at all, its not taking any of their votes, its just the consequence of them failing to inspire enough of their voters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk/
I'll make things a little clearer for you.
I personally wouldn't draw pictures of Mohammed just to annoy. That's just good manners. But if others do, that should not be a capital offence, or indeed any offence (unless it's against good taste).
In Pakistan, it would risk death. If you believe they are allowed to impose that style of justice here, then ... there's nothing more to be said, is there?.
http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/
In selling social housing into the private sector, the government has decided that this is a good thing and should be incentivised.
They then have to look how to optimise usage of the remaining social housing space. The argument is simply that, with limited social housing, the tax payer should meet the cost of peoples' *needs*. If they *want* extra then is it so unreasonable to ask them to contribute towards that cost?
I'd have thought the old curtains are perfectly fine for another few years
Niger is 99% Islamic...
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
http://sociology.about.com/od/Sociological-Theory/a/Conflict-Theory.htm
"I have respect for religious observance. I don't have respect for forced subservience. Can you not see the difference?"
Of course I can. That's precisely the point I'm trying to make (obviously badly) In the hysteria people like Alison Pearson are deliberately blurring the edges and in their ignorance trying to make religious rituals and traditions part of a demonic cult which somehow all Muslims are a part of. Their ignorance is so great and their audience so willing they manage to get away with persuading even intelligent people that this is the case.
I happen to have a close relative who having come under the influence of a young charismatic rabbi at university is now at least as fundamentalist-though in a nice way-as any Muslim. It is to live in another world and to read the likes of Alison Pearson deliberately confusing issues is frankly depressing
To achieve Farage like levels of popularity, Cameron would need to have a positive leader rating of 15 while the Tories VI is 33
A work in progress perhaps...
Well, Hasidim are a fast growing minority among British Jews, one incidentally, that I deplore and abhor. However Indigo is right in that they will never pick up arms to hurt a fellow man, they won't even go into the Israeli army to defend their country. In fact they would prefer that there be no Israel until the Messiah comes. I figure it another religious aberration of people who can see no bright future for themselves.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Clash-Civilizations-Remaking-World/dp/074323149X
Social housing is a precious community resource and should be used to create the maximum benefit possible.
Is Frank Dobson still living in his council flat by the way?
Wikipedia:
I said at the time that come the election, it would be clear that if you wanted to cut energy prices, you should vote Conservative. Energy companies were always going to build a war chest to combat the uncertainty to long-term planning that Labour's cack-handed policy would make inevitable.
For the major two parties, leader ratings and party polling are heavily interconnected. This is less true of minor party leaders, as Nick Clegg found out in 2010.
Failure to document such things before a planned CQC visit shows a casual attitude at best, and in itself points to poor management control. All very easy to disprove if the records exist.
Obviously now this will be my latest obsession and you wil lalll have to pay for that.
But I have come across "conflict theory" which seems to be what I am talking about.. if there is no dominant narrative to keep order,there will be a fragmented society and disorder
http://sociology.about.com/od/Sociological-Theory/a/Conflict-Theory.htm
I don't buy that. Terrorism is at least as common in parts of the world where Muslims are in the majority and even in government. A lot of the facts are In the report. DNR orders not documented, equipment not serviced, staff training inadequate etc.
Failure to document such things before a planned CQC visit shows a casual attitude at best, and in itself points to poor management control. All very easy to disprove if the records exist.
How does it compare with Stafford?
Edit to add: you could actually arb the 4% bond by borrowing from M&S bank or Zopa at 3.6/3.7% to buy it. So it really is free money.
From June-Nov 2010 Cameron did indeed have a positive rating of between 15-31
At the time the Conservatives were polling / Cameron was rated
Jun 39 +21
Jul 40 +23
Sep 37 +24
Oct 39 +15
Nov 36 +1
Using my method only in July would he have topped the current Farage rating.. I think there is something to be gleaned from this, but doint think I have found it yet.
It seems it should be harder to be popular as PM , but I don't buy that Farage "should" be more popular, given the polling that shows UKIP as the least liked party etc.
Also the basic maths means the bigger parties have a bigger pool of supporters and fewer that don't support them which should be to their advantage
In Aug 2011 Tory 40 Cam -3
In Sep 2011 Tory 35 Cam -3
How many deep south baptists in the USA after hearing about the shootings in France from their fire and brimstone pastor, decided to run out and burn down the local mosque...
"I don't buy that. Terrorism is at least as common in parts of the world where Muslims are in the majority and even in government. "
Yes that's because it's not always muslims that are the terrorists. Terrorists are ususally the significant minorities.. the fact that significant minorities at this stage of world history are muslims is incidental
How do you explain
(a) Countries with extremism and violence where there are not a significant amount of Muslims
(b) Countries where there are lots of Muslims and not much terrorism
Mildly amused you attacked Mr. Herdson for his 'partisan' article in a post attacking 'PB Tories' and suggesting their worldview is as popular as ebola. You silly sausage, you.
