Mr. Dair, I agree entirely. The Xbone UI also gets slammed compared to the PS4's [I do wonder how well the XBox One works without the Kinect, given it was apparently designed to be used with the Camera of Doom].
I think PC gaming death may be overstating things. Currently, the consoles don't have great line-ups, and PC games tend to be much cheaper. And mods look great.
After the last slew of polls I'm getting the distinct impression that there are just too many who share the left wing values of concern for the disadvantaged for the Tories to win however competently they run the economy.
There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can.
Indeed Charles, its the usual fatuous leftie nonsense. I am a Tory, and some more say toward the right of the party, and yet I spend at least half my day helping people who have almost nothing, for free. The truth is lefties don't want to help people improve their lives, they want them dependent on handouts and benefits, where they can be relied on to vote for their benefactors and so continue the system. Or they want to shoot adverts and throw rocks from Monaco, not sure which is worse.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds,"
I'm sure they do .
That's why I was a little surprised by some of the the views last night. Lack of co-operation with the police = lack of criminality. Sighs of relief all round
Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate, and craven, enough to pull out all the stops. On Monday, he promised that if his Likud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.
His behavior in the past six years — aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state and never engaging seriously in negotiations — has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement. But his statement this week laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution.
Most of the rest of the article continues in a similar manner.
Mr. Dair, I agree entirely. The Xbone UI also gets slammed compared to the PS4's [I do wonder how well the XBox One works without the Kinect, given it was apparently designed to be used with the Camera of Doom].
I think PC gaming death may be overstating things. Currently, the consoles don't have great line-ups, and PC games tend to be much cheaper. And mods look great.
PC gaming is clinging on to life support but I guess you have a point as its been clinging on for 10 years. It's also much better now at actually coding a game to work on the PC a consumer is likely to have instead of expecting them to go out buy a new video card for £400. But the fact consoles still exist says pretty much all you need to know about how badly the PC gaming industry failed. That cheapness in PC gaming also means less money to attract projects (or at least to make them pay rather than be the next MMORPG Ponzi Scheme).
Interesting you mention mods as Rome 2 actually removed (most) of the ability of users to generate content. (I have no idea if this has changed since it launched, it was never a huge part of my enjoyment of the series but seemed Yet Another Bizarre PC Gaming Decision).
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
A swing of 4.3% to Labour in marginal seats is bigger than most polls show, (equivalent to a 1.6% lead overall), but could be consistent with a bigger than average swing in England. It would put the Conservatives ahead by 3% in England, and probably leave the parties level in terms of English seats.
It's curious to see no movement since October, given that Ashcroft polls generally have swung to the Conservatives since then.
I think Mike's point is relevant - the tactical vote is more significant in marginals. I have 17% LibDems to target. My current leaflet features an endorsement by two prominent current LibDem party members; there is as yet no LibDem candidate.
UK Polling Report makes the fair point that the higher swing in Ashcroft English marginals may be because they're English, and Labour is doing better in England and worse in Scotland. it's important to keep in mind, though, that nearly ALL Tory-Labour marginals are in England. For Government change, England is where the action is.
Ashcroft tried out the "But ther SNP would have too much influence" line on the focus groups: he found that it didn't affect Labour voters, since what were they supposed to do about it? They wanted a Labour government, ideally without the SNP, so they were voting Labour.
Also: given the consoles and the PC share a common x86 architecture, and use virtually identical development kits and environments, I can't see PC gaming going anywhere, even if it only has sales 10% of that of the consoles.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
A swing of 4.3% to Labour in marginal seats is bigger than most polls show, (equivalent to a 1.6% lead overall), but could be consistent with a bigger than average swing in England. It would put the Conservatives ahead by 3% in England, and probably leave the parties level in terms of English seats.
It's curious to see no movement since October, given that Ashcroft polls generally have swung to the Conservatives since then.
That of course would mean Ed Miliband is Prime Minister.
A tie in the UK is roughly equivalent to a 3% Conservative lead in England, and would be a win for Ed Milliband.
I think the Conservatives need to be ahead by c.3% in the UK, for Cameron to remain in office.
I don't see any reason why Ashcroft's next batches of marginal polls will show anything different. I think 55-60 labour gains is too much, but it wouldn't surprise me if the true picture was around 35 gains.
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
After the last slew of polls I'm getting the distinct impression that there are just too many who share the left wing values of concern for the disadvantaged for the Tories to win however competently they run the economy.
There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can.
Charles, I don't think the point here is about individual actions and I hope that it would be an isolated view on the left that anyone more right wing is by definition a selfish bastard (though I suppose in this forum it's likely the extremes are over-represented, meaning that there could be more lefties holding that extreme view and more of the right who actually are selfish bastards).
It's more that left-wing politics can be characterised as responding to human suffering by trying to intervene directly and immediately to relieve it, whereas right-wing responses often focus more on "incentivising" those who are suffering to take steps themselves to address the problem, and managing the overall economy in a way that is intended to benefit all, including the disadvantaged, in the longer term.
