On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
Do postal voters ever change their minds ? Also 2 week gap between each one seems excessive.
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Neil was quite disingenious in his interview with Bennett (although she did poorly with easy to address points). He was implying that the zero tax threshold costs people £10,500 per annum when it actually costs (on current tax rates) £3800.
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
You then need to consider the benefits in terms of forcing up wages at the low end to entice people into work and the tax benefits of higher low end earnings. In fact if there is a criticism of the Green's proposals it is not that Citizen's Income is unaffordable - it can be clearly shown it is affordable. The problem is that it is set too low. If you set it at the Basic State Pension rate, you remove another layer of bureaucracy, make a much bigger impact on the wage diminution which is the fundamental and so far unfixable problem at the heart of capitalism.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Yes very unfair of Andrew Neil to use his deathstare to prevent the leader of (your?) Green Party from correcting his £100bn error.
£100bn here...£100bn there...pretty soon you are talking about...
Not my party and I don't support Citizen's Income. The point I'm making is the level of dismissiveness in the media is out of all relation to the reality of the policy.
I agree that Bennett did very poorly, she should have the numbers (they are really easy to calculate) but didn't. But Neil is supposed to be an impartial broadcaster and interviewing with a clear agenda is outwith the (supposed) scope of BBC Editorial policy.
Apart from the curious way they've presented the Con and UKIP bars on the chart, the most interesting thing about that is they've chosen a message which emphasises 'working with our Conservative colleagues' so much. Somehow I don't think that will be the message in all the constituencies they are defending! Even in Sheffield Hallam, it looks a slightly high-risk approach.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
How very odd. Mr Cameron et al were quite happy to change the goalposts of indyref after most of the postal votes had been returned.
Thanks to all those who helped last night, mostly in the night shift. I think I have the Coral and Ladbrokes liblabconnom odds for the day/day before the 2010 UK General Election. It's not perfect, but it's a step forward, so thank you for your time.
It shouldn't have been so difficult to find the information.
We are so used to everything being instantly available via google, it's a wrench to find out stuff that isn't. In the past I've gotten data from looking at cover illustrations with a ruler: endless fun...:-( Dead tree storage does have its uses...
On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
How very odd. Mr Cameron et al were quite happy to change the goalposts of indyref after most of the postal votes had been returned.
Again - where is the evidence that early response postal voters are in any way inclined to float ?
Dair what about the tens of thousands of workers made unemployed when job centres shut?
I welcome the public servant cut back but do you?
I think the state could do with some shrinking but there are obvious problems with large sudden shocks. Arguably the Greens could be seen as Tatcherite in a willingness to look at long term goals over short term pain.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
You're trying too hard
Don't worry, Amjad will be pushed down the Conservative memory hole soon, if he hasn't already
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
That's true, but it tends to be the fate of most defectors. I think they tend to be highly egotistical media tarts, and when the initial flush fades they are left looking tawdry. I say this of all defectors. I once gave poor old Reg Prentice a real going over for switching to us.
The only time a defection is honourable is if the person says all the good things they saw in their previous party. Never happens. Just shows they are shits.*
(*Actually I don't think Reg was that type. He genuinely agonised about the direction Labour was taking and was a really rather decent chap. The SDP would have been perfect for him had it existed.)
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Neil was quite disingenious in his interview with Bennett (although she did poorly with easy to address points). He was implying that the zero tax threshold costs people £10,500 per annum when it actually costs (on current tax rates) £3800.
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
You then need to consider the benefits in terms of forcing up wages at the low end to entice people into work and the tax benefits of higher low end earnings. In fact if there is a criticism of the Green's proposals it is not that Citizen's Income is unaffordable - it can be clearly shown it is affordable. The problem is that it is set too low. If you set it at the Basic State Pension rate, you remove another layer of bureaucracy, make a much bigger impact on the wage diminution which is the fundamental and so far unfixable problem at the heart of capitalism.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Who said it cost them the full whack? Obviously they wouldn't pay tax below the threshold
The reason the interview was considered a car crash was that people like me who watched it with interest came out not knowing what the hell she was on about
In a perfect world I don't have much problem with the Greens and their policies, they just need to replace human nature and human instinct and they might just work
I'm not sure that the Greens are as dismissive of human nature as you think.
Yes, people will be encouraged to chose a non-work lifestyle. But to the Greens, these people will be low-impact consumers, with lower aspiration and consumption habits - a desirable goal for them.
While Bennett was really bad in the interview, I don't think there is anything really wrong with the principle that people should be encouraged to "read up" on policies in detail on the web rather than endlessly repeating soundbites.
