Given that his deputy can serve if he resigns after November and IIRC that Cameron was not appointed leader until December 2005 after Howard's resignation there probably isn't a particular problem.
True perhaps in 2005 when Labour had a solid majority of 60 and it didn't really matter how long it took for the Conservatives to choose a new leader but given the very real likelihood of a weak unstable Labour minority Government after May, do the Conservatives really want to be leader-less for very long ?
This was the thrust of the argument - a weak Labour minority could collapse at any time so why would the Conservatives take as long to elect their new leader in 2015 ? Answer - they wouldn't and given that Boris would either be LOTO or hold a very senior position in a new Shadow Cabinet, might he not be compelled to stand down as London Mayor thereby forcing the by-election in say September ?
Give incentives to businesses to take on apprentices by all means, but force them to and you just wind them up, discrediting the idea and meaning many of the resulting apprenticeship schemes will just be low quality mechanisms to look like they are compliant.
So Ed has managed at a stroke to turn a fantastic idea, enouraging more apprentices into something negative, authoritarian and interfering. EIC
And people accuse UKIP of coming out with ill thought out, populist crap......
It is typical of Ed though, wave a magic wand and every school leaver can have an apprenticeship, wave the wand again and you guarantee a job for the long-term unemployed.
Half-baked ideas that sound good on paper — energy price freeze — are an Ed speciality. Just think in only 3 months time Ed will have to deal with issues like combating ISIS at home and abroad.
@viewcode. From the outset of these 'negotiations', it struck me that the Greeks were following a playbook created by someone who had book knowledge but no practical experience. Part of the analysis of any negotiation of this type is not just the substance of the negotiations (the hard numbers) but also the process of the negotiation, because it is not a one off and so maintaining a working relationship with all involved is essential. So what did the Greeks do from day one? Everything they could to piss off everyone, and in particular to piss of the most important player of all, Germany. Anyone who has played a true Prisoner's Dilemma knows that, in order to get to the optimal outcome rather than the suboptimal one, the players have to trust each other. Varoufakis seems to have ignored that simple fact in trying to play a very weak hand too cleverly by half.
Ozzie has finally broken into "social media". Could this be a leadership bid?
"Osborne advice on tax avoidance resurfaces Posted at 16:58 A 2003 appearance on the BBC's Daily Politics by George Osborne is doing the rounds on social media. Mr Osborne suggests a caller to the programme investigates some "pretty clever financial products". The clip comes about 30 seconds into this highlights' selection."
Being the partisan hypocrite that I am, I linked to that vid about 2 hours ago.
Well what is worse - telling people how to (legally) avoid tax - or attacking people who legally avoid tax - and then do it yourself?
I think a combination of the three would be worst. Like telling a donor how to make a tax free donation while also attacking tax avoiders and tax avoiding.
Now, who's done that?
I can't even tell who is on which side in this debate. In view of your screen names -
Strange all this Difference should be 'Twixt Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee!
No, he isn't. Genuinely. Reading a book on music does not enable you to sing. Look at how he's approached the negotiations. He couldn't have messed up worse if he was actually trying to.
If somebody claims to be a surgeon then removes the patient's arms and testicles whilst stabbing him in the heart shouting "DIE PATIENT DIE!", we can safely state that that person is not a surgeon. Similarly, we can safely state that Varoufakis is rubbish at game theory.
Give incentives to businesses to take on apprentices by all means, but force them to and you just wind them up, discrediting the idea and meaning many of the resulting apprenticeship schemes will just be low quality mechanisms to look like they are compliant.
So Ed has managed at a stroke to turn a fantastic idea, enouraging more apprentices into something negative, authoritarian and interfering. EIC
And people accuse UKIP of coming out with ill thought out, populist crap......
It is typical of Ed though, wave a magic wand and every school leaver can have an apprenticeship, wave the wand again and you guarantee a job for the long-term unemployed.
Half-baked ideas that sound good on paper — energy price freeze — are an Ed speciality. Just think in only 3 months time Ed will have to deal with issues like combating ISIS at home and abroad.
Yikes!
I am waiting for some journalist to actually ask these probing questions. Like he just trotted out the line of x thousand new front line home care workers that he will hire...except he has no direct control over that. Not only is it not NHS, nor it is in 90% of the time local council these days, all the contracts have been outsourced. So it is up to private providers under their current contracts to provide the support they are being paid for.
Now either Ed is going to change the law radically to make minimum visit times longer / more frequent or he is talking horses##t...and if he is talking about radically altering the law, not only can I see lots of these private providers say hey a deal is a deal, but also old people who pay for their own care will end up paying more.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Ozzie has finally broken into "social media". Could this be a leadership bid?
"Osborne advice on tax avoidance resurfaces Posted at 16:58 A 2003 appearance on the BBC's Daily Politics by George Osborne is doing the rounds on social media. Mr Osborne suggests a caller to the programme investigates some "pretty clever financial products". The clip comes about 30 seconds into this highlights' selection."
Being the partisan hypocrite that I am, I linked to that vid about 2 hours ago.
Well what is worse - telling people how to (legally) avoid tax - or attacking people who legally avoid tax - and then do it yourself?
