Ukip won the popular vote by 3% in the locals and it was neck and neck in the SYPCC election...
Labour a very poor 1/4 shot in rotherham
Turnout will be much higher in May and the MP seems genuinely impressive (what a stroke for her that the documentary featuring her efforts to influence child protection legislation was screened this week, not that all that many constituents will have seen it). I think she's a strong favourite to win.
My money is down on Ukip if you want to take best price labour come talk to me
also there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars before they became MPs and, as a result, got very safe seats, to which they have no local connection. They were obviously just much better than the local candidates, who would otherwise have had an advantage. e.g. Miliband x 2, Reeves, Hunt.
there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars part of a cosy elite through family or other connections
Fixed it for you...
At least one of your 'stars' went Supernova last night and is heading for a Black Hole
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
I wonder if she has found out yet how Stemcor managed to pay only 0.01% Corporation Tax on £2.1 billion of turnover generated in the UK.
Ukip won the popular vote by 3% in the locals and it was neck and neck in the SYPCC election...
Labour a very poor 1/4 shot in rotherham
Turnout will be much higher in May and the MP seems genuinely impressive (what a stroke for her that the documentary featuring her efforts to influence child protection legislation was screened this week, not that all that many constituents will have seen it). I think she's a strong favourite to win.
My money is down on Ukip if you want to take best price labour come talk to me
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
The conversation was about Labour politicians in safe seats. There may be some who attended the right schools (EdM at school with BoJo, EdB at Eton...) and there are probably some who attend Hunt Balls (is that what his [edit]lasagne party is called these days?) but they are outnumbered by the Dynasties of the Labour firmament
also there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars before they became MPs and, as a result, got very safe seats, to which they have no local connection. They were obviously just much better than the local candidates, who would otherwise have had an advantage. e.g. Miliband x 2, Reeves, Hunt.
there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars part of a cosy elite through family or other connections
Fixed it for you...
At least one of your 'stars' went Supernova last night and is heading for a Black Hole
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
Universities more likely, but don't let that bother you.
Labour appear to be having the election campaign from hell, getting smashed in the betting too.
but holding up well in the polls. Something, somewhere does not add up. Something is wrong, broken and twisted about this election campaign.
I don;t know what it is, but its definitely there.
I think it is that there is no message, no 'this is what we'd do'. Love or hate the Tories - at least everyone knows what Dave n Ozzy will do. Sound money, deficit, growth, rebalancing steady as she goes, etc. Miliblob? I'm a politics geek and even I really don't know. Price freezes? Mansion Tax? Spending cuts, same or let rip? Ed Miliband has done a quite fabulous job of holding the Labour party together for 5 years. He's achieved this by completely avoiding the potentially difficult arena of having a plan or a policy or a vision. There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
also there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars before they became MPs and, as a result, got very safe seats, to which they have no local connection. They were obviously just much better than the local candidates, who would otherwise have had an advantage. e.g. Miliband x 2, Reeves, Hunt.
there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars part of a cosy elite through family or other connections
Fixed it for you...
At least one of your 'stars' went Supernova last night and is heading for a Black Hole
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
Isn't that what Labour was supposed to be fighting against? Instead they just created equally privileged cliques of their own. For their own. The Blairs, Straws, Kinnocks, Wedgwood Benns, Harmans and so on and so on - all looking out for their nearest and dearest.
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
I wonder if she has found out yet how Stemcor managed to pay only 0.01% Corporation Tax on £2.1 billion of turnover generated in the UK.
Perhaps an enterprising journalist might make some enquiries. I'm sure whenever she's been asked in the past she's always replied that (a) it had nothing to do with her - even though she is clearly a beneficiary; and (b) it was all in accordance with the law. We've heard that answer before, of course, as has she - and we also know what she thinks of such answers.
I despise such Labour people. I would much rather have the sort of person Roger was talking about on an earlier thread.
There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
Labour appear to be having the election campaign from hell, getting smashed in the betting too.
but holding up well in the polls. Something, somewhere does not add up. Something is wrong, broken and twisted about this election campaign.