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
You then need to consider the benefits in terms of forcing up wages at the low end to entice people into work and the tax benefits of higher low end earnings. In fact if there is a criticism of the Green's proposals it is not that Citizen's Income is unaffordable - it can be clearly shown it is affordable. The problem is that it is set too low. If you set it at the Basic State Pension rate, you remove another layer of bureaucracy, make a much bigger impact on the wage diminution which is the fundamental and so far unfixable problem at the heart of capitalism.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Yes very unfair of Andrew Neil to use his deathstare to prevent the leader of (your?) Green Party from correcting his £100bn error.
£100bn here...£100bn there...pretty soon you are talking about...
Not my party and I don't support Citizen's Income. The point I'm making is the level of dismissiveness in the media is out of all relation to the reality of the policy.
I agree that Bennett did very poorly, she should have the numbers (they are really easy to calculate) but didn't. But Neil is supposed to be an impartial broadcaster and interviewing with a clear agenda is outwith the (supposed) scope of BBC Editorial policy.
She didn't have any numbers at all and aside from the Citizens' Income was floundering on the wealth tax, on immigration, on just about everything he put to her.
Is he biased? I don't know if it was £280bn or £180bn but apart from you I haven't heard from anyone, the Green Party, say, that £280bn is wrong.
I like very much Andrew Neil in the way I like John & Jim - they put the questions you are formulating yourself and don't let their subjects easily off the hook.
Oh and if it's not your party they are missing a trick.
Over the weekend, Jim Murphy announced that a Scottish Labour government would put a stop to fracking. Now Caroline Flint, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Maria Eagle, Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, have announced Labour will force a vote to stop developments regarding shale gas extraction.
I suspect the demands to time the debates before postal voting will end up being a valid reason for making sure that the last debate does not take place just a week before polling day.
On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates?
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in CCHQ's selection of candidates for two hours of the Prime Minister's presumably valuable time?
Your point is that UKIP MEP vetting is as lax as Conservative Membership vetting?
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Think you will find if you read it he is only promising to do something at the break point , ie 2025 , hardly earth shattering and usual Labour spin. Ed could lie just like Jim.
On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
How very odd. Mr Cameron et al were quite happy to change the goalposts of indyref after most of the postal votes had been returned.
He must have learned sone tricks off Salmond.
Apparently the setlled will of the Scottish people is only settled when Eck says so.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
I very much doubt it, but 1 photo versus the many of Farage with his 'carefully vetted' MEP. He was a UKIP poster boy.
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Think you will find if you read it he is only promising to do something at the break point , ie 2025 , hardly earth shattering and usual Labour spin. Ed could lie just like Jim.
Doesn't look like it:
The party's Scottish leader has outlined plans to exercise a break clause in the contract with the firm to takeover ScotRail.
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Any businesses not being chased out of "social revenge" Scotland ?
LOL, you will swallow any garbage to get a poke at Scotland, what is it with losers like you and Carlotta that have left Scotland, do you have to justify your miserable existence by hating Scotland.
She didn't have any numbers at all and aside from the Citizens' Income was floundering on the wealth tax, on immigration, on just about everything he put to her.
Is he biased? I don't know if it was £280bn or £180bn but apart from you I haven't heard from anyone, the Green Party, say, that £280bn is wrong.
I like very much Andrew Neil in the way I like John & Jim - they put the questions you are formulating yourself and don't let their subjects easily off the hook.
Oh and if it's not your party they are missing a trick.
It's pretty easy to calculate the costs. The offer is £72 a week, £3744 per annum. If all 63m in the country were receiving it the maximum cost is £236bn, as it only applies to adults and would have residence criteria, then at say 45m recipients the cost is £187bn.
But you are right, Bennett should have these numbers and her limitations as a politician will hold the Greens back.
I think Neil's inquisitorial style is approriate for politicians who are trying to hide things. When interviewing someone who is not trying to hide things (and I have no reason to think Bennett was) the interview should, if impartial, be more conciliatory if the viewers are to get information.
The last thing the Scottish Labour party need in the run up to the Holyrood elections is the SNP party propping up a minority Westminster Labour Government. But I must admit that I am very relaxed about the idea that this possible Westminster partnership in a Hung Parliament could get lots of media attention and coverage between now and the GE. Absolute PR gold for the Conservative party North and South of the border...
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
I very much doubt it, but 1 photo versus the many of Farage with his 'carefully vetted' MEP. He was a UKIP poster boy.
