The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
Well we can compare and contrast the relative success and failure in both growing the economy and cutting the budget deficit in France (increasing top rate tax dramatically to 75%) and the UK (cutting back to a bit above Labour's preferred tax rate). Which nations have grown better since the 2012 budget and which deficits have come down faster?
It is total dishonesty to claim that Labour ever charged more than 40%. In their 13 whole years in power they only ever charged a top rate of 40% - for a reason.
The reason was that they did not need to. It only became an issue after the crash. The change was announced in the 2009 budget, the first opportunity to do so after the crash happened. As we all know, Osborne announced the reduction in 2012, a year before it happened, just as he has announced all other income tax related changes a year before they actually took place.
Typical Labour ignorance to think there was no deficit issue prior to the crash. The previous government ran a deficit of 2.5% or more every year from 2002 onwards, not 2009. Of course if you're running a 3.5% deficit like in 2004/5 during a boom then its going to be more in a bust, that's Economics 101. Yet even then Labour never once increased the top rate of tax.
Who, except for those on the left, was calling for top rate tax rises prior to 2008/09? Nobody. If you are now saying that the top rate of tax should have been raised earlier then I agree with you.
Completely the opposite. I'm saying just as it was wrong then, it was wrong now. Labour committing arson on the way out the door is no reason not to reach for the fire extinguisher.
So Osborne should have immediately stopped it with his emergency budget in June 2010 and made a huge mistake in only reducing it to 45 pence in 2012?
In his first proper budget he commissioned a review by HMRC into the optimal top rate of tax. They concluded that the revenue maximising rate was slightly below 50% (that Laffer Curve thing again).
Result was that Osborne cut the rate to 47% (45% Yt plus 2% uNIC).
@Charles - Hollande was well ahead in the polls and the 75% tax rate was a key plank of his manifesto. Osborne was placing an "open" sign in the UK's window just at the point when high earners in France were most worried. The growth in the French population in London has a testimony to the success of the policy (although it hasn't helped house prices and rents)
So clearly Osborne saw something that others could not see. It's amazing that none of this has come out. And what you are saying is that the French would have swallowed the 75 pence rate and stayed in France if UK income tax had remained at 50 pence. Wow, just wow.
There's how many countries in Europe? You think the UK is the only one other than France? Wow, just wow.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
Well we can compare and contrast the relative success and failure in both growing the economy and cutting the budget deficit in France (increasing top rate tax dramatically to 75%) and the UK (cutting back to a bit above Labour's preferred tax rate). Which nations have grown better since the 2012 budget and which deficits have come down faster?
It is total dishonesty to claim that Labour ever charged more than 40%. In their 13 whole years in power they only ever charged a top rate of 40% - for a reason.
The reason was that they did not need to. It only became an issue after the crash. The change was announced in the 2009 budget, the first opportunity to do so after the crash happened. As we all know, Osborne announced the reduction in 2012, a year before it happened, just as he has announced all other income tax related changes a year before they actually took place.
Typical Labour ignorance to think there was no deficit issue prior to the crash. The previous government ran a deficit of 2.5% or more every year from 2002 onwards, not 2009. Of course if you're running a 3.5% deficit like in 2004/5 during a boom then its going to be more in a bust, that's Economics 101. Yet even then Labour never once increased the top rate of tax.
Who, except for those on the left, was calling for top rate tax rises prior to 2008/09? Nobody. If you are now saying that the top rate of tax should have been raised earlier then I agree with you.
Completely the opposite. I'm saying just as it was wrong then, it was wrong now. Labour committing arson on the way out the door is no reason not to reach for the fire extinguisher.
So Osborne should have immediately stopped it with his emergency budget in June 2010 and made a huge mistake in only reducing it to 45 pence in 2012?
Yes. He should have done it at the start of the Parliament and just canned it completely along with the perverse 60% marginal rate at £100-120k. If those tax rate were good enough for Labour then they should be good enough for the coalition. High marginal taxes are economically destructive.
Yabadabadooda..Just had a home meeting with an American Italian Film Producer to discuss a new script from one of my novels..Exciting... even if nothing comes of it.