I don;t know what it is, but its definitely there.
Could it be as simple as "90% of stuff doesn't matter or is noticed by the public"?
If people being polled haven't noticed the campaign the numbers won't shift much. Political obsessives, geeks, punters and other denizens of PB have noticed so the markets move and the mood in the parties match the betting, not the polls.
If this is the case then we might expect the polls to move towards the markets as the campaign ramps up.
If not, then we should expect the markets to move to the polls
Labour appear to be having the election campaign from hell, getting smashed in the betting too.
but holding up well in the polls. Something, somewhere does not add up. Something is wrong, broken and twisted about this election campaign.
I don;t know what it is, but its definitely there.
I think it is that there is no message, no 'this is what we'd do'. Love or hate the Tories - at least everyone knows what Dave n Ozzy will do. Sound money, deficit, growth, rebalancing steady as she goes, etc. Miliblob? I'm a politics geek and even I really don't know. Price freezes? Mansion Tax? Spending cuts, same or let rip? Ed Miliband has done a quite fabulous job of holding the Labour party together for 5 years. He's achieved this by completely avoiding the potentially difficult arena of having a plan or a policy or a vision. There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Ravaging the homes, savings and earnings of Middle England seems to be the plan. It'll certainly be the outcome.
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
I wonder if she has found out yet how Stemcor managed to pay only 0.01% Corporation Tax on £2.1 billion of turnover generated in the UK.
Perhaps an enterprising journalist might make some enquiries. I'm sure whenever she's been asked in the past she's always replied that (a) it had nothing to do with her - even though she is clearly a beneficiary; and (b) it was all in accordance with the law. We've heard that answer before, of course, as has she - and we also know what she thinks of such answers.
I despise such Labour people. I would much rather have the sort of person Roger was talking about on an earlier thread.
Well, indeed. I linked to a report below. I cant see anything untoward or inconsistent with her campaigning on corporate tax avoidance. Can you?
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
I wonder if she has found out yet how Stemcor managed to pay only 0.01% Corporation Tax on £2.1 billion of turnover generated in the UK.
Perhaps an enterprising journalist might make some enquiries. I'm sure whenever she's been asked in the past she's always replied that (a) it had nothing to do with her - even though she is clearly a beneficiary; and (b) it was all in accordance with the law. We've heard that answer before, of course, as has she - and we also know what she thinks of such answers.
I despise such Labour people. I would much rather have the sort of person Roger was talking about on an earlier thread.
Well, indeed. I linked to a report below. I cant see anything untoward or inconsistent with her campaigning on corporate tax avoidance. Can you?
I hadn't seen it when I wrote my post. I will review it now.
Last night on QT we had Tristram Hunt talking about Labour's plans for education. Hunt is the MP for one of the worst performing Local Education Areas in the UK. Clearly his 5 years there has not translated into any dramatic improvements in the quality of outcome for the children educated there. But we can guarantee that the teachers will mainly have the right piece of paper and are inducted into the blob's certificate.
e.g. in 2013, Stoke-on-Trent was the 5th worst (147th) in the secondary school league tables, which are based on the proportion of youngsters getting good passes in maths, English and at least two other subjects.
@GuidoFawkes: Margaret Hodge slams PWC before admitting her firm employs them and she receives pension from her time working there: http://t.co/X2qaILnIW3
also there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars before they became MPs and, as a result, got very safe seats, to which they have no local connection. They were obviously just much better than the local candidates, who would otherwise have had an advantage. e.g. Miliband x 2, Reeves, Hunt.
there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars part of a cosy elite through family or other connections
Fixed it for you...
At least one of your 'stars' went Supernova last night and is heading for a Black Hole
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
Universities more likely, but don't let that bother you.
I won’t. I don’t like the idea of anyone succeeding solely or largely by others ..... ie their parents, or parents friends........ efforts, whether they are Lab, Con or whatever politicians. Or lawyers, printers or dockers, come to that However, if someone wishes to enter the same profession as their father or mother I don’t see why that should automatically be held against them. They’ve seen the home downside as well as the “adulation”. From personal experience though, it does lead to rather restricted conversation around the family dinner table!
