" Remind me, which were the surprise LibDem gains at the 2010 GE? "
Arguably ALL the LibDem gains would have been surprises to various people and to varying degrees:
Redcar Burnley Bradford East Norwich South Brent Central Eastbourne Wells
While many of the gains which the LibDems were widely expected to make - Islington South, Oxford East, Hampstead, Watford, Edinburgh South for example - never happened.
I suspect we'll see a similar pattern of surprise gains and surprise misses for UKIP this year.
Hampstead had a truly outstanding conservative candidate in 2010, Chris philip, and a pretty poor libdem one (whose name I have forgotten). In 2015, it is the other way around. Comfortable labour hold, if wager.
Wasn't the LibDem candidate leader of Camden council or somesuch ?
He beat Sarah Teather for the LibDem candidacy and then lost while Teather went and won in Brent Central.
Do you think Teather would have won in Hampstead in 2010 ?
If she had she would have had a reasonable chance of winning again this year.
I'm decades off from retirement so purchasing 5 years of cheap FTSE could work out well in the long run. 60% of auto pension buy...
Now this is an important point. The FTSE 100 is only vaguely linked to the UK economy; IIRC something like two-thirds of the turnover of FTSE 100 companies is outside the UK. So it's perfectly possible for Ed to wreck the UK economy at the same time as the FTSE 100 does well.
I'd be nervous of having too much exposure to the FTSE 250 and 350 over the next few months, though.
More generally, and quite apart from the politics, the FTSE 100 is a bad index to follow. It's heavily skewed towards a small number of companies in just a few sectors.
" Remind me, which were the surprise LibDem gains at the 2010 GE? "
Arguably ALL the LibDem gains would have been surprises to various people and to varying degrees:
Redcar Burnley Bradford East Norwich South Brent Central Eastbourne Wells
While many of the gains which the LibDems were widely expected to make - Islington South, Oxford East, Hampstead, Watford, Edinburgh South for example - never happened.
I suspect we'll see a similar pattern of surprise gains and surprise misses for UKIP this year.
Hampstead had a truly outstanding conservative candidate in 2010, Chris philip, and a pretty poor libdem one (whose name I have forgotten). In 2015, it is the other way around. Comfortable labour hold, if wager.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
It is slightly depressing at a time when we are trying (some of us anyway) to reinstate a sense of morality - or at least good judgment - amongst our leaders and financial institutions to find that the lead candidate, according to press reports anyway, to become Chairman of RBS is one Sir Howard Davies.
The Sir Howard Davies who had to resign from the LSE over its links with the Gaddaffi regime? That Sir Howard? Yes indeed.
Oh dear! Just the man to set the tone from the top - to show bankers that money should not be allowed to blind people to the need - the urgent necessity - to use their judgment and that, sometimes, just because something can be done does not mean that it should.
Surely George will tell them to think again. Unbelievable.
Mirror Politics @MirrorPolitics 6m6 minutes ago British forces head to Ukraine as David Cameron turns up the heat on Putin
With the way the polls are going,it could be Miliband turning the heat up on Putin in 3/4 months time (snigger)
Miliband certainly had more courage than Cameron when it came to taking on Murdoch and Dacre and the vile practices of their media outlets. There's also an air of principle about him unlike mercantilist Dave.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
So, Ed Miliband's courage comprises being a Cabinet minister in a Murdoch-crawling government under which nothing was done, and then when he could see partisan advantage from the luxury of opposition, and when there was nothing to lose because Murdoch had already abandoned Labour, playing to his core vote by laying into Murdoch and blaming Cameron for things which happened a decade earlier.
Incidentally anyone else think that Channel 4's piece of malevolence is the driver of the UKIP slide?
No.
They've just been out of the limelight for a bit. That will change and I would expect them to pick up again when it does.
But why the sudden drop now when they've been out of the limelight (intentionally) for at least a couple of months?
Well for one thing the drop isn't that dramatic, and I think 'a couple of months' is stretching it.
But sell them if you think the decline will continue. I'm not doing so, not yet, and if I'm wrong I'll pay for it, not for the first time.
UKIP heading for 8/9 % at the next GE an inexorable decline looms
Mark
In fairness, you ought to advise new visitors to the Site that you can only improve on your record as a General Election tipster.
My forecast in early 2010 for the 2010 GE on this site is a matter of record and was spot on in terms of No of Lib Dem seats ( exactly right and No Overall Majority whilst dools like you were betting on a .Conservative overall msjority
Lol!