You can see this difference in the bedroom tax for example. It's not unreasonable for the state to limit the provision of excessively large homes to those who rely on the state for housing. But the Tory implementation of the policy seems to be to change the system and wait for the reality to catch up, effectively penalising some people for failing to move to homes that don't exist, as well as ignoring the social and economic costs of forcing people to move away from family support networks etc. The approach that many Labour supporters would like to see their party adopt would aim for the same ultimate outcome, but only punish people for refusing to move to an actual existent home in a reasonable location for their current family circumstances, make some provision for the unavoidable costs of moving, and if sufficient houses didn't exist, would take steps to change that.
I'm not holding my breath for the current Labour party to do that, mind....
Mr. Palmer, that line [who cares if the SNP help Labour out?] won't last.
The SNP will want something. Which means they'll get something, and that will not go down well with the English.
In the same way some thought a currency union would just get the nod from the English, until it became apparent the English didn't like the idea of propping up an independent Scotland's financial industry.
Mr. Dair, I think PC gaming, like newspapers, will always be around, even if popularity waxes and wanes. I don't go into it myself because I'm a luddite, and, working on a computer, I really don't need another distraction away from work [pb.com and F1's bad enough for that].
That mod decision just seems stupid. I can see how toolkits etc might need time to come into being for new engines and the like, but removing modding capability from an existing game just seems guaranteed to piss people off.
Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate, and craven, enough to pull out all the stops. On Monday, he promised that if his Likud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.
His behavior in the past six years — aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state and never engaging seriously in negotiations — has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement. But his statement this week laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution.
Most of the rest of the article continues in a similar manner.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
Of course that's correct. But, 5% of the relevant age group sounds very plausible to me.
Will UK pollsters be twitching this morning at the failure of the Israeli polls that overstated the left and made themselves look like a load of complete pricks, which is unusual in the Jewish state.
PBers should look to my humble ARSE - the greatest election predicator in the history of mankind and never knowingly undersold.
I've previously compared the Israeli GE yesterday with the UK GE on May 7th.
The last polls had: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 56 Herzog bloc (Lab) 42 Kulanu (LibDeb) 9 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 13 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
The exit polls showed: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 54 Herzog bloc (Lab) 43 Kulanu (LibDeb) 10 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 13 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
So Con where a bit worse and Lab and LibDem slightly better.
The actual results this morning with 97% counted show: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 57-58 Herzog bloc (Lab) 40 Kulanu (LibDeb) 9 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 14 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
So Con where a lot better and Lab a lot worse (and SNP a bit better) LibDem will almost certainly support Con to give majority coalition.
Draw your own conclusions. But it looks to me as if there were many shy Netanhayu voters who lied to the pollsters and even lied in the exit polls. There were three exit polls for three TV channels and they all showed similar results.
IF the same happens here and there are still shy Tories in the polls then a) we should add 1-2% to the Con share and subtract 2% from the Lab share b) we should ignore the exit polls on the night c) we should perhaps expect the SNP to do a little better than the polls show.
d0 we should wake up and be disappointed it was only a wet dream and EICIPM
The undeniable fact that will emerge on May 8th will be that the SNP will decide who the next government will be.
That will really upset many in England, particularly those who wanted the "Union" at all costs. The SNP will have achieved its goal despite losing the referendum.
In fact, over the next few years, they will get the best of both worlds. "Near independence" at little extra cost. In fact, at less cost !
Will UK pollsters be twitching this morning at the failure of the Israeli polls that overstated the left and made themselves look like a load of complete pricks, which is unusual in the Jewish state.
PBers should look to my humble ARSE - the greatest election predicator in the history of mankind and never knowingly undersold.
I've previously compared the Israeli GE yesterday with the UK GE on May 7th.
The last polls had: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 56 Herzog bloc (Lab) 42 Kulanu (LibDeb) 9 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 13 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
The exit polls showed: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 54 Herzog bloc (Lab) 43 Kulanu (LibDeb) 10 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 13 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
So Con where a bit worse and Lab and LibDem slightly better.
The actual results this morning with 97% counted show: Netanyahu bloc (Con) 57-58 Herzog bloc (Lab) 40 Kulanu (LibDeb) 9 NB Swings both ways Joint Arab (SNP) 14 NB Won't support Netanyahu but might provide S&C to Herzog
So Con where a lot better and Lab a lot worse (and SNP a bit better) LibDem will almost certainly support Con to give majority coalition.
Draw your own conclusions. But it looks to me as if there were many shy Netanhayu voters who lied to the pollsters and even lied in the exit polls. There were three exit polls for three TV channels and they all showed similar results.
IF the same happens here and there are still shy Tories in the polls then a) we should add 1-2% to the Con share and subtract 2% from the Lab share b) we should ignore the exit polls on the night c) we should perhaps expect the SNP to do a little better than the polls show.
d0 we should wake up and be disappointed it was only a wet dream and EICIPM
The undeniable fact that will emerge on May 8th will be that the SNP will decide who the next government will be.
Nonsense on sticks with red high heels and a fairy dress.
I'd have thought burning the Daily Record might be a better idea
It makes me unhappy about my bets on the SNP in the Paisley constituencies. The local party seems to lack the slightest trace of discretion.