Because I dont want to have to bet on something every time I express an opinion on pbc. If I did I'd have a very large book. Political betting is something I do for fun not compulsively.
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
Worth listening to her squirm as her past record of working for PwC - including that she draws a pension - is revealed, one morsel at a time.
Hypocrisy crawls out the woodwork to shame them whenever Labour tries to make a political point these days.
Margaret Hodge is a self-righteous hypocrite whose deplorable record at Islington Council should bar her from our airwaves and, in my view, Parliament. Someone who ran a council where children in care were abused, who had no adequate procedures to protect those children, who denied the scale of the problem when it was uncovered preferring to lash out at the press and who, and this is the most disgraceful of all, attacked victims who complained is not, in my view, fit to be an MP let alone someone who seems to think it her duty to lecture the rest of us on morality.
She was also Minister for Children from 2003 - 2005. Note that this was at a time when councils such as Rotherham were busy turning a blind eye to widespread child abuse in their town.
The fact that she even thought she might be in the running to be Labour candidate for London Mayor and that when she withdrew she bestoyed her imprimatur on a black or ethnic minority candidate is testament only to her monumentally over-sized ego.
Why Keith Vaz remains in politics, is a mystery too.
also there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars before they became MPs and, as a result, got very safe seats, to which they have no local connection. They were obviously just much better than the local candidates, who would otherwise have had an advantage. e.g. Miliband x 2, Reeves, Hunt.
there are quite a few people at the top of the Labour party who were obviously rising stars part of a cosy elite through family or other connections
Fixed it for you...
At least one of your 'stars' went Supernova last night and is heading for a Black Hole
As opposed to attending the same school, Hunt Balls etc.
Isn't that what Labour was supposed to be fighting against? Instead they just created equally privileged cliques of their own. For their own. The Blairs, Straws, Kinnocks, Wedgwood Benns, Harmans and so on and so on - all looking out for their nearest and dearest.
So the Rotherham "activists" don't like Farage having a platform. Their solution - create a free publicity picture for him?
With enemies like this ....
It's actually a brilliant stroke. They're probably SWP types who are trying to promote UKIP in order to goad the proletariat into rising up against the entire system.
Labour appear to be having the election campaign from hell, getting smashed in the betting too.
but holding up well in the polls. Something, somewhere does not add up. Something is wrong, broken and twisted about this election campaign.
I don;t know what it is, but its definitely there.
I think it is that there is no message, no 'this is what we'd do'. Love or hate the Tories - at least everyone knows what Dave n Ozzy will do. Sound money, deficit, growth, rebalancing steady as she goes, etc. Miliblob? I'm a politics geek and even I really don't know. Price freezes? Mansion Tax? Spending cuts, same or let rip? Ed Miliband has done a quite fabulous job of holding the Labour party together for 5 years. He's achieved this by completely avoiding the potentially difficult arena of having a plan or a policy or a vision. There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Ravaging the homes, savings and earnings of Middle England seems to be the plan. It'll certainly be the outcome.
Well, they're a soft touch. Not super rich enough to pay whizzo accountants to offshore their money, and too polite to go rioting and robbing.
There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
There's alot of people out there like Roger. They'll vote Labour whatever. Miliband could break into Kensington Palace, rape her royal Qilfiness and cut off little George's head, steal their cash and record himself blowing it while naked cavorting with a rentboy in the middle of the Strand - Roger would be putting the X in the Labour box. It's because the Tories are eeeeevil - don't you know?
Oops! And another own goal from the party which just loves tax avoidance:)
BBC: 13:36: Margaret Hodge attacks Labour links to PwC BBC Radio 4 Labour MP Margaret Hodge
Margaret Hodge MP, the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tells the BBC's World at One she thinks it is "inappropriate" for her party's shadow cabinet to be receiving support from staff on secondment from the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
Will she be returning all the money she earned when she worked for them?
I wonder if she has found out yet how Stemcor managed to pay only 0.01% Corporation Tax on £2.1 billion of turnover generated in the UK.