@Charles - In his first proper budget he commissioned a review by HMRC into the optimal top rate of tax. They concluded that the revenue maximising rate was slightly below 50% (that Laffer Curve thing again). Result was that Osborne cut the rate to 47% (45% Yt plus 2% uNIC). Evidence-based policy. Funny idea, isn't it.
It's a great idea. But there was no evidence that cutting the 50 pence rate would raise more money. There were theories. But that's different.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
Well we can compare and contrast the relative success and failure in both growing the economy and cutting the budget deficit in France (increasing top rate tax dramatically to 75%) and the UK (cutting back to a bit above Labour's preferred tax rate). Which nations have grown better since the 2012 budget and which deficits have come down faster?
It is total dishonesty to claim that Labour ever charged more than 40%. In their 13 whole years in power they only ever charged a top rate of 40% - for a reason.
The reason was that they did not need to. It only became an issue after the crash. The change was announced in the 2009 budget, the first opportunity to do so after the crash happened. As we all know, Osborne announced the reduction in 2012, a year before it happened, just as he has announced all other income tax related changes a year before they actually took place.
Typical Labour ignorance to think there was no deficit issue prior to the crash. The previous government ran a deficit of 2.5% or more every year from 2002 onwards, not 2009. Of course if you're running a 3.5% deficit like in 2004/5 during a boom then its going to be more in a bust, that's Economics 101. Yet even then Labour never once increased the top rate of tax.
Who, except for those on the left, was calling for top rate tax rises prior to 2008/09? Nobody. If you are now saying that the top rate of tax should have been raised earlier then I agree with you.
The problem with the british economies wasnt we werent taxed enough, its that we spend too much.
"Yabadabadooda..Just had a home meeting with an American Italian Film Producer to discuss a new script from one of my novels..Exciting... even if nothing comes of it."
Carswell posters all over Clackers ft the man, a Ukip badge and the flag of st George... If you read this site you'd think he wouldn't be seen with such insignia... #babycomeback
Douglas Carswell (@DouglasCarswell) 06/04/2015 15:11 Spotted in #Clacton - we have mo #ukip pic.twitter.com/p8xiLeFKxs
"Okay, it was a serious breach of the rules, but the culprit’s been punished enough."
I think we can all now relax and take it as a certainty that Nicola has been economical with the truth. Carmichael has admitted it's someone in his department and even Biggles doesn't think it was fake. Sorry Nicola but time to come clean.
She's hardly responsible for a third hand summary written, and leaked, in the SO. It may not be a fake in that sense but that doesn't mean it was an accurate historical record, or even written without malice.
The way in which the story is being backpedalled is most interesting.
On second thoughts, that comment on intent is prima facie unfair, so should be ignored, though one does wonder who leaked it and with whose authorisation.
As Rennie was one of the first to react, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be the work of a Carmichael SPAD, as SPAD's are quasi civil servants. SLAB did jump on it early on, but backpedalled once the Milliband not PM material "quote" sunk in. Anyway this will be an interesting test of Sturgeon's popularity, I don't think it will have much impact, as this is just a Westminster bubble story.
The point about Millionaires being £43k better of under Tories mis-describes what a millionaire is. Hardly anyone earns £1 M per annum. A millionaire has assets of a Million of earns more than £100 K pa. Tories should mention this.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
The Laffer curve is multi-dimensional. Anytime anyone shows you the curve you have to remember that it depends on rates of tax in other countries. Thus if taxes elsewhere in the EU are low then the first maximum tax take point of the Laffer curve will be to the left, if taxes elsewhere are high then the first maximum take point of the Laffer curve will be to the right.
All we can really say about the Laffer curve is that there is AT LEAST one point where there will be a local maximum.
Yabadabadooda..Just had a home meeting with an American Italian Film Producer to discuss a new script from one of my novels..Exciting... even if nothing comes of it.
Preume that ICM will have this week first of what will be weekly polls until the GE.If so reasonable chance of improvement for LD,s and Ukip very close to fourth place.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
How many turning points do you think it might have? Pretty clearly an odd number. Can't quite see the mechanism whereby it'd have 3 say.