Ceremonially burning of a document two thirds of the public think is a disgrace will not do anything but endear you to the general public. The faux outrage Nazi comparisons do not seem to be working for the Labour idiots. If anything it just makes them look more ridiculous.
I wonder what sort of faux outrage would have occurred if before the referendum, some minor BTers had burnt copies of Scotland's Future, a document that even most of SNP found embarrassing, while 55% of the voters politely ignored.
Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate, and craven, enough to pull out all the stops. On Monday, he promised that if his Likud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.
His behavior in the past six years — aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state and never engaging seriously in negotiations — has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement. But his statement this week laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution.
Most of the rest of the article continues in a similar manner.
A duplicitous politician ! Whatever next ?
Bibi is an unusually unpleasant politician, however.
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
*cough*Polly Toynbee*cough*
a "coughing fit" of Ms Harman, Ms Abbot, Tony Blair, etc etc
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Because I would rather than private schools didn't need to exist in anything like the scale that they do at present (there will always be a proportion of demand but a lot of it is driven by perceived better educational outcomes).
That's why I am a huge supporter of efforts to allow state schools their independence from the cold dead hand of LEAs. Let them flourish.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
Is it really true the majority were in care? I read several stories of middle class girls being abused, including one case where a father demanded the police take action and they told him to stop stalking the men hanging around his daughter. I know that's not necessarily representative, but it does give you pause for thought about the stereotypes.
After the last slew of polls I'm getting the distinct impression that there are just too many who share the left wing values of concern for the disadvantaged for the Tories to win however competently they run the economy.
There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can.
Charles, I don't think the point here is about individual actions and I hope that it would be an isolated view on the left that anyone more right wing is by definition a selfish bastard (though I suppose in this forum it's likely the extremes are over-represented, meaning that there could be more lefties holding that extreme view and more of the right who actually are selfish bastards).
It's more that left-wing politics can be characterised as responding to human suffering by trying to intervene directly and immediately to relieve it, whereas right-wing responses often focus more on "incentivising" those who are suffering to take steps themselves to address the problem, and managing the overall economy in a way that is intended to benefit all, including the disadvantaged, in the longer term.
You can see this difference in the bedroom tax for example. It's not unreasonable for the state to limit the provision of excessively large homes to those who rely on the state for housing. But the Tory implementation of the policy seems to be to change the system and wait for the reality to catch up, effectively penalising some people for failing to move to homes that don't exist, as well as ignoring the social and economic costs of forcing people to move away from family support networks etc. The approach that many Labour supporters would like to see their party adopt would aim for the same ultimate outcome, but only punish people for refusing to move to an actual existent home in a reasonable location for their current family circumstances, make some provision for the unavoidable costs of moving, and if sufficient houses didn't exist, would take steps to change that.
I'm not holding my breath for the current Labour party to do that, mind....
Yup, I'd vote for that.
I do not see anything morally repugnant in Conservatism. And it is pretty clear that most Tories want to see the same things as most Labour supporters: a peaceful country with a contented population and equality of opportunity. I just disagree with the Tory view of how this can be achieved.
Sadly on this site and elsewhere the temptation is always to see your political opponents' motives and beliefs as reprehensible and immoral, not just misguided. We all do it.
Mr. Surbiton, because the left attacks the right as heartless. People feel more ashamed of being considered heartless than mindless, or perhaps more confident in defending their intellect than their motives.
Some see right/left as a divide of nastiness/niceness. This may be due to the left's superior use of language generally, in both good and bad ways.
Labour market stats due in 20 mins. Another big decline in unemployment and possible increase in wages as backdrop for George's big day? Or not?
Wah wah immigration and part time jobs and the full time ones aren't real jobs nation of burger flippers not proper jobs like outreach diversity coordinators privatisation and real wages are down if you ignore the mahoosive income tax cuts cost of living......
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
"t's more that left-wing politics can be characterised as responding to human suffering by trying to intervene directly and immediately to relieve it"
A few do but most prefer to stand aloof and pontificate. Given a choice, I prefer the testimony of a Sally Army woman who gets her hands dirty rather than the Polly Toynbees or Owen Jones. Or indeed Ed's Dad.
"This is what needs to be done, so one of you lesser breeds should get on and do it. I'm too important to dirty my hands with charity work. Oh, and aren't the Sally Army people silly."
Labour market stats due in 20 mins. Another big decline in unemployment and possible increase in wages as backdrop for George's big day? Or not?
Wah wah immigration and part time jobs and the full time ones aren't real jobs nation of burger flippers not proper jobs like outreach diversity coordinators privatisation and real wages are down if you ignore the mahoosive income tax cuts cost of living......
I'd have thought burning the Daily Record might be a better idea
It makes me unhappy about my bets on the SNP in the Paisley constituencies. The local party seems to lack the slightest trace of discretion.
Ceremonially burning of a document two thirds of the public think is a disgrace will not do anything but endear you to the general public. The faux outrage Nazi comparisons do not seem to be working for the Labour idiots. If anything it just makes them look more ridiculous.