Perhaps an enterprising journalist might make some enquiries. I'm sure whenever she's been asked in the past she's always replied that (a) it had nothing to do with her - even though she is clearly a beneficiary; and (b) it was all in accordance with the law. We've heard that answer before, of course, as has she - and we also know what she thinks of such answers.
I despise such Labour people. I would much rather have the sort of person Roger was talking about on an earlier thread.
Well, indeed. I linked to a report below. I cant see anything untoward or inconsistent with her campaigning on corporate tax avoidance. Can you?
Well, yes I can. The answers she gives are pretty much the same as the likes of Amazon and others also give. The companies are arranging their affairs in the most tax efficient way according the the rules in force at the relevant time as is Stemcor. And yet she talks about them as if they were the spawn of the devil when she is the beneficiary of similar arrangements.
Nor does that article go into the trust arrangements set up by her family which also have the effect of limiting the tax paid.
And I'm afraid the newspaper's questions are not really the sort of forensic questioning of precisely how Stemcor and the family trusts are organised and the tax effect of what they do that is needed.
The plain fact is that as a result of tax laws in place - and which the Labour government did little or nothing to change - companies, including Stemcor, pay relatively little tax. This means that people like you and I have to pay rather more, very many many multiples in fact of the percentage rate that Stemcor pays, according to that article.
And it p*sses me off. So I'm in no mood to be lectured on tax morality by millionairesses who benefit from such arrangements.
It's that lard again. 'General Election 2015 Polls Are 'Corrupted' And Should Be Banned, Says Labour Peer A senior Labour peer has accused polling companies of becoming "corrupted" by money from newspapers who want to influence the outcome of the general election in May. Lord Foulkes, who was a Labour MP from 1979 until 2005, said polls were increasingly "being manipulated at the behest of people with money, whether they be the media or individuals, as part of the political process". He has also called for there to be a ban on the publication of opinion polls in the weeks leading up to election day.' https://archive.today/8WMKA#selection-3981.0-3993.334
In 1993, he resigned as Shadow Defence Minister after being convicted of being drunk and disorderly during in incident in which he struck a Police officer.
Can I ask some of PB's more older seasoned posters, as I wasn't even a teenager in 1992.
If the Tories had lost the 1992 General Election, am I right in thinking John Major would have resigned, if so, who would have been the next Tory leader?
Michael Heseltine?
No; I think he’d have been too associated with the ousting of Thatcher, which would have been blamed for the defeat. Probably Michael Howard.
Michael Howard only became an MP in 1987 so to early for him
'83 and he was in the Cabinet (and supported Thatcher).
Had something of the night about him then, as well. Whoever suggested Lamont and Clarke could well have been right, too.
Other key office holders immediately prior to the April 1992 election were Baker - Home, Hurd - Foreign, Wakeham - Energy and King - Defence.
Because I dont want to have to bet on something every time I express an opinion on pbc. If I did I'd have a very large book. Political betting is something I do for fun not compulsively.
Naturally where fun = cocktails with your pbTory mates.
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
The plain fact is that as a result of tax laws in place - and which the Labour government did little or nothing to change - companies, including Stemcor, pay relatively little tax.
This company seems to have paid relatively little tax in the UK that year because it made relatively little profit in this country that year.
Or do you have different information or information that might suggest that profits related to business transacted here has been booked elsewhere?
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
Yeah, I cant see the Tories winning there so I guess I'll have to stand that round (Or TSE if his Green > LD bet comes in - mind you I should lose my PB Tory status if that happens.)
@GuidoFawkes: Margaret Hodge slams PWC before admitting her firm employs them and she receives pension from her time working there: http://t.co/X2qaILnIW3
Good old Guido; I love it when he exposes rampant hypocrisy. BTW, good day to all.
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
Yeah, I cant see the Tories winning there so I guess I'll have to stand that round (Or TSE if his Green > LD bet comes in - mind you I should lose my PB Tory status if that happens.)
When I win our bet, £200 of my winnings will go to the PB Tory cocktail fund.