For about 10 minutes, once most of the rich 1% leave the country, the rich 1% that pay 30% of the tax, you might find you have to close the NHS, and stop paying most of the welfare.
Must be up there with half-crowns to voters in the pub 150 years ago!
Last week I went to a photographic exhibition of Oscar winning actors and actresses. The phototographs were all shot in studio and had obviously taken quite a bit of the sitters time. i hadn't heard of the photographer and wondered how an unknown was able to assemble such a stellar cast
Apparantly he'd written to 300 Oscar winning actors and actresses and had only received one reply. It was from Joss Ackland who agreed to sit. During the session he asked Joss who his favourite Oscar winning actor was and then wrote to that actor saying Joss Ackland had chosen him as his favourite actor and could he do a portrait. He repeated this technique for the next two years until he ended up with this unique body of work.
At least we have your unbiased and astute observations to balance the smears and lies of the rabid communists.
Here is the list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
My point though isn't to excuse anyone from terrorist acts, but to try and say that the structure of society is to blame for conflicts not the philosophies of the groups that make up society
Cowboys & Indians
White & Black South Africans
Nazis & Jews
Australians & Aboriginees
Prtestants & Catholics
Mormons & Christians
All have been the players in power struggles over time, and now it seems to be muslims vs...
But I am saying it is wrong to analyse the Koran and pick out bits that justify terrorism because
a) You could do that with any religious book
b) Why are there so many muslims, to the point that you could say almost all of them, that aren't terrorists if it is so?
Its all about numbers..
I love the book "The Count of Monte Cristo" and would like it if people lived according to the Counts teachings.. but if enough people did, there is enough in there that condones violence as well as rejects it that if 1.2bn people followed it, thousands would be terrorists in the name of Edmond Dantes
(Peace be upon him)
Usually to read the utter drivel from a minority of posters for my amusement, and to discuss with the others.
What's your excuse for oxygen usage?
We feel your pain. It gives us turnips a good laugh, knowing we have a better handle on the Scottish mind-set than you.
As for the rest of your post: I'm planning to stay in my 2 bedroom flat, as I usually do...
http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/news/file/yougov_samples.jpg
I don't agree with the expenses system for MPs. But it is not the same as a very well paid individual living in housing that is provided for the poor.
I very occasionally watch celebrity versions of programmes, but they are inevitably spoiled by the presenters trying to push their tongue firmly up the celebrities' bums. Usually someone I've never heard of, who was an extra in a soap once, but has a pantomime appearance to plug.
They seldom know the rules of the game show or listen to anyone's answer, happy to bask in the mutual adoration from their fellow 'artists'.
There must be a few genuinely nice ones but they seem scarce.
Naturally I didn't get a very good mark!
(I only read it because the alternative was the Metro...)
Furthermore it would take half an hour max to apply for the loan and the bond. £240 an hour clear tax-free profit is City-solicitor type money.
What the met elite don't get is how unusual the West's tolerance towards people of other faiths is. I think it's great that we are tolerant. But the rest of the world is very different and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.
The 4% interest on the pensioner bond is taxable. So borrowing at 3.6% to fund the purchase, you are likely to end up making a loss.
I mentioned it (years ago now) on another site. Many of the women who replied had no problem agreeing men were likelier to be rapists, murderers, generally violent, stupid or have learning disabilities, but were angered and utterly disagreed with the notion men were likelier to be geniuses, heroic or amazing leaders.
When we see prison populations have more than 10 men for every woman everyone agrees men are just more violent. When we see FTSE 100 boards being dominated by men, there's a consensus that's sexism preventing women reaching their full potential.
The same thing happened with education when boys did better it was because the exams were wrong (so they changed from one-off massive exams to modular examinations and much coursework). Girls did better, and that's because boys are less intelligent. Apparently.
You could also get your children to borrow the money for you on a 1.99% 2 year mortgage and go for the one year bond. You then still make even after 20% tax.
If I could find any that cheap...
I would guess the calculation made is that those who can take advantage will be the only ones who notice, and those too young won't pay it much heed.
PS Charles, the shortage is due to them selling them off at rock bottom prices and squandering the proceeds. They are good at selling stuff they do not own and wasting the cash mind you. Most of them will be in hands of Tory Rachmann's by now ,milking the public purse on huge rents.
It also suggested prisoners were designed for men, that women could be coerced into crime and that women being incarcerated could mean they might not see their children.
It was full of shit.
Off the top of my head, Christians represent over 5% of the population in Syria, Egypt, Iraq (until recently), Jordan, Malaysia and Indonesia. Not to mention lots of countries dominated by other religions (Sri Lanka etc). But I don't recall reading about any terrorist threat from them
(I generally avoid using lawyers. The US tax specialists that I have to work with charge £600 an hour and that's not even for a partner!)