I think a combination of the three would be worst. Like telling a donor how to make a tax free donation while also attacking tax avoiders and tax avoiding.
Now, who's done that?
I can't even tell who is on which side in this debate. In view of your screen names -
Strange all this Difference should be 'Twixt Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee!
I think we're on the same side of the debate..
But I don't know if weejonnie is as partisan or as hypocritical as I'm said to be
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
Exactly my criticism of Cameron. He's totally failed to lead the Conservative movement in this country. In no sense do I detect he's led national debate or moved the centre of public opinion over to the Conservative cause over the last 5 years.
In fact, whenever he does something vaguely Conservative he seems to be very apologetic about it. I think the centre of gravity of UK political discourse is exactly where it was in 2010.
Casino Royale, I take your point and agree with it to an extent, but I don't think you're giving sufficient credit for his achievements in the modern political context.
Certainly I would struggle to define "Cameronism" and I think if he loses in May he will be judged unfavourably against Thatcher and Blair for his failure to leave a defining popular legacy. But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that after thirteen years of Labour government in which public expenditure only went in one direction he has led a government that has consistently challenged the political consensus and begun to establish a "value" culture in the public sector that was hitherto missing. We now hear leaders of major public services like the NHS actively embracing the need for efficiency, in a way that was inconceivable five years ago. And we have seen the beginnings of a revolution in the relationship between welfare, work and the low paid. He has also restored power to parliament and to the people, with referenda on the voting system and Scottish independence, and an EU referendum to follow. On matters of war and peace he has been consultative rather than directional. Finally, he has allowed cabinet ministers (largely) to get on with running their departments, reversing a paralysing centralisation that characterised much of the last 20 years.
You could of course dispute some of the above, or say the credit lies elsewhere. Certainly not all of the above has applied uniformly, or uniformly happily. Some ministers needed more controlling, for example. And perhaps it doesn't make up for his lack of an overwhelming vision. But Cameron has been a pragmatic and flexible leader during a time of great political change, in an era in which people are suspicious of idealists.
I would have liked him to be truer to his instincts and a more visionary leader, but I don't think he has done badly by any stretch, and would say that Britain is better for his premiership.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
State Control @State_Control 32m32 minutes ago Director of EU-funded #UKIP Smear 'Mockumentary' In Court For Tax Fraud: http://bit.ly/1DhSdmL
DIRECTOR OF UKIP SMEAR ‘MOCKUMENTARY’ IN COURT FOR TAX FRAUD
From what I've read Channel 4 appear to have gone for a "Threads" style in portraying the devastation that would occur following a UKIP.
Perhaps we even might get to see a nuclear warhead detonating just outside Sheffield.
It's a very weird documentary in that it's supposed to be like a natural disaster, but it has that funny feeling of a parody of disaster documentaries. Unfortunately it's not like Airplane! but more like the Big Bus (almost there but not quite there).
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
Given the amount of things Labour seems to think the bonus tax will pay for I can only assume that they intend it to be extraordinarily punitive. How that will work in practice, or more likely why it won't work, is another matter.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
The realisation of this sort of thing will drive the Red Liberals back to Clegg.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
The Magic Money Tree exists. It's called the Bank of England.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
MMT jokes don't really work when your own Chancellor has hit on the magnificent money-making wheeze of selling £5 notes for £4, even if he only sells them to the over 65.
I usually only lurk here but this sort of oft repeated nonsense should be challenged.
1) Incorrect. The US does not manufacture the warheads and to do so would be a breach of the Nonproliferation Treaty.
2) Elements are vaguely true but only relevant over a period of many years, during which would could replace their input.
3) Won't address this in detail but it's nonsense. Often repeated nonsense, so I don't blame you for believing it, but it's nonsense. Think about the circumstances in which Trident might be fired (the West has gone and so have the toys overhead) and consider two things: a) we already know where e.g. Moscow is, and b) you don't need to be that accurate with a nuclear device.
3. An interesting angle -one of the key reasons given in the Commission report for maintaining Ballistic missiles over simply using an aircraft is its capability of accuracy within 10s of metres. Perhaps you could outline to them your theory of just lobbing one in the general direction of the Russians -you might save us a lot of money.
Months? Crickey, we'd better tell the V Boat captain on patrol.
On number three, I refer you to other previous comments. My point was that inertial and star mapping navigation are less accurate that some other means we might use for non-nuclear weapons but that's ok, given the reasons for using Trident and its yield.
The real argument for a submarine based ballistic missile is that it's invulnerable until used.
You make good points Flockers. I am not sure we need any more '...isms'. These are things the press have to invent to tag people with. What upsets some people is that Cameron has not played the race card. What Cameron and the tories have done is cut back on expenditure and the public payroll so much so that opponents try to compare it to 1936. But this is still not good enough for some!