One seems to be the most likely number by far.
Completely agree we have no idea where we are on the curve though. My hunch would be on the right of the peak, but it's only a hunch. It's also quite likely that the peak moves.
@Charles - In his first proper budget he commissioned a review by HMRC into the optimal top rate of tax. They concluded that the revenue maximising rate was slightly below 50% (that Laffer Curve thing again). Result was that Osborne cut the rate to 47% (45% Yt plus 2% uNIC). Evidence-based policy. Funny idea, isn't it.
It's a great idea. But there was no evidence that cutting the 50 pence rate would raise more money. There were theories. But that's different.
That's the same with many policies, isn't it? It's difficult to get 'evidence' on the effects of a policy until that policy is implemented: we can look at what happened before (if it was done before), but times change; we can look at what has happened in other countries, but their economies are different. This is particularly true for economic policies.
Labour's hypocrisy on this after the rate was at 40p for nearly all their time in power is breathtaking, but unsurprising.
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Using the scottish and welsh polls published today and trying to paint the rosiest picture possible for the Tories, using that yougov CON 37, LAB 35, LD 7 poll from last week, and using the ukpollingreport's advanced swingometer I get for E&W only CON 290, LAB 272, LD 8 seats.
Of course that result portraits the problem that for the Tories to be ahead in seats they must ravage the LD's for every available seat. Thus the total coalition seats will still be way bellow the threshold for a majority.
But if I use the latest yougov poll of CON 34, LAB 33, LD 10 the result in seats for E&W only is CON 273, LAB 279, LD 19
Which makes Labour the largest party, but again the overall coalition seats are again about the same, just bellow 300 seats.
And all the above results are also using a model that is a simple swing which is flawed and does not take into account tactical voting that may favour the LD against the Tories a bit or UKIP.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
The Laffer curve is multi-dimensional. Anytime anyone shows you the curve you have to remember that it depends on rates of tax in other countries. Thus if taxes elsewhere in the EU are low then the first maximum tax take point of the Laffer curve will be to the left, if taxes elsewhere are high then the first maximum take point of the Laffer curve will be to the right.
All we can really say about the Laffer curve is that there is AT LEAST one point where there will be a local maximum.
My take on the Laffer curve is that a great deal depends on the mood music that accompanies the change. If the tax rate is increased and the government says: "We're doing this because we hate you muhahahaha", then it will cause more tax avoidance than: "We're doing this as a temporary measure because we're in the sh*t; there'll be goodies for you later."
In addition, if they think this is just the start of many squeezing-the-rich changes, then it will also increase avoidance.
For this reason, I'd tentatively suggest a Conservative or Lib Dem government increasing higher rate tax might cause less new avoidance than a Labour government, who seem to revel in pseudo-hatred of the rich (e.g. Roger below). Unless, of course, they are rich and Labour supporters.
Putting our posts, together, it would mean the Laffer curve is not a curve, but a diffuse cloud of probabilities existing in a 3D-space. ;-)
Yabadabadooda..Just had a home meeting with an American Italian Film Producer to discuss a new script from one of my novels..Exciting... even if nothing comes of it.
Good luck! (I should add 'you git', because I've never had the bravery to get any fiction published, if only because I am not a good writer).
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Labour most seats is a good bet at the moment. In individual seats, Ipswich is almost a certain Labour gain with good odds at the moment, Stroud too is a good bet for Labour.
The most riskiest bets at the moment are UKIP seats both in total and individual because you don't know if they will gain any other than Clacton if they are at present levels, but if they move up a bit they might get a dozen seats. The uncertainty about UKIP is very great, there is no past model or result to compare it with.
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Best bets prob the 8/13 Farage in S Thanet, worst the 4/1 Labour in the same seat
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Best bets prob the 8/13 Farage in S Thanet, worst the 4/1 Labour in the same seat
st ives 8/11 lib dem bye bye Cleggy 13/8 Cannock chase 13/10 lab All good I reckon
I've been thinking about getting a Kindle, but am just not certain - I'm told it's better for reading than using an e-book app on a Tablet, but I do currently have a tablet in any case, so is the reading so much better on a Kindle that it is worth getting as well?