No need for us to argue over this mate, I am more than happy with how its turned out, hope you are too
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
I haven't read the article due to needing to register but isn't what Murphy proposing impossible given that Holyrood doesn't have the power to do so currently?
Just delete the Herald cookies & you get your 'free articles' again.
AFAIK the Smith Commission & UK Govt Command Paper would enable the Scottish government to do this.....don't believe everything the SNP says about it......
LOL, given they have a veto on road sign changes , you should practice what you preach and not believe all the liars say about it
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
I'm not entirely sure you follow how the media works there though, Isam. 99.99999999% of people won't pay any attention to the kind of in-depth analysis on here. They will have seen the headline and a minority will have read the briefest coverage of the defection. Virtually no-one will be remotely interested in the follow up wrangling. It's a good example of how Westminster just doesn't get it.
Bashir is history. The damage is done.
But, yes I agree, it wasn't handled brilliant by us.
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Neil was quite disingenious in his interview with Bennett (although she did poorly with easy to address points). He was implying that the zero tax threshold costs people £10,500 per annum when it actually costs (on current tax rates) £3800.
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Who said it cost them the full whack? Obviously they wouldn't pay tax below the threshold
The reason the interview was considered a car crash was that people like me who watched it with interest came out not knowing what the hell she was on about
In a perfect world I don't have much problem with the Greens and their policies, they just need to replace human nature and human instinct and they might just work
I'm not sure that the Greens are as dismissive of human nature as you think.
Yes, people will be encouraged to chose a non-work lifestyle. But to the Greens, these people will be low-impact consumers, with lower aspiration and consumption habits - a desirable goal for them.
While Bennett was really bad in the interview, I don't think there is anything really wrong with the principle that people should be encouraged to "read up" on policies in detail on the web rather than endlessly repeating soundbites.
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Think you will find if you read it he is only promising to do something at the break point , ie 2025 , hardly earth shattering and usual Labour spin. Ed could lie just like Jim.
Doesn't look like it:
The party's Scottish leader has outlined plans to exercise a break clause in the contract with the firm to takeover ScotRail.
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Neil was quite disingenious in his interview with Bennett (although she did poorly with easy to address points). He was implying that the zero tax threshold costs people £10,500 per annum when it actually costs (on current tax rates) £3800.
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Who said it cost them the full whack? Obviously they wouldn't pay tax below the threshold
The reason the interview was considered a car crash was that people like me who watched it with interest came out not knowing what the hell she was on about
In a perfect world I don't have much problem with the Greens and their policies, they just need to replace human nature and human instinct and they might just work
I'm not sure that the Greens are as dismissive of human nature as you think.
Yes, people will be encouraged to chose a non-work lifestyle. But to the Greens, these people will be low-impact consumers, with lower aspiration and consumption habits - a desirable goal for them.
While Bennett was really bad in the interview, I don't think there is anything really wrong with the principle that people should be encouraged to "read up" on policies in detail on the web rather than endlessly repeating soundbites.
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
Well, the Watermelons are - and apparently they've pulverised the Mangos........
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives
I hope we don't get too much of this silliness. Defectors and celebrities should be sent to Coventry for the next 3 months regardless of whom they defect to.
It's desperation tactics from all parties, redolent of schoolboy behaviour, distracts from policy discussion and panders to egos.
I suspect the demands to time the debates before postal voting will end up being a valid reason for making sure that the last debate does not take place just a week before polling day.
On the debates, The Times is reporting that whilst the attendees might have been settled, the timings have not. Tories not happy about debates happening after postal votes have happened. Which rather suggests they are expecting a bounce when voters actually see Ed Miliband....
Yeah I think this is the real reason. They want to reduce the impact of the debates
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Think you will find if you read it he is only promising to do something at the break point , ie 2025 , hardly earth shattering and usual Labour spin. Ed could lie just like Jim.
Doesn't look like it:
The party's Scottish leader has outlined plans to exercise a break clause in the contract with the firm to takeover ScotRail.
The break clause is in 2025
Why would you have a break clause at the end of a contract?
She didn't have any numbers at all and aside from the Citizens' Income was floundering on the wealth tax, on immigration, on just about everything he put to her.
Is he biased? I don't know if it was £280bn or £180bn but apart from you I haven't heard from anyone, the Green Party, say, that £280bn is wrong.
I like very much Andrew Neil in the way I like John & Jim - they put the questions you are formulating yourself and don't let their subjects easily off the hook.
Oh and if it's not your party they are missing a trick.
It's pretty easy to calculate the costs. The offer is £72 a week, £3744 per annum. If all 63m in the country were receiving it the maximum cost is £236bn, as it only applies to adults and would have residence criteria, then at say 45m recipients the cost is £187bn.