Only teasing, Mark. We all know how accurate your forecasts are, especially when it come to projecting LibDem seat totals. ;-)
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
I wouldn't disagree with your description, but I fear Ed Milliband is worse.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
And what do you think Ed will be?
We'll be able to point and laugh at folks like Frank and OGH when they are ranting and raving about the hopelessness of Ed The Younger in 2018...
Well that's when the power is on long enough for us to log on to PB.Com.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
And what do you think Ed will be?
I'm not actually sure. As I've said on here before I won't be voting Labour (although I live in a safe Lab seat so what does it matter?) given the party still seems absolutely tribal and committed to FPTP in spite of the obvious fracturing of the party system. If I lived in a marginal I probably would vote Labour to get rid of Cameron, Osborne and hopefully Clegg.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
And what do you think Ed will be?
I'm not actually sure. As I've said on here before I won't be voting Labour (although I live in a safe Lab seat so what does it matter?) given the party still seems absolutely tribal and committed to FPTP in spite of the obvious fracturing of the party system. If I lived in a marginal I probably would vote Labour to get rid of Cameron, Osborne and hopefully Clegg.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
If the Conservatives win an overall majority, Rod Crosby will deserve a knighthood. Has he adjusted his model for Scotland though ? (Max con 4 seats) And I do mean MAX
What bloody business do we have in Ukraine ? It will become a bloody business now !
I fear you are quite right. This is not going to end well because it never does. It's as always the Americans fighting the Russians and as always using someone else's country to do it in.
If the Conservatives win an overall majority, Rod Crosby will deserve a knighthood. Has he adjusted his model for Scotland though ? (Max con 4 seats) And I do mean MAX
4 seats for Tories, christ you are optimistic. Max 1 and I do mean Max 1 probably more like it.
Survation converts a 0.3% Lab lead in ELBOW for the week so far into a 1.3% Lab lead - or if you prefer simple average, a 0.5% Lab lead into a 1.6% Lab lead.
Richard Nabavi - I'm sorry but that won't do. Both Miliband and Cameron had a chance to take a stand when it came to phone hacking. Cameron was found wanting. I can''t believe you want to even try to defend him on this one. Bringing back Labour's cosy relationship with Murdoch pre-2009 is a red herring.
So, to get this straight, you think that phone hacking, which was carried out by the most important Labour-supporting newspaper group (and, we've recently discovered, by the other mass-market Labour-supporting newspaper group), under a Labour government, and was investigated three times under Labour-appointed Met police commissioners, and was considered by a Labour Attorney General, and was investigated without any result by a Labour-dominated select committee under the Labour government, somehow contrives to be Cameron's fault?
As I said: hypocrisy, thy name is Labour.
I'm not a defender of Labour 1997-2010. I didn't even vote for them. My point was about Cameron utter failure on phone hacking when it became blindingly obvious something needed to be done. I know it's hard for you to understand but there are many of us out there who are neither kipper or tribal Labour who nonetheless think Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM.
And what do you think Ed will be?
We'll be able to point and laugh at folks like Frank and OGH when they are ranting and raving about the hopelessness of Ed The Younger in 2018...
Well that's when the power is on long enough for us to log on to PB.Com.
OGH will be moaning about the Emergency Site Hosting Tax, rushed in when the Bankers Bonus Tax only raised a couple of million.
If the Conservatives win an overall majority, Rod Crosby will deserve a knighthood. Has he adjusted his model for Scotland though ? (Max con 4 seats) And I do mean MAX
Rod gave me a pasting in 2010 so I'm taking a Wait And Watch approach this year.
@coolagorna No, I saw it in the news, our stock market is at levels not seen since the dot com bust......but this time it hasn't been artificially pumped up! It is as sound as our house prices.
it is.....isn't it?
Ajusted for inflation, the stock market is half the value of 1999, and as a percentage of gdp, it's 60% down.
Yes, the meme that the 'rich' (by which I think the Left mean ordinary pension funds) have grabbed all the goodies in the last 15 years is rather threadbare.
Add in reinvested dividends and then you are doing all right even if you bought at the very peak of the dot com bubble.
Not particularly - less than 3% per annum before inflation.
3.6% And that still seems pretty good to me for investing at the absolute worst possible time.
In nominal terms, stock markets have tended to average around 9% annual nominal returns over longer periods. If you think of it as 2.5% economic growth, 2.5% inflation, 3% dividends, and 1% share buy backs, that gets to the number.