I wonder what sort of faux outrage would have occurred if before the referendum, some minor BTers had burnt copies of Scotland's Future, a document that even most of SNP found embarrassing, while 55% of the voters politely ignored.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
How the hell does being able to afford certain privileges for your own children mean you care less about someone else's ? Does it feel good suggestion people should not put their own children in the best schools now that you have had the benefit of your parents do so for you ?
Why are right wing voters ashamed to say what their true feelings are ? There must be a reason.
Probably the incessant, albeit illogical, attacks by the loony left. If you feel you are under the spotlights then you keep your head down. (as Labour found to its cost in 1992 and may find out in 2015).
I am a liberal conservative. Make of that what you will.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Because I would rather than private schools didn't need to exist in anything like the scale that they do at present (there will always be a proportion of demand but a lot of it is driven by perceived better educational outcomes).
That's why I am a huge supporter of efforts to allow state schools their independence from the cold dead hand of LEAs. Let them flourish.
Charles, Try saying that to the Welsh Assembly and they will screech about properly qualified teachers etc.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate, and craven, enough to pull out all the stops. On Monday, he promised that if his Likud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.
His behavior in the past six years — aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state and never engaging seriously in negotiations — has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement. But his statement this week laid bare his duplicity, confirmed Palestinian suspicions and will make it even harder for him to repair his poisoned relations with President Obama, who has invested heavily in pushing a two-state solution.
Most of the rest of the article continues in a similar manner.
A duplicitous politician ! Whatever next ?
Bibi is an unusually unpleasant politician, however.
He is however what the Israelis want - has Obama called him to congratulate him yet ?
Mike - can we be sure that Lord Ashcroft is using the same pollster for his national polls and his constituency polls? Otherwise some of the difference could be due to house effect.
The same question also applies to his new constituency polls compared to when they were first done.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
Just had an email from Ed Balls about George Osborne.
He talks about broken promises and concludes " That's why everyone knows the only way the Tories can make their sums add up is by breaking their promises again — raising VAT and putting our NHS at risk."
The interesting word there is VAT. I wonder if Labour will rule out a VAT increase (not progressive) and then press the Tories to give a similar commitment with no weasel words like "we do not plan etc etc"?
UK VAT rates are amongst the lowest in Europe. Mind you, if you believe anything Ed Balls trumpets then I have a great deal from some Spanish Prisoners you might be interested in.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Because I would rather than private schools didn't need to exist in anything like the scale that they do at present (there will always be a proportion of demand but a lot of it is driven by perceived better educational outcomes).
That's why I am a huge supporter of efforts to allow state schools their independence from the cold dead hand of LEAs. Let them flourish.
And, as we know, in the UK "perceived" is the apposite word. The reality is that on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools:
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
That would be around 20% of all girls that had been teenagers in the last decade.
Which seems high.
Extrapolating from Rotherham would suggest 250,000 or so. Which is still a very disturbing number. Even if Rotherham is exceptional, it could easily be 150-200,000.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds, and don't want to relive their experiences in Court.
Rotherham has 260,000 people. The idea that 0.5% of that population have been sexually abused over the course of 15 years is not at all far-fetched.
One of the problems with Rotherham, Oxford and the like is that those who seek to question the numbers are seen as "deniers", who are seeking to sweep the issue under the carpet.I found myself in this position, when @Socrates or @SeanT suggested 2 million girls could have been abused, and I pointed out that 2m was equivalent to one-third of the girls who had passed through the 13-16 age group in the last decade - and that, therefore, the number was probably not particularly plausible.
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
That would be around 20% of all girls that had been teenagers in the last decade.
Which seems high.
Will have been some boys in the mix too.
Abuse comes in many forms. One in five does not seem that outlandish in a country that has always been extremely poor at protecting children from abusers, and at punishing abusers.
"The latest unemployment figures show further signs of improvement: in the three months to January 2015 the number of people out of work fell by 102,000 to 8.6m"
Mike - can we be sure that Lord Ashcroft is using the same pollster for his national polls and his constituency polls? Otherwise some of the difference could be due to house effect.
The same question also applies to his new constituency polls compared to when they were first done.
It's important for Conservative supporters not to discount the polls just because we don't like the results.
Personally, I can't understand any logical reason why Worcester would have swung to the Tories, and Chester heavily to Labour - they're old Middle England historic towns/cities in not dissimiliar parts of the country.
But any critique I'd like to be on evidence - like margin of error - not conjecture.
"Comparing the three months ending January 2015 with a year earlier, pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 1.8% including bonuses and by 1.6% excluding bonuses."
There were 1.86 million unemployed people, 102,000 fewer than for August to October 2014 and 479,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
Comparing the three months ending January 2015 with a year earlier, pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 1.8% including bonuses and by 1.6% excluding bonuses
Comparing the estimates for full-time and part-time employment by sex for the three months ending :
January 2015 with those for a year earlier, the number of: • men working full-time increased by 301,000 to reach 14.30 million • men working part-time fell by 20,000 to reach 2.15 million • women working full-time increased by 179,000 to reach 8.34 million • women working part-time increased by 157,000 to reach 6.15 million.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Why is it accepted that state education is necessarily so much worse than private education? Why is it necessarily so? I mean facilities, trips here and there I get but why the actual edjumacation bit?