But you are right, Bennett should have these numbers and her limitations as a politician will hold the Greens back.
I think Neil's inquisitorial style is approriate for politicians who are trying to hide things. When interviewing someone who is not trying to hide things (and I have no reason to think Bennett was) the interview should, if impartial, be more conciliatory if the viewers are to get information.
Do the residents of the big house at the end of the Mall get it also? That's true egalitarianism. Not a million miles off @isam's point
As to your other point (now we are drifting off-topic) - surely the logical conclusion of your argument would be for Andrew Neil (or a caption on the screen) to say:
"And if you want to know anything about the Green Party, please go to their website."
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
A bitter behind-the-scenes row between two leading nationalists about exploiting onshore gas has resulted in a complaint to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, the Sunday Herald can reveal...
......The row comes as pressure mounts in the run-up to the UK general election for the SNP to make clear where it stands on unconventional gas and fracking. There are proposals at different stages in Scotland to mine coalbed methane, frack for shale gas and gasify coal under the sea.
Murphy pledges to return Scotland's railways to public ownership DUTCH rail operator Abellio's forthcoming £2.5bn franchise to run Scotland's railways would be cancelled if Labour came to power after the 2016 Holyrood elections.
Think you will find if you read it he is only promising to do something at the break point , ie 2025 , hardly earth shattering and usual Labour spin. Ed could lie just like Jim.
Doesn't look like it:
The party's Scottish leader has outlined plans to exercise a break clause in the contract with the firm to takeover ScotRail.
The break clause is in 2025
Why would you have a break clause at the end of a contract?
I was partly wrong , it is 2022 or 2025 depending on what they agree after year 5. The new ScotRail Franchise will be for a term of up to 10 years with a review and a decision by the end of the fifth year to decide whether the franchise will terminate at the end of year 7 or 10.
She didn't have any numbers at all and aside from the Citizens' Income was floundering on the wealth tax, on immigration, on just about everything he put to her.
Is he biased? I don't know if it was £280bn or £180bn but apart from you I haven't heard from anyone, the Green Party, say, that £280bn is wrong.
I like very much Andrew Neil in the way I like John & Jim - they put the questions you are formulating yourself and don't let their subjects easily off the hook.
Oh and if it's not your party they are missing a trick.
It's pretty easy to calculate the costs. The offer is £72 a week, £3744 per annum. If all 63m in the country were receiving it the maximum cost is £236bn, as it only applies to adults and would have residence criteria, then at say 45m recipients the cost is £187bn.
But you are right, Bennett should have these numbers and her limitations as a politician will hold the Greens back.
I think Neil's inquisitorial style is approriate for politicians who are trying to hide things. When interviewing someone who is not trying to hide things (and I have no reason to think Bennett was) the interview should, if impartial, be more conciliatory if the viewers are to get information.
Do the residents of the big house at the end of the Mall get it also? That's true egalitarianism. Not a million miles off @isam's point
As to your other point (now we are drifting off-topic) - surely the logical conclusion of your argument would be for Andrew Neil (or a caption on the screen) to say:
"And if you want to know anything about the Green Party, please go to their website."
At current tax levels (virtually) no-one who has an income gets a benefit from Citizen's Income. The zero threshold on tax costs individuals £3800. The annual Citizen's Income is £3744.
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.
Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives
Please, no!
He's one we wouldn't mind getting rid of.
Odd then that he too had a speaking slot at the UKIP conference - another one of the top figures, clearly.
He has been got rid of hasn't he?
Last I heard he was still the UKIP candidate for Croydon North (or at least he thought he was), but with UKIP there are so many splits, rows, de-selections, re-selections, back-stabbings and defections that it's hard to keep up.
As I understand it, there's only one Old Maid in the normal version of the game. If you play the game with UKIP, almost all the cards in their hand are highly undesirable.
If I were advising one of the other parties, I'd want a pair of tongs for holding any possible recruits from UKIP. But that's the Conservatives' problem now.
Before each hand begins, each player chooses three cards, and passes them to another player. The main objectives of passing are to try to become "short" or "void" in a suit, and thus able to play off-suit when that suit is led; or to rid one's hand of "dangerous" cards that will likely force that player to take a trick containing penalty points, such as the Ace, King, or Queen of any suit (especially Spades and Hearts).
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
I'm not entirely sure you follow how the media works there though, Isam. 99.99999999% of people won't pay any attention to the kind of in-depth analysis on here.
I don't think your numbers are right, even if you're talking about the proportion of the world population instead of the British population. Mike Smithson must read his own blog for starters.
Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives
Please, no!
He's one we wouldn't mind getting rid of.
Odd then that he too had a speaking slot at the UKIP conference - another one of the top figures, clearly.
He has been got rid of hasn't he?
Last I heard he was still the UKIP candidate for Croydon North (or at least he thought he was), but with UKIP there are so many splits, rows, de-selections, re-selections, back-stabbings and defections that it's hard to keep up.
Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives
Please, no!
He's one we wouldn't mind getting rid of.
Odd then that he too had a speaking slot at the UKIP conference - another one of the top figures, clearly.
He has been got rid of hasn't he?
Last I heard he was still the UKIP candidate for Croydon North (or at least he thought he was), but with UKIP there are so many splits, rows, de-selections, re-selections, back-stabbings and defections that it's hard to keep up.
This indeed seems to be the current state of play:
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.
One of the reasons I do stuff like candidate spreadsheets is when I've assumed that information like that would be available in one place somewhere or other, and when it wasn't I was so exasperated that I decided to do it myself.
Thanks to all those who helped last night, mostly in the night shift. I think I have the Coral and Ladbrokes liblabconnom odds for the day/day before the 2010 UK General Election. It's not perfect, but it's a step forward, so thank you for your time.
It shouldn't have been so difficult to find the information.
We are so used to everything being instantly available via google, it's a wrench to find out stuff that isn't. In the past I've gotten data from looking at cover illustrations with a ruler: endless fun...:-( Dead tree storage does have its uses...
The current reporting period is the year of the data described. So in a time series, the 2005 data will be in 2005 prices, the 2006 data in 2006 prices, etc. So no inflation adjustment has been made to any year. It says right there in your link that this is nominal data.
When it's inflation-adjusted, you put it all in one year's prices, rather than in the prices of the reporting period. Then it becomes real data.
I can't actually believe I'm having this conversation with you.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates?
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in CCHQ's selection of candidates for two hours of the Prime Minister's presumably valuable time?
Tory posters like Keynesians in a recession this morning.
I don't doubt that his former senior-player colleagues in UKIP are crapping themselves at what Mr. Bashir has told CCHQ. No wonder they have to trash his credibility....
Intel on the state of the party they have left is about the only use for defectors. Very few make any impact after they change sides. Nobody trusts them.
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.
Yes it does
No, it's not.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.
Yes it does
No, it's not.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
The Greens are communist, and their policies are all geared to a society based on the end of wealth inequality.. its the only way their big ideas could work
(Is he still your Croydon North GE candidate, or was he only suspended from Chairmanship of the local branch?)
Not "my" candidate, and you seem to have put down the spade in order to give your attention to shooting yourself in the foot. What is this bloke doing in Downing Street? Which party invited him there? Why?
(Is he still your Croydon North GE candidate, or was he only suspended from Chairmanship of the local branch?)
Not "my" candidate, and you seem to have put down the spade in order to give your attention to shooting yourself in the foot. What is this bloke doing in Downing Street? Which party invited him there? Why?
Oh he isn't really, I was mucking about! Sorry!
Like I was when TSE fell for my wind up earlier! (Unless he was genuinely rolling about in laughter at my joke, and wanted to give me credit, in which case thank you)
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
Minimum wage earners paying more tax to finance millionaires getting £72 a week?
But that's not how Citizen's Income works.
Citizen's Income is a rationalisation of the safety net which is part of the Social Contract (which has been consistently undermined over the last few decades).
Neil was quite disingenious in his interview with Bennett (although she did poorly with easy to address points). He was implying that the zero tax threshold costs people £10,500 per annum when it actually costs (on current tax rates) £3800.
Citizen's Income on provides guaranteed benefits to the very poorest in society, once you work, the £3700 is withdrawn back in tax. Of the £180bn cost of the policy (not the £280bn which Neil lied about) £90bn is recoverable in tax from working people and another £40bn is recoverable from pensioners, another £7.5bn recoverable from basic Benefits and there's a substantial saving in not spending money on jobcenters and a much more streamlined benefits system. Just on those headlines around £150bn of the cost is covered.
You then need to consider the benefits in terms of forcing up wages at the low end to entice people into work and the tax benefits of higher low end earnings. In fact if there is a criticism of the Green's proposals it is not that Citizen's Income is unaffordable - it can be clearly shown it is affordable. The problem is that it is set too low. If you set it at the Basic State Pension rate, you remove another layer of bureaucracy, make a much bigger impact on the wage diminution which is the fundamental and so far unfixable problem at the heart of capitalism.