@viewcode. From the outset of these 'negotiations', it struck me that the Greeks were following a playbook created by someone who had book knowledge but no practical experience. Part of the analysis of any negotiation of this type is not just the substance of the negotiations (the hard numbers) but also the process of the negotiation, because it is not a one off and so maintaining a working relationship with all involved is essential. So what did the Greeks do from day one? Everything they could to piss off everyone, and in particular to piss of the most important player of all, Germany. Anyone who has played a true Prisoner's Dilemma knows that, in order to get to the optimal outcome rather than the suboptimal one, the players have to trust each other. Varoufakis seems to have ignored that simple fact in trying to play a very weak hand too cleverly by half.
That works if the 2 sides don't really hate each other and even then if the disaster of no agreement is not total (Cold War vs Nuclear Holocaust) The end of the eurozone will not be the end of mankind, so both sides have no problem of pressing the red button if they really hate each other.
The eurozone is an emotional and political thing (the EU too), it is disastrous economically, however it manages to go on because of the emotion of the "european ideal", if you take that emotion away and replace it by hate towards "european oppressors" then it's game over for the euro (and for the EU) as inevitably you get a populace that votes a government that wants to get out.
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
Given the amount of things Labour seems to think the bonus tax will pay for I can only assume that they intend it to be extraordinarily punitive. How that will work in practice, or more likely why it won't work, is another matter.
Given there's the crazy EU 2x salary multiple cap in place now aren't "bankers bonuses" going to be much smaller anyway.
Give incentives to businesses to take on apprentices by all means, but force them to and you just wind them up, discrediting the idea and meaning many of the resulting apprenticeship schemes will just be low quality mechanisms to look like they are compliant.
So Ed has managed at a stroke to turn a fantastic idea, enouraging more apprentices into something negative, authoritarian and interfering. EIC
And people accuse UKIP of coming out with ill thought out, populist crap......
It is typical of Ed though, wave a magic wand and every school leaver can have an apprenticeship, wave the wand again and you guarantee a job for the long-term unemployed.
Half-baked ideas that sound good on paper — energy price freeze — are an Ed speciality. Just think in only 3 months time Ed will have to deal with issues like combating ISIS at home and abroad.
Yikes!
The govt have already done quite a bit a bit on apprenticeships I think.
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
Given the amount of things Labour seems to think the bonus tax will pay for I can only assume that they intend it to be extraordinarily punitive. How that will work in practice, or more likely why it won't work, is another matter.
Given there's the crazy EU 2x salary multiple cap in place now aren't "bankers bonuses" going to be much smaller anyway.
Yes, in theory bonuses in future will be smaller, but still Labour keep adding to the the list of things the tax will pay for.
I usually only lurk here but this sort of oft repeated nonsense should be challenged.
1) Incorrect. The US does not manufacture the warheads and to do so would be a breach of the Nonproliferation Treaty.
2) Elements are vaguely true but only relevant over a period of many years, during which would could replace their input.
3) Won't address this in detail but it's nonsense. Often repeated nonsense, so I don't blame you for believing it, but it's nonsense. Think about the circumstances in which Trident might be fired (the West has gone and so have the toys overhead) and consider two things: a) we already know where e.g. Moscow is, and b) you don't need to be that accurate with a nuclear device.
3. An interesting angle -one of the key reasons given in the Commission report for maintaining Ballistic missiles over simply using an aircraft is its capability of accuracy within 10s of metres. Perhaps you could outline to them your theory of just lobbing one in the general direction of the Russians -you might save us a lot of money.
Months? Crickey, we'd better tell the V Boat captain on patrol.
On number three, I refer you to other previous comments. My point was that inertial and star mapping navigation are less accurate that some other means we might use for non-nuclear weapons but that's ok, given the reasons for using Trident and its yield.
The real argument for a submarine based ballistic missile is that it's invulnerable until used.
Investment in Trident is measured in decades. Against that, surely a system that could be made useless in months is a serious consideration.
Whether it is invulnerable to the latest anti-submarine technology, and if it is invulnerable, whether it will remain invulnerable for the foreseeable future, is a whole new can of worms. No-one is going to broadcast the fact they have these technologies; it would surely lead to a new arms race.
@viewcode. From the outset of these 'negotiations', it struck me that the Greeks were following a playbook created by someone who had book knowledge but no practical experience. Part of the analysis of any negotiation of this type is not just the substance of the negotiations (the hard numbers) but also the process of the negotiation, because it is not a one off and so maintaining a working relationship with all involved is essential. So what did the Greeks do from day one? Everything they could to piss off everyone, and in particular to piss of the most important player of all, Germany. Anyone who has played a true Prisoner's Dilemma knows that, in order to get to the optimal outcome rather than the suboptimal one, the players have to trust each other. Varoufakis seems to have ignored that simple fact in trying to play a very weak hand too cleverly by half.
That works if the 2 sides don't really hate each other and even then if the disaster of no agreement is not total (Cold War vs Nuclear Holocaust) The end of the eurozone will not be the end of mankind, so both sides have no problem of pressing the red button if they really hate each other.
The eurozone is an emotional and political thing (the EU too), it is disastrous economically, however it manages to go on because of the emotion of the "european ideal", if you take that emotion away and replace it by hate towards "european oppressors" then it's game over for the euro (and for the EU) as inevitably you get a populace that votes a government that wants to get out.