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Because I would rather than private schools didn't need to exist in anything like the scale that they do at present (there will always be a proportion of demand but a lot of it is driven by perceived better educational outcomes).
That's why I am a huge supporter of efforts to allow state schools their independence from the cold dead hand of LEAs. Let them flourish.
And, as we know, in the UK "perceived" is the apposite word. The reality is that on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools:
That assumes that academic achievement is all parents value. There are several private schools I have encountered around the UK which are extremely mediocre by any academic standard, but they teach beautiful manners and immaculate handwriting, I wouldn't chose it for my children even if I could afford it, but it takes all sorts.
Mike - can we be sure that Lord Ashcroft is using the same pollster for his national polls and his constituency polls? Otherwise some of the difference could be due to house effect.
The same question also applies to his new constituency polls compared to when they were first done.
It would be Ashcroft's methodology applied to the sample, though, so this depends on how much of the house effect is due to which phones are used to call people with.
The bigger problem with comparing these constituency polls to when they were last polled is that he selected them on the basis that they were competitive in October - and that may have been simply due to margin of error noise in October favouring the Tories.
Frustratingly, I can't download the PDFs from Ashcroft's site to repeat Mike's analysis for the 2010 Lib Dems who have switched to the Tories, as I suggested would be worthwhile at 06:50.
"The latest unemployment figures show further signs of improvement: in the three months to January 2015 the number of people out of work fell by 102,000 to 8.6m"
LOL....Blanchflower predictions were incorrect, just 3m too low...
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
BBC journo unhappy you say ?
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
BBC journo unhappy you say ?
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
BBC journo unhappy you say ?
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
LOL...glass half empty....surely not.
R5 were sneering at the 20p rise in minimum wage last night as well. When I was on minimum wage job, although 20p extra per hour isn't much, I certainly would have been happy to see it. I guess it is easy to sneer when you make £100k a year at the BBC.
Mr. Indigo, I do wonder if we'll see handwriting decline. My own, perversely, has improved immeasurably since school [it's not great, but used to be horrendous]. I quite like writing by hand when musing on vague writing ideas.
There's also the strangely different way of thinking that occurs, for me at least, when writing by hand rather than typing. When you can't easily edit, and have to work more slowly, it alters the way one thinks.
Employment figures are lovely. A problem for the Government is that great employment stats now feel priced in, not unlike Mercedes winning races, or Horner whining pathetically.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
BBC journo unhappy you say ?
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
What a bloody humbug!
McHumbug ?
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 1m1 minute ago At 5.9%, Scotland's jobless rate is now above the UK average of 5.7% - @ons #Budget2015
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 5m5 minutes ago Unemployment in Scotland rose by 6,000 to 162,000 between November & January but was down 28,000 year on year - @ONS #Budget2015
PS You'd think the highest paid politician in the Uk would give better value for money than that - how many nurses and teachers could be employed for her fat salary ?
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Why is it accepted that state education is necessarily so much worse than private education? Why is it necessarily so? I mean facilities, trips here and there I get but why the actual edjumacation bit?
For hundreds of years the national elite has sent its sons and, latterly, its daughters to public schools to be educated. That is bound to have a significant influence on general perceptions. What's more, it is undoubtedly the case that a private education buys your children more attention from teachers, better facilities and less disruptive classes in which to learn. These are all very rational reasons to prefer it. But, as we know, on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools. Given the pool from which they attract their clients, private schools should do a whole lot better than they do.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
Wonder what conspiracy theory the BBC will come up with this time to try and explain away this massive reduction in unemployment over the past 6-9 months? We had the "its all part time" jobs, we have had "its all zero hour contracts", we have had "they are all unskilled ones"...all of which have been found to be nonsense.
BBC journo unhappy you say ?
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
Good to catch up with some of the pb.com posters and lurkers at The Shooting Star yesterday evening. Thanks to Steve for arranging.
Disappointing but not wholly unsurprising news from Israel this morning. Netanyahu is the consummate politician and played to this electorate's fears very well. I presume his calculation is the current administration is more concerned with IS and the next (hopefully for him) GOP administration will be much more sympathetic so status quo can be preserved.
It was municipal liberals in the 19th century that began to move forward ideas such as compulsory education, sewage, rudimentary healthcare but it was, I suspect, as much about having a strong and capable workforce to maximise productivity and profit in the factories than about any genuinw social concern.
A diseased, malnourished and ignorant labour force wasn't what the Industrial Revolution needed or wanted but education was also about the instilling of values (Christian, patriotic and respectful).which would act as a bulwark against revolution and economic upheaval such as the Luddites.
The problem was a healthier, better educated and stronger workforce lived longer so some form of support for a post-working life came to be seen and it was also vital to create a national standard of provision of education and healthcare beyond that provided by the factory owners and some towns so, long before Beveridge, you had the People's Budget.