Well yes, if you had invested your lump sum two years later at the market low you'd be sitting on an astronomical return now.
Rather horrific image on BBC2 now, Keith Vaz dancing to One Direction and Ed Balls as Santa Clause all watched by Jacob Rees Mogg at the Parliamentary Christmas Party
If the Conservatives win an overall majority, Rod Crosby will deserve a knighthood. Has he adjusted his model for Scotland though ? (Max con 4 seats) And I do mean MAX
Rod gave me a pasting in 2010 so I'm taking a Wait And Watch approach this year.
I never quite believed Con OM in 2010 even though my Dad thought it was nailed on. Broke even that GE with about a hundred quid total in play. Bit more this time
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time.
Strange you should wonder that since it gets aired several times a week on here, only just behind the poptastic Labour run Welsh NHS, 'they were National SOCIALISTS you know', the pinko count on Question Time and why the Mirror Group doesn't get pelters for phone hacking. #PBTorymemes
If the Conservatives win an overall majority, Rod Crosby will deserve a knighthood. Has he adjusted his model for Scotland though ? (Max con 4 seats) And I do mean MAX
Rod gave me a pasting in 2010 so I'm taking a Wait And Watch approach this year.
I never quite believed Con OM in 2010 even though my Dad thought it was nailed on. Broke even that GE with about a hundred quid total in play. Bit more this time
If Rod is right this time i will be up a very brown creek
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
The prospect of yet another Labour government fills me with dread. The last time they royally screwed the economy, systemically trashed our civil liberties, and made it a mission statement to sell-out our interests as a nation wherever they could.
Yet the electorate still default to them whenever they think the alternative isn't eons better. It's like that bloke that lazily traipses from his house to that crap, rough pub round the corner - to be served yet another disappointing pint by the rude landlord, and end-up in another piss-poor brawl at the end of the night - just because it's easy, convenient, and a known entity. He'd rather sport a shiner at work the next day than be ignored by the posh bloke that runs that nice, successful gastro-pub up the road, but looks like he couldn't care less whether you're there or not.
And how bad must Cameron be to face the prospect of losing to Ed Miliband, for Pete's sake?
Labour: the Japanese knotweed of British politics. I'm going to... do something else.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
The prospect of yet another Labour government fills me with dread. The last time they royally screwed the economy, systemically trashed our civil liberties, and made it a mission statement to sell-out our interests as a nation wherever they could.
Yet the electorate still default to them whenever they think the alternative isn't eons better. It's like that bloke that lazily traipses from his house to that crap, rough pub round the corner - to be served yet another disappointing pint by the rude landlord, and end-up in another piss-poor brawl at the end of the night - just because it's easy, convenient, and a known entity. He'd rather sport a shiner at work the next day than be ignored by the posh bloke that runs that nice, successful gastro-pub up the road, but looks like he couldn't care less whether you're there or not.
And how bad must Cameron be to face the prospect of losing to Ed Miliband, for Pete's sake?
Labour: the Japanese knotweed of British politics. I'm going to... do something else.
I have to say I don't think I can remember a less impressive shadow cabinet going into an election.
The Minsk agreement calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops so a clear and unambiguous violation. Of course this will be regarded as an attempt to torpedo Minsk by neo cons on behalf of Washington by most observers in Europe and at the UN.
The sum impact zero. The Ukraine has been unable to conscript many into its army, US trainers/advisers made no difference for the Georgians when they invaded South Ossetia and this isn't the mid 90s when a US trained/advised Croatian army attacked and ethnically cleansed Kraina Serbs in Operation Storm. Of course it could be used by Russia to justify arming the rebels with advanced weapons if Kiev fails to fulfill the Minsk agreement.
Sad to see Cameron sacrificing British interests for US interests as well as giving more than a blank cheque to an increasingly authoritarian, repressive and unstable regime.
Still like them myself - in fact I had them on 5 minutes ago. My standard background music when I'm translating is the Musikladen sequence on Youtube - disco heaven (from a German 70s equivalent of TOTP):
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
Amazing that a bloke with a 'coal not dole' badge has no idea of the history.
Just another thick Socialist with double standards.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
It is slightly depressing at a time when we are trying (some of us anyway) to reinstate a sense of morality - or at least good judgment - amongst our leaders and financial institutions to find that the lead candidate, according to press reports anyway, to become Chairman of RBS is one Sir Howard Davies.