The plain fact is that as a result of tax laws in place - and which the Labour government did little or nothing to change - companies, including Stemcor, pay relatively little tax.
This company seems to have paid relatively little tax in the UK that year because it made relatively little profit in this country that year.
Or do you have different information or information that might suggest that profits related to business transacted here has been booked elsewhere?
So the accounts say. As any accoutant will tell you where a profit is made and where it is taxable is more of an art than a science. I am not accusing Stemcor of illegality. But it is behaving no differently to Amazon or Starbucks or anyone else. But La Hodge seems to think that something which is legal but does not meet her exacting moral standards is wrong and seems not to apply those same moral standards to herself.
There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
There's alot of people out there like Roger. They'll vote Labour whatever. Miliband could break into Kensington Palace, rape her royal Qilfiness and cut off little George's head, steal their cash and record himself blowing it while naked cavorting with a rentboy in the middle of the Strand - Roger would be putting the X in the Labour box. It's because the Tories are eeeeevil - don't you know?
Erm, the same applies in the Tory direction. Perhaps more so when reading the comments on here.
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
Yeah, I cant see the Tories winning there so I guess I'll have to stand that round (Or TSE if his Green > LD bet comes in - mind you I should lose my PB Tory status if that happens.)
@GuidoFawkes: Margaret Hodge slams PWC before admitting her firm employs them and she receives pension from her time working there: http://t.co/X2qaILnIW3
Good old Guido; I love it when he exposes rampant hypocrisy. BTW, good day to all.
I see Tapestry makes a very err controversial post in the comments.
I am not accusing Stemcor of illegality. But it is behaving no differently to Amazon or Starbucks or anyone else.
That's a very strong claim and one you seem to have no basis for making. Indeed the facts in the article (the amount of tax paid when UK profits were higher) would strongly suggest that you are wrong.
I see nothing to suggest that this company seeks to allocate profits to lower tax jurisdictions rather than where they were actually made and it is this kind of behaviour Hodge has been criticising multi-nationals for.
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
Yeah, I cant see the Tories winning there so I guess I'll have to stand that round (Or TSE if his Green > LD bet comes in - mind you I should lose my PB Tory status if that happens.)
When I win our bet, £200 of my winnings will go to the PB Tory cocktail fund.
Bravo....we'll hold you to that....and Sheffield (platform 3) seems an ideal place to overnight.
It's because the Tories are eeeeevil - don't you know?
A valiant explanation, Patrick, but one that unfortunately does not explain the betting markets.
Fact is, right now the punters think the polls are bullsh8t. Given what happens when people are asked to put a cross on a ballot paper in a real election, I'm inclined to agree.
Oh dear, Hunt, Hodge and now Saint Sarah - it's gonna be fun when the campaign proper starts. All we need now is for Lord Foulkes to ask for a ban on all the other parties.
Oh dear, Hunt, Hodge and now Saint Sarah - it's gonna be fun when the campaign proper starts. All we need now is for Lord Foulkes to ask for a ban on all the other parties.
In the real world I suspect it's just a normal Friday afternoon with people looking forward to getting to the pub or home or both.
There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
There's alot of people out there like Roger. They'll vote Labour whatever. Miliband could break into Kensington Palace, rape her royal Qilfiness and cut off little George's head, steal their cash and record himself blowing it while naked cavorting with a rentboy in the middle of the Strand - Roger would be putting the X in the Labour box. It's because the Tories are eeeeevil - don't you know?
Erm, the same applies in the Tory direction. Perhaps more so when reading the comments on here.
Unfortunately there's more than a lot of zombies from all parties, which is a shame, because they don't think and criticise their parties to help make them better.
From the FT, 70% chance of Labour being in Government after GE:
Quite. So why isn't every journalist at that venerable organ piling into the odds as they stand, seeing how the FT rates itself so highly intellectually?
Are they allergic to getting rich?
Or is it they don;t believe the utter bullsh*t they are writing?