All this worked well while we had a traditional industrial structure but the huge technological and economic changes since the 1970s undermined the "welfare" route. The standard of education required by the 21st Century workplace is so much higher and so much different and the education system hasn't responded well to that change and the demographic inversion, known in te 1980s but about which nothing was done by successive Governments, has created a significantly larger bloc of relatively healthy but economically inactive (either through choice or otherwise) people,
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Why is it accepted that state education is necessarily so much worse than private education? Why is it necessarily so? I mean facilities, trips here and there I get but why the actual edjumacation bit?
For hundreds of years the national elite has sent its sons and, latterly, its daughters to public schools to be educated. That is bound to have a significant influence on general perceptions. What's more, it is undoubtedly the case that a private education buys your children more attention from teachers, better facilities and less disruptive classes in which to learn. These are all very rational reasons to prefer it. But, as we know, on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools. Given the pool from which they attract their clients, private schools should do a whole lot better than they do.
That feels like a synthetic comparison. What is the state equivalent of Winchester College or Christ's Hospital School with which they are being compared ?
Netanyahu, by not espousing (even in theory) a two state solution must logically be saying that Palestine is part of Israel.
In which case, @SeanT's claim that Israel is an apartheid state has become true. The fiction that there was no vote in Israel because they would become Palestinian citizens down the line is exposed.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Why is it accepted that state education is necessarily so much worse than private education? Why is it necessarily so? I mean facilities, trips here and there I get but why the actual edjumacation bit?
For hundreds of years the national elite has sent its sons and, latterly, its daughters to public schools to be educated. That is bound to have a significant influence on general perceptions. What's more, it is undoubtedly the case that a private education buys your children more attention from teachers, better facilities and less disruptive classes in which to learn. These are all very rational reasons to prefer it. But, as we know, on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools. Given the pool from which they attract their clients, private schools should do a whole lot better than they do.
so what are you saying? Perceptions trump quantified out-performance?
Or that playing fields make or break an education (disruptive classes are presumably accounted or controlled for in the out-performance stats)?
There were 1.86 million unemployed people, 102,000 fewer than for August to October 2014 and 479,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
Comparing the three months ending January 2015 with a year earlier, pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 1.8% including bonuses and by 1.6% excluding bonuses
Happy Days Are Here Again!
This net following job losses in the public sector. At least 350,000 public sector jobs have disappeared as far as I can tell, with another million to go over the next 5 years. So the job performance has been even better than you suggest. This loss of public sector jobs is a good thing. We have too many. But will these people who have lost their jobs be happy? Is it going to help the govt, the Tory Party, with votes? If right wingers vote in a totally perverse way, then no.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Why is it accepted that state education is necessarily so much worse than private education? Why is it necessarily so? I mean facilities, trips here and there I get but why the actual edjumacation bit?
For hundreds of years the national elite has sent its sons and, latterly, its daughters to public schools to be educated. That is bound to have a significant influence on general perceptions. What's more, it is undoubtedly the case that a private education buys your children more attention from teachers, better facilities and less disruptive classes in which to learn. These are all very rational reasons to prefer it. But, as we know, on a like for like basis state schools out-perform private schools. Given the pool from which they attract their clients, private schools should do a whole lot better than they do.
That feels like a synthetic comparison. What is the state equivalent of Winchester College or Christ's Hospital School with which they are being compared ?
The school I went to had about 80 people per year. Around 60% of people did not speak English as a first language (mostly Urdu, and Gujerati), and almost half were on free school meals.
Of that 80, around 40 went through the sixth form to do A-Levels. And of that 40, four of us got into Oxbridge - and all (except me who got a 2:2) got excellent degrees.
I think that's a staggeringly good result for a state school in a deprived area.
Netanyahu, by not espousing (even in theory) a two state solution must logically be saying that Palestine is part of Israel.
In which case, @SeanT's claim that Israel is an apartheid state has become true. The fiction that there was no vote in Israel because they would become Palestinian citizens down the line is exposed.
So should the Palestinian Authority dissolve itself and demand instead equal civil rights in the unitary state of Israel?
Comments
"But you are clearly just about the most tribal, prejudiced, unthinking, nasty rentagob on PB"
Thank goodness your parents had the forsight to send you to Marlborough. Just think what you'd be like if you'd gone to the local comp.
I think PC gaming death may be overstating things. Currently, the consoles don't have great line-ups, and PC games tend to be much cheaper. And mods look great.
I think a lot of people who've been sexually abused just want to put it out of their minds,"
I'm sure they do .
That's why I was a little surprised by some of the the views last night. Lack of co-operation with the police = lack of criminality. Sighs of relief all round
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/an-israeli-election-turns-ugly.html Most of the rest of the article continues in a similar manner.
Interesting you mention mods as Rome 2 actually removed (most) of the ability of users to generate content. (I have no idea if this has changed since it launched, it was never a huge part of my enjoyment of the series but seemed Yet Another Bizarre PC Gaming Decision).
Taking Rotherham, 0.5% of people abused in the town does not sound unlikely. But you do need to adjust the data - only half the people are girls. And only 20% of these will have been in the 13-16 age group at some point in the last 15 years. So, we're saying 5% of girls who were teenagers in the last 15 years were abused. Which is possible - and fairly horrendous.