The Sir Howard Davies who had to resign from the LSE over its links with the Gaddaffi regime? That Sir Howard? Yes indeed.
Oh dear! Just the man to set the tone from the top - to show bankers that money should not be allowed to blind people to the need - the urgent necessity - to use their judgment and that, sometimes, just because something can be done does not mean that it should.
Surely George will tell them to think again. Unbelievable.
I suspect his name would not have got this far had George not approved.
On one level he is a good choice: experienced, with knowledge of how government works and links to all the main parties so probably a good man to help the bank navigate its way round the shark-infested political waters, which is probably what Hester lacked and did for him in the end.
And working for a bank but taking orders, directly or indirectly, from politicians at the whim of whatever's in the press, with relatively low pay (relative to other similar roles) is a bugger of a job
But - and it's a big but in my view - it is precisely this focus only on skills rather than on character and judgment which has been behind a lot of the disastrous personnel choices of recent years. In the end, experience and knowledge count for absolutely nothing if you have poor judgment.
It also sends out a poor signal to people at large - that even when you make bad mistakes you still stay on the gravy train. And it creates the impression that, for all the talent around, the pool of people from whom the choices for good jobs are made, is very small, another very bad signal and not, IMO, true - if only people thought intelligently about what is needed.
There is remarkably little diversity in Britain in establishment roles - it often feels like it is the same 200 people who rotate round and round and they could all be described in pretty much the same way.
And the other person on the shortlist should be Joanna Cash.
Sorry but Johnny Cash died years ago...
JOANNA
Who?
Joanna Cash was one of the 'Tatler Tories'. A bunch of self-obsessed electoral disasters who at the height of Cameroon hubris were choosing their cabinet positions:
And the other person on the shortlist should be Joanna Cash.
Sorry but Johnny Cash died years ago...
JOANNA
Who?
Joanna Cash was one of the 'Tatler Tories'. A bunch of self-obsessed electoral disasters who at the height of Cameroon hubris were choosing their cabinet positions:
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
With 1.25 million miners in 1914, 0.75 million miners in 1947 and 0.25 million miners in 1979 its all the fault of Fatcha.
Caroline Lucas justifying her leader's 'brain freeze' just cited Miliband and Balls as equally forgetful.
What I can't understand is why Bennett didn't simply say that housing was a key issue and that it would have to be paid for by raising taxes and that the Greens were being honest about this unlike the other parties. It might not have made her popular but it would have had the merit of honesty and would not have made her look like a moron.
Caroline Lucas justifying her leader's 'brain freeze' just cited Miliband and Balls as equally forgetful.
What I can't understand is why Bennett didn't simply say that housing was a key issue and that it would have to be paid for by raising taxes and that the Greens were being honest about this unlike the other parties. It might not have made her popular but it would have had the merit of honesty and would not have made her look like a moron.
Don't the Greens also have an open-door immigration policy, which means they could never build houses fast enough?
It is slightly depressing at a time when we are trying (some of us anyway) to reinstate a sense of morality - or at least good judgment - amongst our leaders and financial institutions to find that the lead candidate, according to press reports anyway, to become Chairman of RBS is one Sir Howard Davies.
The Sir Howard Davies who had to resign from the LSE over its links with the Gaddaffi regime? That Sir Howard? Yes indeed.
Oh dear! Just the man to set the tone from the top - to show bankers that money should not be allowed to blind people to the need - the urgent necessity - to use their judgment and that, sometimes, just because something can be done does not mean that it should.
Surely George will tell them to think again. Unbelievable.
I suspect his name would not have got this far had George not approved.
On one level he is a good choice: experienced, with knowledge of how government works and links to all the main parties so probably a good man to help the bank navigate its way round the shark-infested political waters, which is probably what Hester lacked and did for him in the end.
And working for a bank but taking orders, directly or indirectly, from politicians at the whim of whatever's in the press, with relatively low pay (relative to other similar roles) is a bugger of a job
But - and it's a big but in my view - it is precisely this focus only on skills rather than on character and judgment which has been behind a lot of the disastrous personnel choices of recent years. In the end, experience and knowledge count for absolutely nothing if you have poor judgment.
It also sends out a poor signal to people at large - that even when you make bad mistakes you still stay on the gravy train. And it creates the impression that, for all the talent around, the pool of people from whom the choices for good jobs are made, is very small, another very bad signal and not, IMO, true - if only people thought intelligently about what is needed.