MTimM, that might be right. But the Greek government is pouring out so much fire, backing themselves at home, that it is starting to look like cover for something else. I big climbdown, perhaps, or unilateral withdrawal perhaps.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
Don't worry the bankers' bonus tax will probably pay for it, as it will pay for, and I'm not joking, the apprenticeships for all that he announced this morning.
How many times has it been allocated for things now? 20 different things?
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
The realisation of this sort of thing will drive the Red Liberals back to Clegg.
That's an interesting thought... Maybe the prospect of the SNP will encourage a Lab to LD swing.??
They're already on Airbus pulling out of the UK within seconds of 'PM Farage' announcing the UK withdrawing from the EU.
Yes, it's pretty chilling. Put me right off voting for UKIP.
Best tweet I saw from a kipper about this said if ukip were in charge they'd have closed channel 4 down within 100 days so this shit wouldn't be on!
Ha. To be fair, Channel 4 did do a fairly pro-Farage documentary on the real Nigel Farage a few months ago, so it's not all bad. Although this particular documentary is silly propaganda.
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
Given the amount of things Labour seems to think the bonus tax will pay for I can only assume that they intend it to be extraordinarily punitive. How that will work in practice, or more likely why it won't work, is another matter.
Given there's the crazy EU 2x salary multiple cap in place now aren't "bankers bonuses" going to be much smaller anyway.
Yes, in theory bonuses in future will be smaller, but still Labour keep adding to the the list of things the tax will pay for.
This guide from Freshfields implies that bonuses as such will be significantly smaller in value, fixed at 1:1 ratio's unless shareholders approve a 1:2 ratio backed up with robust anti avoidance.
They're already on Airbus pulling out of the UK within seconds of 'PM Farage' announcing the UK withdrawing from the EU.
Yes, it's pretty chilling. Put me right off voting for UKIP.
Best tweet I saw from a kipper about this said if ukip were in charge they'd have closed channel 4 down within 100 days so this shit wouldn't be on!
Ha. To be fair, Channel 4 did do a fairly pro-Farage documentary on the real Nigel Farage a few months ago, so it's not all bad. Although this particular documentary is silly propaganda.
Just switched it on... Unreal really, but I guess they gave Farage an hour with the goggle box crew so yeah fair enough
Hopefully there will be a bit of outrage, bit of publicity and we will go back up in the polls
Give incentives to businesses to take on apprentices by all means, but force them to and you just wind them up, discrediting the idea and meaning many of the resulting apprenticeship schemes will just be low quality mechanisms to look like they are compliant.
So Ed has managed at a stroke to turn a fantastic idea, enouraging more apprentices into something negative, authoritarian and interfering. EIC
And people accuse UKIP of coming out with ill thought out, populist crap......
It is typical of Ed though, wave a magic wand and every school leaver can have an apprenticeship, wave the wand again and you guarantee a job for the long-term unemployed.
Half-baked ideas that sound good on paper — energy price freeze — are an Ed speciality. Just think in only 3 months time Ed will have to deal with issues like combating ISIS at home and abroad.
Yikes!
The govt have already done quite a bit a bit on apprenticeships I think.
They have, but some of the numbers are shall we say a bit inflated. Morrisons for instance have taken on loads and loads on, but closer inspection reveals a significant number aren't quite what you would expect most people would think of as an "apprenticeship ".
Have Lab ever announced the level of the bankers' bonus tax?
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
Given the amount of things Labour seems to think the bonus tax will pay for I can only assume that they intend it to be extraordinarily punitive. How that will work in practice, or more likely why it won't work, is another matter.
Given there's the crazy EU 2x salary multiple cap in place now aren't "bankers bonuses" going to be much smaller anyway.
The cap only applies to a subset of bankers - lots of people still get more than 2x salary (I thought it was 'bonus couldn't exceed basic', anyway?). A large proportion of that subset got a huge hike in base salaries after the rule came in. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2845403/Bankers-pay-rocket-year-EU-backs-cap-bonuses-Chancellor-concedes-defeat.html Anyway, what's a bonus? What if you receive "variable pay" which changes each year depending on the previous year's performance? And there are people a lot cleverer/sneakier than me think about it, I assure you. The bonus tax will bring in three-quarters of sweet FA and, as ever, those it catches will be exactly the group that it wasn't meant to catch. EIC.
I hope the end of the programme features the UKIP government collapsing and a LibLabCon government taking power and embracing the Euro and the joys of political union. The country returns to prosperity and lives happily ever after.
I usually only lurk here but this sort of oft repeated nonsense should be challenged.
1) Incorrect. The US does not manufacture the warheads and to do so would be a breach of the Nonproliferation Treaty.
2) Elements are vaguely true but only relevant over a period of many years, during which would could replace their input.
3) Won't address this in detail but it's nonsense. Often repeated nonsense, so I don't blame you for believing it, but it's nonsense. Think about the circumstances in which Trident might be fired (the West has gone and so have the toys overhead) and consider two things: a) we already know where e.g. Moscow is, and b) you don't need to be that accurate with a nuclear device.