As an aside, I thought the majority of people we know to have been abused were in care, and therefore particularly vulnerable. (And which, of course, makes the council even more culpable.)
UK Polling Report makes the fair point that the higher swing in Ashcroft English marginals may be because they're English, and Labour is doing better in England and worse in Scotland. it's important to keep in mind, though, that nearly ALL Tory-Labour marginals are in England. For Government change, England is where the action is.
Ashcroft tried out the "But ther SNP would have too much influence" line on the focus groups: he found that it didn't affect Labour voters, since what were they supposed to do about it? They wanted a Labour government, ideally without the SNP, so they were voting Labour.
Also: given the consoles and the PC share a common x86 architecture, and use virtually identical development kits and environments, I can't see PC gaming going anywhere, even if it only has sales 10% of that of the consoles.
"There is nothing left wing about "concern for the disadvantaged"
"I'm a Tory & take some fairly practical steps to help in the limited way that I can."
How can someone who believes in private education for the sons and daughters of the rich in the knowledge that 90% of the population can't afford that education be considered compassionate?
Not good enough for Cameron.
It's more that left-wing politics can be characterised as responding to human suffering by trying to intervene directly and immediately to relieve it, whereas right-wing responses often focus more on "incentivising" those who are suffering to take steps themselves to address the problem, and managing the overall economy in a way that is intended to benefit all, including the disadvantaged, in the longer term.
You can see this difference in the bedroom tax for example. It's not unreasonable for the state to limit the provision of excessively large homes to those who rely on the state for housing. But the Tory implementation of the policy seems to be to change the system and wait for the reality to catch up, effectively penalising some people for failing to move to homes that don't exist, as well as ignoring the social and economic costs of forcing people to move away from family support networks etc. The approach that many Labour supporters would like to see their party adopt would aim for the same ultimate outcome, but only punish people for refusing to move to an actual existent home in a reasonable location for their current family circumstances, make some provision for the unavoidable costs of moving, and if sufficient houses didn't exist, would take steps to change that.
I'm not holding my breath for the current Labour party to do that, mind....
The SNP will want something. Which means they'll get something, and that will not go down well with the English.
In the same way some thought a currency union would just get the nod from the English, until it became apparent the English didn't like the idea of propping up an independent Scotland's financial industry.
Mr. Dair, I think PC gaming, like newspapers, will always be around, even if popularity waxes and wanes. I don't go into it myself because I'm a luddite, and, working on a computer, I really don't need another distraction away from work [pb.com and F1's bad enough for that].
That mod decision just seems stupid. I can see how toolkits etc might need time to come into being for new engines and the like, but removing modding capability from an existing game just seems guaranteed to piss people off.
Burning documents you don't like is a singularly dumb thing to do. There are some historical examples you might want to look up.
Anyone who doesn't condemn it is an idiot. Nicola is not an idiot.
A duplicitous politician ! Whatever next ?
That will really upset many in England, particularly those who wanted the "Union" at all costs.
The SNP will have achieved its goal despite losing the referendum.
In fact, over the next few years, they will get the best of both worlds. "Near independence" at little extra cost. In fact, at less cost !
"Roger Though most provide scholarships/bursaries"
A complete red herring. If you don't even believe in equality of opportunity for 13 year olds then you just don't believe in it.
Bibi is an unusually unpleasant politician, however.
I'm not sure why you want to condemn that.
Maybe just another hawk.
That's why I am a huge supporter of efforts to allow state schools their independence from the cold dead hand of LEAs. Let them flourish.
I do not see anything morally repugnant in Conservatism. And it is pretty clear that most Tories want to see the same things as most Labour supporters: a peaceful country with a contented population and equality of opportunity. I just disagree with the Tory view of how this can be achieved.
Sadly on this site and elsewhere the temptation is always to see your political opponents' motives and beliefs as reprehensible and immoral, not just misguided. We all do it.
Some see right/left as a divide of nastiness/niceness. This may be due to the left's superior use of language generally, in both good and bad ways.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-sex-abuse-gangs-could-5114029
"t's more that left-wing politics can be characterised as responding to human suffering by trying to intervene directly and immediately to relieve it"
A few do but most prefer to stand aloof and pontificate. Given a choice, I prefer the testimony of a Sally Army woman who gets her hands dirty rather than the Polly Toynbees or Owen Jones. Or indeed Ed's Dad.
"This is what needs to be done, so one of you lesser breeds should get on and do it. I'm too important to dirty my hands with charity work. Oh, and aren't the Sally Army people silly."
I am a liberal conservative. Make of that what you will.
Careful, that sort of talk will not be tolerated...
Which seems high.
He is however what the Israelis want - has Obama called him to congratulate him yet
The same question also applies to his new constituency polls compared to when they were first done.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/31938428
I'm amused it's 'breaking news', given it was reported yesterday.
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisainfocus/48482894.pdf
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 10s10 seconds ago
UK unemployment fell 102,000 to 1.86m (5.7%) in 3 months to January, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1HZbE2O
"The latest unemployment figures show further signs of improvement: in the three months to January 2015 the number of people out of work fell by 102,000 to 8.6m"
Personally, I can't understand any logical reason why Worcester would have swung to the Tories, and Chester heavily to Labour - they're old Middle England historic towns/cities in not dissimiliar parts of the country.