There is remarkably little diversity in Britain in establishment roles - it often feels like it is the same 200 people who rotate round and round and they could all be described in pretty much the same way.
He is an archetypal bureaucrat who wouldn't know a moral principle if you bent it into a flat iron and clobbered him with it.
I thought it was shocking that he was not sued for his incompetence at the FSA. It seemed to me a classic demonstration of how our ruling class are never held responsible for their criminal negligence. And now this. I despair, I really do.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
Amazing that a bloke with a 'coal not dole' badge has no idea of the history.
Just another thick Socialist with double standards.
I have some lovely Anti Nazi League badges too "pogo on a nazi" or Rock against Racism would you like one Nigel?
Only thick people call people with an IQ of 138 thick because they are Socialists BTW.
Caroline Lucas justifying her leader's 'brain freeze' just cited Miliband and Balls as equally forgetful.
What I can't understand is why Bennett didn't simply say that housing was a key issue and that it would have to be paid for by raising taxes and that the Greens were being honest about this unlike the other parties. It might not have made her popular but it would have had the merit of honesty and would not have made her look like a moron.
Saying anything in such a situation is better than nothing.
With social housing I thought the argument was always that you could justify borrowing to fund it because the money buys an asset which generates a financial return from the rents you would receive, the reductions in the housing benefit that would accrue and the savings from no longer housing families in expensive bed and breakfast accommodation. However, I don't know what the detail of the Green policy is.
Never forget ....January the crossover month, February the pulling away month and March the regular majority winning lead month.
Go PB Hodges and Tory HQ!
Who actually made that original prediction ?
Audrey, I think. As she's now banished and I don't know who she was, my bet with her (£10 that the Tories will not lead by 7%) may not be collectable, I fear.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
Amazing that a bloke with a 'coal not dole' badge has no idea of the history.
Just another thick Socialist with double standards.
I have some lovely Anti Nazi League badges too "pogo on a nazi" or Rock against Racism would you like one Nigel?
Only thick people call people with an IQ of 138 thick because they are Socialists BTW.
I haven't got any badges but I went to a couple of Red Wedge gigs, people are not always as they seem.
It's a shame you indulge in childish tribal politics instead of using that IQ to actually think for yourself.
I often wonder those that shout the loudest about the closure of mines even note that Wilson closed down twice as many in half the time. Odd that rarely gets mentioned but it's something we all knew as we did our homework by candle during the winter of discontent.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Wilson before my time I am afraid.
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
No idea if its true or not but no amount of Tory spin on coal mines will mask the fact that 80 per cent of coal jobs were lost under Thatcher.
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
When Wilson came to power in 1964 there were 520,000 jobs in mining in Britain. When he left power in 1970 there were 290,000. I wonder if Wilson enjoyed inflicting misery on mining communities?
One of my moans a few months ago was that polls were unnaturally stable and did not show the level of volatility one might expect from random samples. Yet another example of being careful what you wish for!
Comments
He beat Sarah Teather for the LibDem candidacy and then lost while Teather went and won in Brent Central.
Do you think Teather would have won in Hampstead in 2010 ?
If she had she would have had a reasonable chance of winning again this year.
"Cameron is a slimy, vacuous, spineless irrelevance of a PM. "
Stop highlighting his better points? we have an election to win!
Vote Pragmatic Communist! You know it doesn't make sense, but it is loads of fun
I'd be nervous of having too much exposure to the FTSE 250 and 350 over the next few months, though.
More generally, and quite apart from the politics, the FTSE 100 is a bad index to follow. It's heavily skewed towards a small number of companies in just a few sectors.
Oh wait, fearless principled Ed
Dont make me laugh
Right, understood.
Well that's when the power is on long enough for us to log on to PB.Com.
EICIDC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtxlCsVKkvY
Wow, just wow.
Such is socialism that sets year zero each time anyone else walks into No 10 and can never admit the truth even to themselves.
Survation the new Gold Standard?
I loved Boney M when I was little.
It's our moral duty as a world super power.
Plus, it helps Dave to posture for the cameras.
I fear you are quite right. This is not going to end well because it never does. It's as always the Americans fighting the Russians and as always using someone else's country to do it in.
Take your pick
Reckoned Tories were more rather than less toxic than in 2010 with women, working classes, northerners etc.
Also said both parties about level on vote share since October with no noticeable trend.
Go PB Hodges and Tory HQ!
I have to say I enjoyed being a young socialist under Thatcher though.