I would definitely say yes and given the prices now they are a bargain. I have the original kindle with 3G so can download anywhere.
Malcolm, I hope you have the works of Nigel Tranter on your kindle!! They are excellent and you would enjoy them, if you are not already a devotee!
What about Harlow 4/1 lab? the local Tory council chief really upset the locals by refusing to turn the street lights back on at night despite the council voting to subsidize it with council tax rise. Residents agreed apparently. All championed by a lab councilor.
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
I have no idea why Conservatives are still 1-4 in Truro.
My take on the Laffer curve is that a great deal depends on the mood music that accompanies the change. If the tax rate is increased and the government says: "We're doing this because we hate you muhahahaha", then it will cause more tax avoidance than: "We're doing this as a temporary measure because we're in the sh*t; there'll be goodies for you later."
In addition, if they think this is just the start of many squeezing-the-rich changes, then it will also increase avoidance.
For this reason, I'd tentatively suggest a Conservative or Lib Dem government increasing higher rate tax might cause less new avoidance than a Labour government, who seem to revel in pseudo-hatred of the rich (e.g. Roger below). Unless, of course, they are rich and Labour supporters.
There is a hint of truth in this, but principally for the wrong reasons. People choose "to avoid" tax where the cost of "avoidance" is less, usually substantially less than the reduction in their charge to tax. A temporary measure is less likely to be "avoided" for the simple reason that the cost of "avoidance" relative to the reduction in tax liability is very high in the short term. It made little sense therefore "to avoid" measures such as the "bankers' bonus tax" in the last Parliament, which raised substantial revenue. "Avoidance" is inevitably higher when permanent tax rates are very high. Natural and legal persons make decisions on objective economic criteria, rather than on party political considerations.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
How many turning points do you think it might have? Pretty clearly an odd number. Can't quite see the mechanism whereby it'd have 3 say.
One seems to be the most likely number by far.
Completely agree we have no idea where we are on the curve though. My hunch would be on the right of the peak, but it's only a hunch. It's also quite likely that the peak moves.
One point - if we are near a local maximum d(Income)/d(rate) = 0 (approx) and changes in the rate applied are not going to have much of an effect on total take - and such changes could be substantially affected by 'noise'.
The point about Millionaires being £43k better of under Tories mis-describes what a millionaire is. Hardly anyone earns £1 M per annum. A millionaire has assets of a Million of earns more than £100 K pa. Tories should mention this.
Sounds well off there I think, will be plenty earning good money with few assets and plenty southerners with big assets and little earnings , so completely bogus thinking.
I've been thinking about getting a Kindle, but am just not certain - I'm told it's better for reading than using an e-book app on a Tablet, but I do currently have a tablet in any case, so is the reading so much better on a Kindle that it is worth getting as well?
I would definitely say yes and given the prices now they are a bargain. I have the original kindle with 3G so can download anywhere.
Malcolm, I hope you have the works of Nigel Tranter on your kindle!! They are excellent and you would enjoy them, if you are not already a devotee!
David, I have them in paper as well. Excellent books and well written. I recently read the Bruce Trilogy.
As we come up to the 1 month mark, what do people think are the best and worst bets available at the moment?
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Best bets prob the 8/13 Farage in S Thanet, worst the 4/1 Labour in the same seat
st ives 8/11 lib dem bye bye Cleggy 13/8 Cannock chase 13/10 lab All good I reckon
I'd want more than 13/8 on Clegg going - he's one a few LibDems who might get tactical voting from Conservatives.
Favouring Conservatives is that workers will see their net pay rise just days before the election.
Is there any evidence of meaningful pay rises? If not could push opinion the other way.
Net pay will rise owing to the increased personal allowance, effective this month. That's all I meant.
Ah, I see. I remember someone saying many workers will see pay rises just before the election, convincing them to vote Tory. With inflation so low I can't see that happening.