But any critique I'd like to be on evidence - like margin of error - not conjecture.
There were 1.86 million unemployed people, 102,000 fewer than for August to October 2014 and 479,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
Comparing the three months ending January 2015 with a year earlier, pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 1.8% including bonuses and by 1.6% excluding bonuses
Happy Days Are Here Again!
January 2015 with those for a year earlier, the number of:
• men working full-time increased by 301,000 to reach 14.30 million
• men working part-time fell by 20,000 to reach 2.15 million
• women working full-time increased by 179,000 to reach 8.34 million
• women working part-time increased by 157,000 to reach 6.15 million.
Good luck with trying to make money out of opinion polls after the Israeli election.
ONS @ONS · 4m4 minutes ago
#Employment rate 73.3% for Nov-Jan 2015, highest figure on record http://ow.ly/KtDlt
The bigger problem with comparing these constituency polls to when they were last polled is that he selected them on the basis that they were competitive in October - and that may have been simply due to margin of error noise in October favouring the Tories.
Frustratingly, I can't download the PDFs from Ashcroft's site to repeat Mike's analysis for the 2010 Lib Dems who have switched to the Tories, as I suggested would be worthwhile at 06:50.
Public sector employment 5.397m in Q4 2014, lowest level since series began in 1999
ONS @ONS · 3m3 minutes ago
Public sector employment 5.397m in Q4 2014, lowest level since series began in 1999 http://ow.ly/KtDMJ
Linda Yueh @lindayueh 5m5 minutes ago
UK avg wage growth slows to 1.8% vs expected 2.2% & unemployment rate unchanged at 5.7% vs exp fall to 5.6%. Just ahead of Budget 12:30GMT.
R5 were sneering at the 20p rise in minimum wage last night as well. When I was on minimum wage job, although 20p extra per hour isn't much, I certainly would have been happy to see it. I guess it is easy to sneer when you make £100k a year at the BBC.
There's also the strangely different way of thinking that occurs, for me at least, when writing by hand rather than typing. When you can't easily edit, and have to work more slowly, it alters the way one thinks.
Employment figures are lovely. A problem for the Government is that great employment stats now feel priced in, not unlike Mercedes winning races, or Horner whining pathetically.
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 1m1 minute ago
At 5.9%, Scotland's jobless rate is now above the UK average of 5.7% - @ons #Budget2015
James Cook @BBCJamesCook 5m5 minutes ago
Unemployment in Scotland rose by 6,000 to 162,000 between November & January but was down 28,000 year on year - @ONS #Budget2015
PS You'd think the highest paid politician in the Uk would give better value for money than that - how many nurses and teachers could be employed for her fat salary ?
Amazing how rounding can distort numbers
Good to catch up with some of the pb.com posters and lurkers at The Shooting Star yesterday evening. Thanks to Steve for arranging.
Disappointing but not wholly unsurprising news from Israel this morning. Netanyahu is the consummate politician and played to this electorate's fears very well. I presume his calculation is the current administration is more concerned with IS and the next (hopefully for him) GOP administration will be much more sympathetic so status quo can be preserved.
It was municipal liberals in the 19th century that began to move forward ideas such as compulsory education, sewage, rudimentary healthcare but it was, I suspect, as much about having a strong and capable workforce to maximise productivity and profit in the factories than about any genuinw social concern.
A diseased, malnourished and ignorant labour force wasn't what the Industrial Revolution needed or wanted but education was also about the instilling of values (Christian, patriotic and respectful).which would act as a bulwark against revolution and economic upheaval such as the Luddites.
The problem was a healthier, better educated and stronger workforce lived longer so some form of support for a post-working life came to be seen and it was also vital to create a national standard of provision of education and healthcare beyond that provided by the factory owners and some towns so, long before Beveridge, you had the People's Budget.
All this worked well while we had a traditional industrial structure but the huge technological and economic changes since the 1970s undermined the "welfare" route. The standard of education required by the 21st Century workplace is so much higher and so much different and the education system hasn't responded well to that change and the demographic inversion, known in te 1980s but about which nothing was done by successive Governments, has created a significantly larger bloc of relatively healthy but economically inactive (either through choice or otherwise) people,
Sorry for the lecture....
In which case, @SeanT's claim that Israel is an apartheid state has become true. The fiction that there was no vote in Israel because they would become Palestinian citizens down the line is exposed.
Or that playing fields make or break an education (disruptive classes are presumably accounted or controlled for in the out-performance stats)?
This loss of public sector jobs is a good thing. We have too many. But will these people who have lost their jobs be happy? Is it going to help the govt, the Tory Party, with votes? If right wingers vote in a totally perverse way, then no.
Of that 80, around 40 went through the sixth form to do A-Levels. And of that 40, four of us got into Oxbridge - and all (except me who got a 2:2) got excellent degrees.
I think that's a staggeringly good result for a state school in a deprived area.