3. An interesting angle -one of the key reasons given in the Commission report for maintaining Ballistic missiles over simply using an aircraft is its capability of accuracy within 10s of metres. Perhaps you could outline to them your theory of just lobbing one in the general direction of the Russians -you might save us a lot of money.
Months? Crickey, we'd better tell the V Boat captain on patrol.
On number three, I refer you to other previous comments. My point was that inertial and star mapping navigation are less accurate that some other means we might use for non-nuclear weapons but that's ok, given the reasons for using Trident and its yield.
The real argument for a submarine based ballistic missile is that it's invulnerable until used.
Inertial and Star Mapping navigation is accurate enough, that a Trident D5 will deliver a 100 kiloton warhead to within 390 feet of it's intended target, as designed.
As accuracy has improved, required yields have fallen. When it was measured in miles, weapons had to be in the megaton range.
I hope the end of the programme features the UKIP government collapsing and a LibLabCon government taking power and embracing the Euro and the joys of political union. The country returns to prosperity and lives happily ever after.
Don't be silly this is the UK. Not Never Never Land.
Having looked a bit more at the form, In my opinion no bet represents value on the Scotland v NZ match.
For the record however I expect a 7 wicket or 130 run victory (something like 320/190) for New Zealand.
If New Zealand can score 331 against the test attack of Sri Lanka, then they should score more than 320 against Scotland.
The handicap (I think you were her earlier) should be tempted for you then, if you're prepared to take the risk they bat second and can only drop a single wicket. [EDIT: NZ put Scotland in, so it won't matter.]
I'm personally not convinced, I expect a bright start but a quite considered middle period for NZ.
At the end of the day since I'm not betting I did have to come out and say something to be judged by.
They're already on Airbus pulling out of the UK within seconds of 'PM Farage' announcing the UK withdrawing from the EU.
Yes, it's pretty chilling. Put me right off voting for UKIP.
Best tweet I saw from a kipper about this said if ukip were in charge they'd have closed channel 4 down within 100 days so this shit wouldn't be on!
Ha. To be fair, Channel 4 did do a fairly pro-Farage documentary on the real Nigel Farage a few months ago, so it's not all bad. Although this particular documentary is silly propaganda.
Just switched it on... Unreal really, but I guess they gave Farage an hour with the goggle box crew so yeah fair enough
Hopefully there will be a bit of outrage, bit of publicity and we will go back up in the polls
Kippers across the land must have felt a small stirring at the mention of the words 'PM Farage'.
They're already on Airbus pulling out of the UK within seconds of 'PM Farage' announcing the UK withdrawing from the EU.
Yes, it's pretty chilling. Put me right off voting for UKIP.
Best tweet I saw from a kipper about this said if ukip were in charge they'd have closed channel 4 down within 100 days so this shit wouldn't be on!
Ha. To be fair, Channel 4 did do a fairly pro-Farage documentary on the real Nigel Farage a few months ago, so it's not all bad. Although this particular documentary is silly propaganda.
Just switched it on... Unreal really, but I guess they gave Farage an hour with the goggle box crew so yeah fair enough
Hopefully there will be a bit of outrage, bit of publicity and we will go back up in the polls
Kippers across the land must have felt a small stirring at the mention of the words 'PM Farage'.
I am interested how you might be able to get the money back after 10 years? I know bankers don't get their money in cash straight away now, but lets say you have done something dodgy, you get your bonus in x years, well if you suspect that maybe, just maybe in the next 5-6 years the government might come to claw it back because you have been up to no good, well there are plenty of ways you can shift your money and then show them empty pockets and say sorry bankrupt.
I am kinda of skeptical full stop how effective anything like that is. High net worth criminals already do it on a massive scale and the whole proceeds of crime act really only manages to get money back off morons.
There was a documentary, I think last year, giving examples of how some big time criminals basically showed the authorities empty pockets when the law caught up with them. 2-3 years in the clink and surprise surprise they are again in their mansions on the Costa del Sol, of course said mansion not in their name.
I am interested how you might be able to get the money back after 10 years? I know bankers don't get their money in cash straight away now, but lets say you have done something dodgy, you get your bonus in x years, well if you suspect that maybe, just maybe in the next 5-6 years the government might come to claw it back because you have been up to no good, well there are plenty of ways you can shift your money and then show them empty pockets and say sorry bankrupt.
I am kinda of skeptical full stop how effective anything like that is. High net worth criminals already do it on a massive scale and the whole proceeds of crime act really only manages to get money back of morons.
LIAMT and antifrank can comment if they want, but I am thoroughly dubious of the legal basis of a ten-year period, assuming the bonus is prima facie paid to the banker in year 1 (rather than held somehow).
Having looked a bit more at the form, In my opinion no bet represents value on the Scotland v NZ match.
For the record however I expect a 7 wicket or 130 run victory (something like 320/190) for New Zealand.
If New Zealand can score 331 against the test attack of Sri Lanka, then they should score more than 320 against Scotland.
I'll bet you £100 at evens they score less than 300
Really, given that the Sweaties could bat first? Nice try
It's worse than that, NZ have already put Scotland in! TSE not fooled.
Incidentally I do think Scotland will post enough to prevent a nine-wicket haul (currently 5/6) but not my sort of bet (the casual gambler's outsider).