Citizen's Income actually finds a solution to Marx which many thought impossible.
Yes very unfair of Andrew Neil to use his deathstare to prevent the leader of (your?) Green Party from correcting his £100bn error.
£100bn here...£100bn there...pretty soon you are talking about...
Not my party and I don't support Citizen's Income. The point I'm making is the level of dismissiveness in the media is out of all relation to the reality of the policy.
I agree that Bennett did very poorly, she should have the numbers (they are really easy to calculate) but didn't. But Neil is supposed to be an impartial broadcaster and interviewing with a clear agenda is outwith the (supposed) scope of BBC Editorial policy.
Neil treats all alike. He also interviewed Shapps thoroughly and I have read anti-Conservatives saying that Neil did a job on him. Aussie Nat is probably not used to being questioned so thoroughly.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
The Greens are communist, and their policies are all geared to a society based on the end of wealth inequality.. its the only way their big ideas could work
You're making unsubstantiated claims which are completely unrelated to the proposal of the Citizen's Incomes as the greens want to establish it.
There is no redistributive impact. There is no wage equality.
You can argue the Greens are "communists" in other areas if you want, there's not really much evidence and you've provided none at all so far but if you want to try you are free to do so.
But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
All nicely funded by people actually generating wealth.
Except it wouldn't be funded, because the collapse in the tax base means it's unaffordable.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.
(Is he still your Croydon North GE candidate, or was he only suspended from Chairmanship of the local branch?)
Not "my" candidate, and you seem to have put down the spade in order to give your attention to shooting yourself in the foot. What is this bloke doing in Downing Street? Which party invited him there? Why?
Oh he isn't really, I was mucking about! Sorry!
Like I was when TSE fell for my wind up earlier! (Unless he was genuinely rolling about in laughter at my joke, and wanted to give me credit, in which case thank you)
Oh bugger.
But after Bashir, it was pretty credible.
Time to do some work.
Markets reacting to Greek news with a massive calm btw.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
The Greens are communist, and their policies are all geared to a society based on the end of wealth inequality.. its the only way their big ideas could work
You're making unsubstantiated claims which are completely unrelated to the proposal of the Citizen's Incomes as the greens want to establish it.
There is no redistributive impact. There is no wage equality.
You can argue the Greens are "communists" in other areas if you want, there's not really much evidence and you've provided none at all so far but if you want to try you are free to do so.
But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.
Yeah yeah
What will be the top rate of tax when this £72 a week is given to top rate tax payers? And when will top rate kick in?
Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature
Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.
Yes it does
No, it's not.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
Could you explain this? Why would 100% be recoverable in tax?
Just been searching for a Henry Ford quote for a presentation and came across these which are food for thought today:
"In the long run people are going to buy the cheapest and the best article no matter where it is made."
"There can be no lasting peace where hatred exists. Hatreds will continue to arise as long as the causes of war are not rooted out and exposed."
"Public officials are all right if they stay in their proper sphere and perform their proper functions but when they get greedy for wider scope and more power and money they lose their value and become parasites."
"The unhappiest man on earth is the one who has nothing to do."
"There can be no bosses in our country except the people. The job of the government is to serve, not to dominate."
"If governments would only understand that if people are left alone they'll work out their own salvation."
"Greatest thing in life is experience. Even mistakes have value."
"I believe in 100% Theory and 100% Practice. Theory without practical application is futile."
"A man's college and university degrees mean nothing to me until I see what he is able to do with them."
"To resent efficiency is a mark of inefficiency."
"The difference between a good govt. system and its poor administration is easily explained; the chief administrators are not Bosses in the best sense."
The BBC and the Labour party will be proved wrong, employment and personal financial security will prove to be the most important issues. In other words, the result of the GE will come down to the electorate deciding which party is regarded as the most competent to run the UK economy for the next five years.
"It’s the middle classes that will deliver the coup de grace. Not the white van drivers of Kent. Or the students of Keele. Or the Bedroom Tax payers of Wythenshawe. It will be the chattering classes who finish off Labour.
They are not chattering at the moment. Instead, they are keeping their counsel. Biding their time. Some, to be fair, are wrestling with their consciences. They would like to do the right thing. They understand times are hard for many people. But..."
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.
But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.
That might be true, but the fact remains you gave a millionaire £71 that week, if he subsequently gave you back half of it through the tax system, the country is still down £35 or so a week, about £1800 a year, compared to if you didn't have the policy but had the same tax bands.
Isam and MikeK etc Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....
What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?
Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.
Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.
So what?
You tell me, you seem to think Cameron's misguided picture with UKIP's latest disaster zone is a big deal.