Turnover on the Betfair seats market generally derisory- except South Thanet (over £15,000), Sheffield Hallam (£2,000) and Brighton Kemptown (£1,750). The money has been on UKIP, LD and Cons respectively in the above 3 seats; volume as important as price movements in Betfair's racing markets- at least as far as indicating stable confidence if not the result.
It's already down to 3/1 on WH. Interesting to note more folks voted yes in O&S than voted for Carmichael in 2010. Assuming a similar reduction in Carmichael's vote to Kennedy's, I think this isn't as safe a seat as all the pundits and bookies think. In addition, Frenchgate still has the potential to hurt him.
Turnover on the Betfair seats market generally derisory- except South Thanet (over £15,000), Sheffield Hallam (£2,000) and Brighton Kemptown (£1,750). The money has been on UKIP, LD and Cons respectively in the above 3 seats; volume as important as price movements in Betfair's racing markets- at least as far as indicating stable confidence if not the result.
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
5/2 for the Conservatives to win Corby is worth a punt..
Why?
Interesting seat. Louise Mensch won it for the Conservatives in 2010 by just less than 2000 votes. When she left Parliament two years later, Labour regained with a fairly comfortable majority of 7700. This majority was boosted by Louise Mensch's precipitate departure , but since then the local Conservatives are fighting hard with a very hard working Candidate and team. At 5/2 - 3/1 for the Tory's to regain, it might be worth a punt. The seat includes the town of Corby, which has traditionally been strongly "old" Labour and also the very rural East Northamptonshire which has been Conservative. It will be interesting to see which part of the Constituency outguns the other!
5/2 for the Conservatives to win Corby is worth a punt..
Why?
Interesting seat. Louise Mensch won it for the Conservatives in 2010 by just less than 2000 votes. When she left Parliament two years later, Labour regained with a fairly comfortable majority of 7700. This majority was boosted by Louise Mensch's precipitate departure , but since then the local Conservatives are fighting hard with a very hard working Candidate and team. At 5/2 - 3/1 for the Tory's to regain, it might be worth a punt. The seat includes the town of Corby, which has traditionally been strongly "old" Labour and also the very rural East Northamptonshire which has been Conservative. It will be interesting to see which part of the Constituency outguns the other!
You do not recover from a 7700 loss in two years against a 1st time incumbent.
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
The Laffer Curve has been known about for decades that's why,
The Laffer curve is notional only.
There is no evidence that the tax revenue curve has a single turning point. Also I'm amazed that every single proponent of the Laffer curve always an ever believes that we are on the right hand side of the curve.
How many turning points do you think it might have? Pretty clearly an odd number. Can't quite see the mechanism whereby it'd have 3 say.
One seems to be the most likely number by far.
Completely agree we have no idea where we are on the curve though. My hunch would be on the right of the peak, but it's only a hunch. It's also quite likely that the peak moves.
Instead of speculating we could all ready the Treasury paper again! Obviously assumptions underlying the analysis (as with all analysis) - the most critical is the assumption of the marginal responsiveness to tax rates
A Yougov online poll. Today, it was voting intention, certainty to vote, any knowledge of good/bad announcements by parties followed by somewhat leading questions on topics in the political news eg ZHCs, tax proposals and immigration.
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
But so much of the CON vote has gone to UKIP
But has it? That's not what the national polls suggest.
Of course, I realise not every seat performs exactly the same way. But for Lab to beat Con in Thanet South and Lab not to get a majority would require Thanet South to perform way, way, way out of line with the national picture.
And the ComRes Thanet poll released yesterday found the Con retention rate (from 2010) was higher than the Lab retention rate.
Perhaps a moment to catch the collective breath as I suspect there aren't going to be many evenings without a poll between now and May 7th.
Out and about this weekend I get little sense of the election campaign catching the imagination or really having started (almost certainly not the case in the marginals). I think Labour has weathered the initial Conservative barrage fairly well but there's a long way to go from here.
The key television "debate" is the QT on the 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg . A key test for all three with just a week before polling with (I believe) both a formal interview and questions from the audience and an opportunity for UKIP and SNP supporters to pose the awkward ones.