@GuidoFawkes: Margaret Hodge slams PWC before admitting her firm employs them and she receives pension from her time working there: http://t.co/X2qaILnIW3
Good old Guido; I love it when he exposes rampant hypocrisy. BTW, good day to all.
I see Tapestry makes a very err controversial post in the comments.
Has he got the right person? Say what you like about Hodge, but I don't think so.
I am not accusing Stemcor of illegality. But it is behaving no differently to Amazon or Starbucks or anyone else.
That's a very strong claim and one you seem to have no basis for making. Indeed the facts in the article (the amount of tax paid when UK profits were higher) would strongly suggest that you are wrong.
I see nothing to suggest that this company seeks to allocate profits to lower tax jurisdictions rather than where they were actually made and it is this kind of behaviour Hodge has been criticising multi-nationals for.
Hodge is criticising multi-nationals for doing something which is in compliance with the laws. Stemcor is also complying with the laws - I am not saying otherwise and have no evidence to suggest this. So all these companies are complying with the laws in force at the time.
And yet only one group are the object of her scorn.
I am not accusing Stemcor of illegality. But it is behaving no differently to Amazon or Starbucks or anyone else.
That's a very strong claim and one you seem to have no basis for making. Indeed the facts in the article (the amount of tax paid when UK profits were higher) would strongly suggest that you are wrong.
I see nothing to suggest that this company seeks to allocate profits to lower tax jurisdictions rather than where they were actually made and it is this kind of behaviour Hodge has been criticising multi-nationals for.
Hodge is criticising multi-nationals for doing something which is in compliance with the laws. Stemcor is also complying with the laws
She is criticising the multi-nationals for doing something. You have accused this company of doing the same thing as these multi-nationals and hence her, indirectly, of hypocrisy. I am just pointing out that you have no basis for making that accusation and indeed the facts that there are tend to suggest you might be wrong to do so.
There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
There's alot of people out there like Roger. They'll vote Labour whatever. Miliband could break into Kensington Palace, rape her royal Qilfiness and cut off little George's head, steal their cash and record himself blowing it while naked cavorting with a rentboy in the middle of the Strand - Roger would be putting the X in the Labour box. It's because the Tories are eeeeevil - don't you know?
I think the reason is very simple. Punters are looking at Ed Miliband, as well as at the polls.
I have been amazed at the number of people who have said to me (without prompting) that they cannot believe Ed Miliband will become Prime Minister. This is people of all political persuasions, some of them quite aware politically, some not at all.
Now, there are two possibilities. Either they are in for a great surprise, and voters will indeed vote as they currently are telling pollsters, thus making Ed PM; or alternatively, when the election finally happens, that amazement at the prospect of Ed Miiband as Her Majesty's Prime Minister of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland will translate into a shift in the vote away from Labour.
Which will it be?
If I knew that for certain, I could make a killing from the election.
My view FWIW is that the second factor will have an effect, but perhaps not enough to save the country from discovering that it was right to be dismayed at the prospect of Ed as PM.
@CCHQPress: .@nadhimzahawi “6 months out from the General Election those at highest levels of the Labour party were plotting to remove @Ed_Miliband..."
@CCHQPress: ...This just proves @Ed_Miliband is not up to job of being PM & his own party knows it. Miliband in Downing St would spell chaos for Britain
We could ask why the pollsters way of collating support does not match up to real elections.
Look at H&M. Labour way out in front until about 2 minutes before the election when there is adrastic and massive alteration to get in line with the way that people are really going to vote
Same with the euro elections. Labour were out in front and UKIP third until just before the result when there was a drastic and large reconfiguration.
I have been amazed at the number of people who have said to me (without prompting) that they cannot believe Dave Cameron will be re-elected Prime Minister. This is people of all political persuasions, some of thom quite aware politically, some not at all.
Now, there are two possibilities. Either they are in for a great surprise, and people will vote counter to the way they are currently are telling pollsters, thus making Dave PM; or alternatively, when the election finally happens, the prospect of David Cameron winning another term as Her Majesty's Prime Minister of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland will cause a shift in the vote away from the Tories.
Which will it be?
If I knew that for certain, I could make a killing from the election.