Well let me say right now, I don't rate him either
It seems the shorter list might be those in your party you do rate....
Maybe, but previous scandals like this have shown that the kipper voter doesn't care, and after this they still wont care. They are not voting for policies, or politicians, they are voting because they are goddam pissed off.
UKIP are in essence the "inchoate rage vote", the "mad as hell and not going to take it any more" vote, the "had just about as much as I can stand of political correctness" vote, the "the country's going to the dogs" vote, they are pissed off and they want to stick it to the "parties of government", the Conservatives, the LDs and Labour. Bashir and Kerry Smith wont affect that in the slightest.
Comments
I agree that Bennett did very poorly, she should have the numbers (they are really easy to calculate) but didn't. But Neil is supposed to be an impartial broadcaster and interviewing with a clear agenda is outwith the (supposed) scope of BBC Editorial policy.
We are so used to everything being instantly available via google, it's a wrench to find out stuff that isn't. In the past I've gotten data from looking at cover illustrations with a ruler: endless fun...:-( Dead tree storage does have its uses...
http://wingsoverscotland.com/by-way-of-example/
The only time a defection is honourable is if the person says all the good things they saw in their previous party. Never happens. Just shows they are shits.*
(*Actually I don't think Reg was that type. He genuinely agonised about the direction Labour was taking and was a really rather decent chap. The SDP would have been perfect for him had it existed.)
You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?
Clearly other polls especially LARGER point to a different outcome.
Betfair punters also seem to think EICIPM looking increasingly unlikely
We will see
Yes, people will be encouraged to chose a non-work lifestyle. But to the Greens, these people will be low-impact consumers, with lower aspiration and consumption habits - a desirable goal for them.
While Bennett was really bad in the interview, I don't think there is anything really wrong with the principle that people should be encouraged to "read up" on policies in detail on the web rather than endlessly repeating soundbites.
Is he biased? I don't know if it was £280bn or £180bn but apart from you I haven't heard from anyone, the Green Party, say, that £280bn is wrong.
I like very much Andrew Neil in the way I like John & Jim - they put the questions you are formulating yourself and don't let their subjects easily off the hook.
Oh and if it's not your party they are missing a trick.
Over the weekend, Jim Murphy announced that a Scottish Labour government would put a stop to fracking. Now Caroline Flint, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Maria Eagle, Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, have announced Labour will force a vote to stop developments regarding shale gas extraction.
http://labourlist.org/2015/01/labour-will-force-a-vote-to-stop-shale-gas-extraction/
I recall the 2 hour claim being made by Bashir, but can't now track it down. I am sure CCHQ will clarify in due course.
Apparently the setlled will of the Scottish people is only settled when Eck says so.
The party's Scottish leader has outlined plans to exercise a break clause in the contract with the firm to takeover ScotRail.
Who would have predicted that!
But you are right, Bennett should have these numbers and her limitations as a politician will hold the Greens back.
I think Neil's inquisitorial style is approriate for politicians who are trying to hide things. When interviewing someone who is not trying to hide things (and I have no reason to think Bennett was) the interview should, if impartial, be more conciliatory if the viewers are to get information.
No need for us to argue over this mate, I am more than happy with how its turned out, hope you are too
Bashir is history. The damage is done.
But, yes I agree, it wasn't handled brilliant by us.
It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.
The Tories can never win if the NHS is the topic.
I thought you would have spotted that by now
The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.
It's desperation tactics from all parties, redolent of schoolboy behaviour, distracts from policy discussion and panders to egos.
As to your other point (now we are drifting off-topic) - surely the logical conclusion of your argument would be for Andrew Neil (or a caption on the screen) to say:
"And if you want to know anything about the Green Party, please go to their website."
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/hiking_the_personal_allowance_is_welcome_but_there_s_more_to_do
If not, you can see where the pbtories got the hole-digging idea.
Winston MacKenzie. lol.
A bitter behind-the-scenes row between two leading nationalists about exploiting onshore gas has resulted in a complaint to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, the Sunday Herald can reveal...
......The row comes as pressure mounts in the run-up to the UK general election for the SNP to make clear where it stands on unconventional gas and fracking. There are proposals at different stages in Scotland to mine coalbed methane, frack for shale gas and gasify coal under the sea.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/environment/msps-clash-over-shale-gas-sparks-complaint-to-sturgeon.116871742
The new ScotRail Franchise will be for a term of up to 10 years with a review and a decision by the end of the fifth year to decide whether the franchise will terminate at the end of year 7 or 10.