How's it going to end up ? I have no idea - probably the most equally inconvenient result for everybody because that's how life works.
5/2 for the Conservatives to win Corby is worth a punt..
Why?
Interesting seat. Louise Mensch won it for the Conservatives in 2010 by just less than 2000 votes. When she left Parliament two years later, Labour regained with a fairly comfortable majority of 7700. This majority was boosted by Louise Mensch's precipitate departure , but since then the local Conservatives are fighting hard with a very hard working Candidate and team. At 5/2 - 3/1 for the Tory's to regain, it might be worth a punt. The seat includes the town of Corby, which has traditionally been strongly "old" Labour and also the very rural East Northamptonshire which has been Conservative. It will be interesting to see which part of the Constituency outguns the other!
You do not recover from a 7700 loss in two years against a 1st time incumbent.
Mmm TCP! You are probably making a fair point, at least conventionally. But the circumstances of the By-election were very strange and strongly disadvantaged the Conservatives. Also it was before the rise of UKIP and where they may get their support from. Worth watching!
Carswell posters all over Clackers ft the man, a Ukip badge and the flag of st George... If you read this site you'd think he wouldn't be seen with such insignia... #babycomeback
Douglas Carswell (@DouglasCarswell) 06/04/2015 15:11 Spotted in #Clacton - we have mo #ukip pic.twitter.com/p8xiLeFKxs
? English Votes for English Laws is what Watling, Carswells tory opponent, is proposing. He is using the flag of St George to advertise that; you would hardly expect him to wave the Saltire, unlike say the winner of The Voice? Letting Labour in by voting UKIP will certainly stuff the English, what is your policy? In a devolved age what flag would an English Parliament fly?
No I didn't confuse Moniker with a Sturgeon fancier. In fact I was going to reply with a lawyer joke but these Nats are so messianic about her that I thought they may be so incensed they'd do a Charlie Hebdo so I rowed back
I don't know if that is meant to be serious or funny, but either way it really doesn't add to the intellectual gravitas of PB.
David Cameron has ridiculed Nick Clegg as a “desperate” attention seeker who leads a “minor party”, as the gulf between the two Coalition partners widened on the tenth day of the election campaign.
The key television "debate" is the QT on the 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg . A key test for all three with just a week before polling with (I believe) both a formal interview and questions from the audience and an opportunity for UKIP and SNP supporters to pose the awkward ones.
It won't have an interview. It will just be each leader in turn at the table with Dimbleby taking audience questions - with Dimbleby adding supplementaries as he does on a normal QT.
I wouldn't expect it to rate that highly - certainly lower than the ITV debate last week - but obviously far higher than a normal QT.
Normal QT gets about 2.7m - this should get about 5m - it will almost certainly be 8.30pm to 10pm.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 33m 33 minutes ago Week-ending 5th April 2015 - First ever Tory lead in ELBOW! Con 34.1, Lab 33.8, UKIP 13.7, LD 8.0, Greens 4.8
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 36m 36 minutes ago Party leads in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August 2014. Cons finally take the lead w/e 5th April!
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 35m 35 minutes ago Cons and Lab in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Cons finally take the lead w/e 5th April
It won't have an interview. It will just be each leader in turn at the table with Dimbleby taking audience questions - with Dimbleby adding supplementaries as he does on a normal QT.
I wouldn't expect it to rate that highly - certainly lower than the ITV debate last week - but obviously far higher than a normal QT.
Normal QT gets about 2.7m - this should get about 5m - it will almost certainly be 8.30pm to 10pm.
Why do you think the QT will rate lower than the ITV debate last week ? Will it only be shown on the BBC or will it be shown on Sky and other outlets ? It's a week before polling day and most of us on here have been obsessing about the election for months, if not years, the majority of sensible people haven't.
It may indeed be the only time many people will focus on the election as, for all the anecdotal evidence on here, most people never meet a canvasser or read a political leaflet.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 31m 31 minutes ago #LibDems and #Greens in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Greens now in free-fall?