I am interested how you might be able to get the money back after 10 years? I know bankers don't get their money in cash straight away now, but lets say you have done something dodgy, you get your bonus in x years, well if you suspect that maybe, just maybe in the next 5-6 years the government might come to claw it back because you have been up to no good, well there are plenty of ways you can shift your money and then show them empty pockets and say sorry bankrupt.
I am kinda of skeptical full stop how effective anything like that is. High net worth criminals already do it on a massive scale and the whole proceeds of crime act really only manages to get money back of morons.
There was a documentary, I think last year giving examples of how some big time criminals basically showed the authorities empty pockets when the law caught up with them. 2-3 years in the clink and surprise surprise they are again in their mansions on the Costa del Sol, of course said mansion not in their name.
It's obviously just big socialist talk. And if they make it into power they'll blame Fatcha for not being able to implement it
I hope the end of the programme features the UKIP government collapsing and a LibLabCon government taking power and embracing the Euro and the joys of political union. The country returns to prosperity and lives happily ever after.
Quite possibly they will have Farage on a mat dressed in a kimono with a long knife in his hand ready to commit sepuku. And someone with a Katana ready to chop his head off. A thrilling end to a leftist fantasy smear.
I hope the end of the programme features the UKIP government collapsing and a LibLabCon government taking power and embracing the Euro and the joys of political union. The country returns to prosperity and lives happily ever after.
Quite possibly they will have Farage on a mat dressed in a kimono with a long knife in his hand ready to commit sepuku. And someone with a Katana ready to chop his head off. A thrilling end to a leftist fantasy smear.
Hopefully there will be some sort of modern day Nuremberg trials where UKIP members up and down the country are tried for their crimes.
@viewcode. From the outset of these 'negotiations', it struck me that the Greeks were following a playbook created by someone who had book knowledge but no practical experience. Part of the analysis of any negotiation of this type is not just the substance of the negotiations (the hard numbers) but also the process of the negotiation, because it is not a one off and so maintaining a working relationship with all involved is essential. So what did the Greeks do from day one? Everything they could to piss off everyone, and in particular to piss of the most important player of all, Germany. Anyone who has played a true Prisoner's Dilemma knows that, in order to get to the optimal outcome rather than the suboptimal one, the players have to trust each other. Varoufakis seems to have ignored that simple fact in trying to play a very weak hand too cleverly by half.
I'm not so sure about that. I wonder if the problem isn't between the ECB and Greece but between the ECB and Germany. http://coppolacomment.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/what-on-earth-is-ecb-up-to.html highlighted that possibility earlier this month. After all there is little you can do when Germany continually says nein....
Having looked a bit more at the form, In my opinion no bet represents value on the Scotland v NZ match.
For the record however I expect a 7 wicket or 130 run victory (something like 320/190) for New Zealand.
If New Zealand can score 331 against the test attack of Sri Lanka, then they should score more than 320 against Scotland.
I'll bet you £100 at evens they score less than 300
Really, given that the Sweaties could bat first? Nice try
It's worse than that, NZ have already put Scotland in! TSE not fooled.
Incidentally I do think Scotland will post enough to prevent a nine-wicket haul (currently 5/6) but not my sort of bet (the casual gambler's outsider).
Nightmare for me as I bought Williamson series runs at 374, just hope he gets a bat
I hope the end of the programme features the UKIP government collapsing and a LibLabCon government taking power and embracing the Euro and the joys of political union. The country returns to prosperity and lives happily ever after.
Quite possibly they will have Farage on a mat dressed in a kimono with a long knife in his hand ready to commit sepuku. And someone with a Katana ready to chop his head off. A thrilling end to a leftist fantasy smear.
I liked the posh counties lady trying to persuade the Asian UKIP MP to overturn gay marriage, except of course the Asian community tends to have the most traditional family values of any community in Britain
Oooh, I missed all the fun, due to taking my daughter and friend to the Science Museum. The weirdly sincere joys of Half Term, and Nandos.
Anyway I wanted to pick up on a prior point fpt.
At the Science Museum I saw a young Jewish family with the boys all wearing yarmulkahs (sp?). My first thought was "how brave". Then came total shock at my thought.
We've reached stage where a European Gentile is quietly admiring of a 9 year old Jewish boy who will happily admit his Jewishness in public?
With our history, this is beyond wrong. It is the harbinger of deep evil.
I speak as someone who abhors the behaviour of Israel in Gaza, but when we unwittingly and subconsciously expect Jews to creep about the streets, hiding their identity, like 15th century Spain, then: UGH.
There is a cancer in the West. And it isn't western Jews.
Aren't you 50 years out of date? Well actually to be fair you might only be 50 minutes. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4355811.ece ''An incendiary row over antisemitism hit France’s ruling Socialists today after a party grandee claimed that key policies were being shaped by the prime minister’s Jewish wife.'' Maybe the guy is senile, but as the Times points out ...''It also recalls recent attacks on the Prime Minister by a host of figures ranging from Islamist radicals to Nicolas Anelka, the footballer, who all portray Mrs Gavroin as the lynchpin of the new Jewish lobby in France.''