My view FWIW is that the second factor will have an effect, but perhaps not enough to save the country from discovering that it was right to be dismayed at the prospect of another term of Dave.
Yes, but it isn't. Why? The only logical explanation is that nobody believes the polls.
As I say, something about this election does not ring true. Something is wrong.
I have more than a feeling, that UKIP will take more seats from Labour than the Tories: in the ratio of 55:45
MikeK predicts 100 UKIP gains!!!!
If the LibDems edge up to 14 or 15%, largely at the expense of Labour, and UKIP gets more than 20%, then MrK's forecast might prove to be prophetic.
I think he is optimistic, but in a world where the "top" party is on less than a third of the vote, then there could be some extraordinary results. I am a buyer of UKIP seats (although I think they'll struggle to hold Rochester).
I have been amazed at the number of people who have said to me (without prompting) that they cannot believe Bobajob has remembered his login details etc etc.
Same with the euro elections. Labour were out in front and UKIP third until just before the result when there was a drastic and large reconfiguration.
Nope, UKIP were polling in the 20s / 30s for the Euros all of 2014 and polled in the lead months before the actual vote. I think you are misremembering what happened last year.
Comments
but holding up well in the polls. Something, somewhere does not add up. Something is wrong, broken and twisted about this election campaign.
I don;t know what it is, but its definitely there.
Your size
Same goes for anyone else including you bobajob
http://www.barkinganddagenhampost.co.uk/news/business/barking_mp_defends_family_firm_s_tax_bill_on_day_she_grills_companies_1_1691530
So you don't believe the polls either.
Does anybody?
Love or hate the Tories - at least everyone knows what Dave n Ozzy will do. Sound money, deficit, growth, rebalancing steady as she goes, etc.
Miliblob? I'm a politics geek and even I really don't know. Price freezes? Mansion Tax? Spending cuts, same or let rip? Ed Miliband has done a quite fabulous job of holding the Labour party together for 5 years. He's achieved this by completely avoiding the potentially difficult arena of having a plan or a policy or a vision. There's no 'why' to anything he says. It's all tatty and inconsistent bits of flesh without any discernible skeleton.
Cut Labour and they bleed hypocrisy.
I despise such Labour people. I would much rather have the sort of person Roger was talking about on an earlier thread.
Yes but that does not explain the consistent high support for labour in the polls.
Indeed, the polls appear to be the only thing that's keeping ed in his job. The press,the policies, the turnouts, the result when people actually come to vote, are all against him.
If people being polled haven't noticed the campaign the numbers won't shift much. Political obsessives, geeks, punters and other denizens of PB have noticed so the markets move and the mood in the parties match the betting, not the polls.
If this is the case then we might expect the polls to move towards the markets as the campaign ramps up.
If not, then we should expect the markets to move to the polls
e.g. in 2013, Stoke-on-Trent was the 5th worst (147th) in the secondary school league tables, which are based on the proportion of youngsters getting good passes in maths, English and at least two other subjects.
http://survation.com/ukip-won-in-8-westminster-constituencies-last-thursday/
From personal experience though, it does lead to rather restricted conversation around the family dinner table!
Why not take isam to the cleaners then?
With enemies like this ....
That would be too delicious
Nor does that article go into the trust arrangements set up by her family which also have the effect of limiting the tax paid.
And I'm afraid the newspaper's questions are not really the sort of forensic questioning of precisely how Stemcor and the family trusts are organised and the tax effect of what they do that is needed.
The plain fact is that as a result of tax laws in place - and which the Labour government did little or nothing to change - companies, including Stemcor, pay relatively little tax. This means that people like you and I have to pay rather more, very many many multiples in fact of the percentage rate that Stemcor pays, according to that article.
And it p*sses me off. So I'm in no mood to be lectured on tax morality by millionairesses who benefit from such arrangements.
PS I did wager with Isam on Rotherham so I may share the winnings.
Or do you have different information or information that might suggest that profits related to business transacted here has been booked elsewhere?
BTW, good day to all.