Match made in heaven.
http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Winston-McKenzie-steps-branch-chairman-stand-Ukip/story-25887957-detail/story.html
Well let me say right now, I don't rate him either
http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Winston-McKenzie-steps-branch-chairman-stand-Ukip/story-25887957-detail/story.html
It's hard not to admire a man who is clearly too big for any one party for any length of time.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/10/21/ukip-spokesman-who-said-gay-adoption-is-child-abuse-denies-mike-read-song-is-racist/
(Is he still your Croydon North GE candidate, or was he only suspended from Chairmanship of the local branch?)
Re current prices. It means at the prices of the current reporting period, i.e. with inflation taken out.
See: http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=1165
Andreas @AndreasLeKirk · 36m36 minutes ago
when your mate asks if you're ok after that last shot of tequila pic.twitter.com/Sv9Gee8vi2
The current reporting period is the year of the data described. So in a time series, the 2005 data will be in 2005 prices, the 2006 data in 2006 prices, etc. So no inflation adjustment has been made to any year. It says right there in your link that this is nominal data.
When it's inflation-adjusted, you put it all in one year's prices, rather than in the prices of the reporting period. Then it becomes real data.
I can't actually believe I'm having this conversation with you.
And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.
There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.
Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.
But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.
Like I was when TSE fell for my wind up earlier! (Unless he was genuinely rolling about in laughter at my joke, and wanted to give me credit, in which case thank you)
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/537044601065197569
Nigel was most cross at that comparison, Nigel likes to be known as the Almighty.
There is no redistributive impact.
There is no wage equality.
You can argue the Greens are "communists" in other areas if you want, there's not really much evidence and you've provided none at all so far but if you want to try you are free to do so.
But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.
Except it wouldn't be funded, because the collapse in the tax base means it's unaffordable.
But after Bashir, it was pretty credible.
Time to do some work.
Markets reacting to Greek news with a massive calm btw.
What will be the top rate of tax when this £72 a week is given to top rate tax payers? And when will top rate kick in?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png
For spectators, it's PB Diplomacy V at playdiplomacy.com (you have to sign up, but it's free).
Edited extra bit: forgot the 'Mr's. I do apologise.
Just been searching for a Henry Ford quote for a presentation and came across these which are food for thought today:
"In the long run people are going to buy the cheapest and the best article no matter where it is made."
"There can be no lasting peace where hatred exists. Hatreds will continue to arise as long as the causes of war are not rooted out and exposed."
"Public officials are all right if they stay in their proper sphere and perform their proper functions but when they get greedy for wider scope and more power and money they lose their value and become parasites."
"The unhappiest man on earth is the one who has nothing to do."
"There can be no bosses in our country except the people. The job of the government is to serve, not to dominate."
"If governments would only understand that if people are left alone they'll work out their own salvation."
"Greatest thing in life is experience. Even mistakes have value."
"I believe in 100% Theory and 100% Practice. Theory without practical application is futile."
"A man's college and university degrees mean nothing to me until I see what he is able to do with them."
"To resent efficiency is a mark of inefficiency."
"The difference between a good govt. system and its poor administration is easily explained; the chief administrators are not Bosses in the best sense."
http://www.thehenryford.org/research/henryFordQuotes.aspx
Dan Hodges in the Telegraph - It's the guilty, middle-class voters will finish off Labour
"It’s the middle classes that will deliver the coup de grace. Not the white van drivers of Kent. Or the students of Keele. Or the Bedroom Tax payers of Wythenshawe. It will be the chattering classes who finish off Labour.
They are not chattering at the moment. Instead, they are keeping their counsel. Biding their time. Some, to be fair, are wrestling with their consciences. They would like to do the right thing. They understand times are hard for many people. But..."
"But, yes I agree, it wasn't handled brilliant by us."
A fair comment, and most people won't know the details, but you want to be careful about accepting the excess idiots from other parties.
Interesting to see what Syriza achieve with the EU. If they get big concessions, Cameron will have to negotiate equally well.
aura Pitel @laurapitel 11m11 minutes ago
Dan Hannan story updated to include his response. He insists it's untrue. Arron Banks stands by his account.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 5m5 minutes ago London, England
So according to Arron Banks, @Nigel_Farage thinks @DanHannanMEP is a "little weasel".
UKIP are in essence the "inchoate rage vote", the "mad as hell and not going to take it any more" vote, the "had just about as much as I can stand of political correctness" vote, the "the country's going to the dogs" vote, they are pissed off and they want to stick it to the "parties of government", the Conservatives, the LDs and Labour. Bashir and Kerry Smith wont affect that in the slightest.