Some of the badge slogans were pretty bad in hindsight "Just one more cut Thatchers throat" springs to mind
Actually the most telling point of your post is you did not rebut the Wilson statement. Because deep down you know it's true ... Go on admit it you will feel so much better.
The prospect of yet another Labour government fills me with dread. The last time they royally screwed the economy, systemically trashed our civil liberties, and made it a mission statement to sell-out our interests as a nation wherever they could.
Yet the electorate still default to them whenever they think the alternative isn't eons better. It's like that bloke that lazily traipses from his house to that crap, rough pub round the corner - to be served yet another disappointing pint by the rude landlord, and end-up in another piss-poor brawl at the end of the night - just because it's easy, convenient, and a known entity. He'd rather sport a shiner at work the next day than be ignored by the posh bloke that runs that nice, successful gastro-pub up the road, but looks like he couldn't care less whether you're there or not.
And how bad must Cameron be to face the prospect of losing to Ed Miliband, for Pete's sake?
Labour: the Japanese knotweed of British politics. I'm going to... do something else.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/feb/24/hsbc-stuart-gulliver-called-before-mps-bank-account-switzerland-panama
*orders bulk popcorn*
Maybe the other difference would be that Thatcher enjoyed inflicting the misery on mining communities
The sum impact zero. The Ukraine has been unable to conscript many into its army, US trainers/advisers made no difference for the Georgians when they invaded South Ossetia and this isn't the mid 90s when a US trained/advised Croatian army attacked and ethnically cleansed Kraina Serbs in Operation Storm. Of course it could be used by Russia to justify arming the rebels with advanced weapons if Kiev fails to fulfill the Minsk agreement.
Sad to see Cameron sacrificing British interests for US interests as well as giving more than a blank cheque to an increasingly authoritarian, repressive and unstable regime.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAjFhmVv2gs&list=RDQMX9btU6pESSc&index=4&spfreload=1
Just another thick Socialist with double standards.
She went mad with guilt and remorse?
On one level he is a good choice: experienced, with knowledge of how government works and links to all the main parties so probably a good man to help the bank navigate its way round the shark-infested political waters, which is probably what Hester lacked and did for him in the end.
And working for a bank but taking orders, directly or indirectly, from politicians at the whim of whatever's in the press, with relatively low pay (relative to other similar roles) is a bugger of a job
But - and it's a big but in my view - it is precisely this focus only on skills rather than on character and judgment which has been behind a lot of the disastrous personnel choices of recent years. In the end, experience and knowledge count for absolutely nothing if you have poor judgment.
It also sends out a poor signal to people at large - that even when you make bad mistakes you still stay on the gravy train. And it creates the impression that, for all the talent around, the pool of people from whom the choices for good jobs are made, is very small, another very bad signal and not, IMO, true - if only people thought intelligently about what is needed.
There is remarkably little diversity in Britain in establishment roles - it often feels like it is the same 200 people who rotate round and round and they could all be described in pretty much the same way.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/2711375/Society-magazine-Tatler-unveils-line-up-of-top-Tory-totty.html
It's usually a "tell" in the classics and Shakespeare?
Try again
Brain Freeze is putting it mildly.
More likely: either they don't know the numbers, or they don't want to talk about them as they sound ridiculous.
Don't the Greens also have an open-door immigration policy, which means they could never build houses fast enough?
I thought it was shocking that he was not sued for his incompetence at the FSA. It seemed to me a classic demonstration of how our ruling class are never held responsible for their criminal negligence. And now this. I despair, I really do.
Only thick people call people with an IQ of 138 thick because they are Socialists BTW.
With social housing I thought the argument was always that you could justify borrowing to fund it because the money buys an asset which generates a financial return from the rents you would receive, the reductions in the housing benefit that would accrue and the savings from no longer housing families in expensive bed and breakfast accommodation. However, I don't know what the detail of the Green policy is.
Tories have a two-point lead: CON 35%, LAB 33%, LD 6%, UKIP 14%, GRN 7%
GIN almost exactly on the mark today!
It's a shame you indulge in childish tribal politics instead of using that IQ to actually think for yourself.
Its another score draw day in the polls
LDs on an awful 6%
Yes, and it signifies the same as the rest.. the square root of burger all.
Didn't think so.
One of my moans a few months ago was that polls were unnaturally stable and did not show the level of volatility one might expect from random samples. Yet another example of being careful what you wish for!
So far since Sunday, three Conservative leads, three Labour leads, two ties. Excellent guess by GIN.