Having looked a bit more at the form, In my opinion no bet represents value on the Scotland v NZ match.
For the record however I expect a 7 wicket or 130 run victory (something like 320/190) for New Zealand.
If New Zealand can score 331 against the test attack of Sri Lanka, then they should score more than 320 against Scotland.
I'll bet you £100 at evens they score less than 300
Really, given that the Sweaties could bat first? Nice try
It's worse than that, NZ have already put Scotland in! TSE not fooled.
Incidentally I do think Scotland will post enough to prevent a nine-wicket haul (currently 5/6) but not my sort of bet (the casual gambler's outsider).
Nightmare for me as I bought Williamson series runs at 374, just hope he gets a bat
Played for Yorkshire last season,county cricket for me did Williamson a world of good.
Not sure I buy NP-ExMP...its ok to have a smear-fest documentary about UKIP because they did a boozey hour with the couple off gogglebox.
I am not sure he would be very happy if ITV say did nice segment on This Morning with Ed, then a 2hr "mockumentary" claiming that an Ed Miliband government would turn Britain into something akin to worst of Soviet Russia.
Comments
No deal between Greece and the rest of the EU.
Greece's finance minister Yanis Varoufakis says he is ready to do "whatever it takes" to reach agreement on its bailout in the next two days.
Mr Varoufakis was speaking after talks with EU finance ministers broke down earlier than expected, with Greece describing the EU's offer as "absurd".
This was the thrust of the argument - a weak Labour minority could collapse at any time so why would the Conservatives take as long to elect their new leader in 2015 ? Answer - they wouldn't and given that Boris would either be LOTO or hold a very senior position in a new Shadow Cabinet, might he not be compelled to stand down as London Mayor thereby forcing the by-election in say September ?
Half-baked ideas that sound good on paper — energy price freeze — are an Ed speciality. Just think in only 3 months time Ed will have to deal with issues like combating ISIS at home and abroad.
Yikes!
Strange all this Difference should be
'Twixt Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee!
Now either Ed is going to change the law radically to make minimum visit times longer / more frequent or he is talking horses##t...and if he is talking about radically altering the law, not only can I see lots of these private providers say hey a deal is a deal, but also old people who pay for their own care will end up paying more.
I am not saying there isn't a problem with home care for the elderly, but he can't just hire 5000 extra workers, he doesn't have the power to do so without major change across the whole system...and that can't be overnight and will cost a lot of money.
But I don't know if weejonnie is as partisan or as hypocritical as I'm said to be
Perhaps we even might get to see a nuclear warhead detonating just outside Sheffield.
I hope for the good of the country and my sanity i can settle at least one of your Ro-Ro-Ro bets to 25. Otherwise im moving to Panama to trade tennis.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I worked at IG sport for nine years yes... invented 'the 0-0 detector' bet and "no sleep til heartbeat!'
Short lived specials....
I meant all the constituencies starting 'Ro' in a special bet?? I think there are a few chances Ahh, you worked at spin? IG?
I hope for the good of the country and my sanity i can settle at least one of your Ro-Ro-Ro bets to 25. Otherwise im moving to Panama to trade tennis.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I worked at IG sport for nine years yes... invented 'the 0-0 detector' bet and "no sleep til heartbeat!'
Short lived specials....
I meant all the constituencies starting 'Ro' in a special bet?? I think there are a few chances Ahh, you worked at spin? IG?
I hope for the good of the country and my sanity i can settle at least one of your Ro-Ro-Ro bets to 25. Otherwise im moving to Panama to trade tennis.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I worked at IG sport for nine years yes... invented 'the 0-0 detector' bet and "no sleep til heartbeat!'
Short lived specials....
I meant all the constituencies starting 'Ro' in a special bet?? I think there are a few chances
Ahh i got you.
I work with a couple of lads from IG, do you still work in the industry??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31495081
Certainly I would struggle to define "Cameronism" and I think if he loses in May he will be judged unfavourably against Thatcher and Blair for his failure to leave a defining popular legacy. But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that after thirteen years of Labour government in which public expenditure only went in one direction he has led a government that has consistently challenged the political consensus and begun to establish a "value" culture in the public sector that was hitherto missing. We now hear leaders of major public services like the NHS actively embracing the need for efficiency, in a way that was inconceivable five years ago. And we have seen the beginnings of a revolution in the relationship between welfare, work and the low paid. He has also restored power to parliament and to the people, with referenda on the voting system and Scottish independence, and an EU referendum to follow. On matters of war and peace he has been consultative rather than directional. Finally, he has allowed cabinet ministers (largely) to get on with running their departments, reversing a paralysing centralisation that characterised much of the last 20 years.
You could of course dispute some of the above, or say the credit lies elsewhere. Certainly not all of the above has applied uniformly, or uniformly happily. Some ministers needed more controlling, for example. And perhaps it doesn't make up for his lack of an overwhelming vision. But Cameron has been a pragmatic and flexible leader during a time of great political change, in an era in which people are suspicious of idealists.
I would have liked him to be truer to his instincts and a more visionary leader, but I don't think he has done badly by any stretch, and would say that Britain is better for his premiership.