I see nothing to suggest that this company seeks to allocate profits to lower tax jurisdictions rather than where they were actually made and it is this kind of behaviour Hodge has been criticising multi-nationals for.
A valiant explanation, Patrick, but one that unfortunately does not explain the betting markets.
Fact is, right now the punters think the polls are bullsh8t. Given what happens when people are asked to put a cross on a ballot paper in a real election, I'm inclined to agree.
Why is EdM4PM backable at 2.25 (2.3 on Betfair)?
That bet should be below evens.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/prime-minister-after-general-election
http://sports.betfair.com/Index.do?mi=116758783&ex=1&origin=MRL
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7c362376-ad48-11e4-bfcf-00144feab7de.html#axzz3QyrBS7we
Yes, but it isn't. Why? The only logical explanation is that nobody believes the polls.
As I say, something about this election does not ring true. Something is wrong.
Quite. So why isn't every journalist at that venerable organ piling into the odds as they stand, seeing how the FT rates itself so highly intellectually?
Are they allergic to getting rich?
Or is it they don;t believe the utter bullsh*t they are writing?
And yet only one group are the object of her scorn.
I loaded the GE candidates from YourNextMP into my system (I find it easier to search than their site):-
www.nojam.com/at/ge2015
The data is crowd-sourced and seems to have quite a lot of detail, even down to facebook pages.
Does anyone know of other open data sources relevant to May 2015?
Brighton Kempton @ 6/4
Hove @ 9/4
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dFkzTjFrRmJRN3F6ODBTTEs4NGFhcUE#gid=0
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/timber-great-snp-price-crash.html
That's a 12% return in 93 days !
What is certain is that this election will cost some people their careers.
I think it will cost several pollsters theirs.
If I am wrong, it will cost Dan Hodges his!
Seriously, I've doing it obsessively every day for about a year. I never add any names unless I'm 100% sure they're correct. I love accurate data.
I have been amazed at the number of people who have said to me (without prompting) that they cannot believe Ed Miliband will become Prime Minister. This is people of all political persuasions, some of them quite aware politically, some not at all.
Now, there are two possibilities. Either they are in for a great surprise, and voters will indeed vote as they currently are telling pollsters, thus making Ed PM; or alternatively, when the election finally happens, that amazement at the prospect of Ed Miiband as Her Majesty's Prime Minister of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland will translate into a shift in the vote away from Labour.
Which will it be?
If I knew that for certain, I could make a killing from the election.
My view FWIW is that the second factor will have an effect, but perhaps not enough to save the country from discovering that it was right to be dismayed at the prospect of Ed as PM.
@CCHQPress: .@nadhimzahawi “6 months out from the General Election those at highest levels of the Labour party were plotting to remove @Ed_Miliband..."
@CCHQPress: ...This just proves @Ed_Miliband is not up to job of being PM & his own party knows it. Miliband in Downing St would spell chaos for Britain
We could ask why the pollsters way of collating support does not match up to real elections.
Look at H&M. Labour way out in front until about 2 minutes before the election when there is adrastic and massive alteration to get in line with the way that people are really going to vote
Same with the euro elections. Labour were out in front and UKIP third until just before the result when there was a drastic and large reconfiguration.
What the f8ck is going on?
Now, there are two possibilities. Either they are in for a great surprise, and people will vote counter to the way they are currently are telling pollsters, thus making Dave PM; or alternatively, when the election finally happens, the prospect of David Cameron winning another term as Her Majesty's Prime Minister of Great Britain and Nothern Ireland will cause a shift in the vote away from the Tories.
Which will it be?
If I knew that for certain, I could make a killing from the election.
My view FWIW is that the second factor will have an effect, but perhaps not enough to save the country from discovering that it was right to be dismayed at the prospect of another term of Dave.
But I have backed them in four 'Ro's' and am quite confident in all of them
And i don't fancy them in Romford!! (2nd nailed on)
You should unleash the innerfrank.
I think he is optimistic, but in a world where the "top" party is on less than a third of the vote, then there could be some extraordinary results. I am a buyer of UKIP seats (although I think they'll struggle to hold Rochester).