Polling averages are better than taking any single poll in getting rid of those outliers.
On top of the 50% rate they'd be paying anyway under Labour, plus NI, plus their pay-for-everything bonus tax, we've got to be looking at a top rate of at least 70% for bankers?
I'm sure the city firms will be delighted to stay..
The Magic Money Tree has now been discredited, so they now have to use Bankers Bonus Bush instead.
Unfortunately it's not like Airplane! but more like the Big Bus (almost there but not quite there).
It's called the Bank of England.
Months? Crickey, we'd better tell the V Boat captain on patrol.
On number three, I refer you to other previous comments. My point was that inertial and star mapping navigation are less accurate that some other means we might use for non-nuclear weapons but that's ok, given the reasons for using Trident and its yield.
The real argument for a submarine based ballistic missile is that it's invulnerable until used.
Still in the game, yes
Ali and Jacob work at spin don't they?
Bradford city v reading ,any thoughts ;-)
What upsets some people is that Cameron has not played the race card.
What Cameron and the tories have done is cut back on expenditure and the public payroll so much so that opponents try to compare it to 1936. But this is still not good enough for some!
The end of the eurozone will not be the end of mankind, so both sides have no problem of pressing the red button if they really hate each other.
The eurozone is an emotional and political thing (the EU too), it is disastrous economically, however it manages to go on because of the emotion of the "european ideal", if you take that emotion away and replace it by hate towards "european oppressors" then it's game over for the euro (and for the EU) as inevitably you get a populace that votes a government that wants to get out.
Whether it is invulnerable to the latest anti-submarine technology, and if it is invulnerable, whether it will remain invulnerable for the foreseeable future, is a whole new can of worms. No-one is going to broadcast the fact they have these technologies; it would surely lead to a new arms race.
That's torn it.
http://www.freshfields.com/uploadedFiles/SiteWide/Knowledge/New EU rules on bankers pay.pdf
Labour really are basing their election hopes on voters being completely stupid.
Hopefully there will be a bit of outrage, bit of publicity and we will go back up in the polls
For the record however I expect a 7 wicket or 130 run victory (something like 320/190) for New Zealand.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2845403/Bankers-pay-rocket-year-EU-backs-cap-bonuses-Chancellor-concedes-defeat.html
Anyway, what's a bonus? What if you receive "variable pay" which changes each year depending on the previous year's performance? And there are people a lot cleverer/sneakier than me think about it, I assure you. The bonus tax will bring in three-quarters of sweet FA and, as ever, those it catches will be exactly the group that it wasn't meant to catch. EIC.
@guardian_clark: Full Gdn/ICM tables on tax, marginals and that 4-point Tory lead
https://t.co/WkOs3LhqDA @anthonyjwells @MSmithsonPB @TSEofPB @tmlbk
As accuracy has improved, required yields have fallen. When it was measured in miles, weapons had to be in the megaton range.
How much are they planning to tax them to pay for all this stuff in just two years? How much is paid to bankers in bonuses each year?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KeIvRNsARs
I'd love to see Bradford in the final, fitting 30 years on from the fire.
I'm personally not convinced, I expect a bright start but a quite considered middle period for NZ.
At the end of the day since I'm not betting I did have to come out and say something to be judged by.
In any case, I'm off to bed.
I am kinda of skeptical full stop how effective anything like that is. High net worth criminals already do it on a massive scale and the whole proceeds of crime act really only manages to get money back off morons.
There was a documentary, I think last year, giving examples of how some big time criminals basically showed the authorities empty pockets when the law caught up with them. 2-3 years in the clink and surprise surprise they are again in their mansions on the Costa del Sol, of course said mansion not in their name.
Incidentally I do think Scotland will post enough to prevent a nine-wicket haul (currently 5/6) but not my sort of bet (the casual gambler's outsider).
Hey, #UKIP. Seen this documentary?: "Labour: The First 1400 Kids"?
No. Me neither.
Con 36, Lab 32, LD 7, UKIP 10, Greens 7, SNP 6
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2956040/Journalist-puts-Jewish-skullcap-walks-streets-Paris-filmed-hidden-camera-safe-streets-are.html
Aren't you 50 years out of date?
Well actually to be fair you might only be 50 minutes.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4355811.ece
''An incendiary row over antisemitism hit France’s ruling Socialists today after a party grandee claimed that key policies were being shaped by the prime minister’s Jewish wife.''
Maybe the guy is senile, but as the Times points out ...''It also recalls recent attacks on the Prime Minister by a host of figures ranging from Islamist radicals to Nicolas Anelka, the footballer, who all portray Mrs Gavroin as the lynchpin of the new Jewish lobby in France.''
I am not sure he would be very happy if ITV say did nice segment on This Morning with Ed, then a 2hr "mockumentary" claiming that an Ed Miliband government would turn Britain into something akin to worst of Soviet Russia.
With "Love Thy Neighbour" on after the late news?
'Meanwhile, to cap the theme of the night, UKIP named Britain's most hated brand, followed by the Tories and Marmite'
Followed by the Labour & Lib Dem brands.