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
But the last poll I saw had Con 31, Lab 30, UKIP 29. That shows an 8% swing from Con to Lab. Labour will finish third here. Either the Tories or UKIP, one of them has to give. I think Farage will by 5 points from Labour.
Took a run over with the family from Ancaster to Happisburgh on the Norfolk coast today. Did some sign spotting on the way. Interestingly almost nothing at all going down the A17 to King's Lynn. Should be hard core Tory country with perhaps a challenge from UKIP around Boston. But no election signs in sight. Past Kings Lynn cutting south of Fakenham plenty of Tory posters and then north of Coltishall plenty of posters fro Stuart Agnew of UKIP. What was most noticeable though were the large number of orange lollipops for Norman Lamb in all the small towns and villages North East of Norwich.
If lollipops were the measure of electoral chances then Norman would be a shoe in. Certainly it looks like he gas a very effective ground game going.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 31m 31 minutes ago #LibDems and #Greens in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Greens now in free-fall?
twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585151283759357952
If I wasn't on my phone I'd have he perfect image to describe the LDs performance.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 30m 30 minutes ago The Rise and Fall (possibly?) of UKIP? ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week), update for w/e 5th Apr 2015 (13.7%)
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
But the last poll I saw had Con 31, Lab 30, UKIP 29. That shows an 8% swing from Con to Lab. Labour will finish third here. Either the Tories or UKIP, one of them has to give. I think Farage will by 5 points from Labour.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 31m 31 minutes ago #LibDems and #Greens in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Greens now in free-fall?
twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585151283759357952
If I wasn't on my phone I'd have he perfect image to describe the LDs performance.
Cameron helped out Labour by insisting on Bennett being invited to the debates.
What is the rule regarding Prime Minister after the election ? Is it after a confidence motion or just the next day ? If not, Cameron wins anyway because he will the PM for a few days , at least, unless it is a bad defeat.
Best bet about at moment is the 6/1 from Hills on LAB in Thanet South.
Con was 17% ahead of Lab in Thanet South in 2010.
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
But the last poll I saw had Con 31, Lab 30, UKIP 29. That shows an 8% swing from Con to Lab. Labour will finish third here. Either the Tories or UKIP, one of them has to give. I think Farage will by 5 points from Labour.
No you have Labour and UKIP reversed I believe.
I meant to say Labour will finish second here with UKIP first.
It won't have an interview. It will just be each leader in turn at the table with Dimbleby taking audience questions - with Dimbleby adding supplementaries as he does on a normal QT.
I wouldn't expect it to rate that highly - certainly lower than the ITV debate last week - but obviously far higher than a normal QT.
Normal QT gets about 2.7m - this should get about 5m - it will almost certainly be 8.30pm to 10pm.
Why do you think the QT will rate lower than the ITV debate last week ? Will it only be shown on the BBC or will it be shown on Sky and other outlets ? It's a week before polling day and most of us on here have been obsessing about the election for months, if not years, the majority of sensible people haven't.
It may indeed be the only time many people will focus on the election as, for all the anecdotal evidence on here, most people never meet a canvasser or read a political leaflet.
I imagine BBC1 only but maybe BBC News Channel as well.
But the reason it will rate lower is because it won't be marketed as a "debate" - so the public will think of it as more like a normal political programme.
Evan Davis will also be interviewing the four leaders (ie inc Farage) in separate programmes on BBC1 in prime-time - from memory they got about 2.5m in 2010 (when done by Paxman).
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 31m 31 minutes ago #LibDems and #Greens in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Greens now in free-fall?
twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585151283759357952
If I wasn't on my phone I'd have he perfect image to describe the LDs performance.
Cameron helped out Labour by insisting on Bennett being invited to the debates.
Comments
Result was that Osborne cut the rate to 47% (45% Yt plus 2% uNIC).
Evidence-based policy. Funny idea, isn't it.
Result was that Osborne cut the rate to 47% (45% Yt plus 2% uNIC).
Evidence-based policy. Funny idea, isn't it.
It's a great idea. But there was no evidence that cutting the 50 pence rate would raise more money. There were theories. But that's different.
"Yabadabadooda..Just had a home meeting with an American Italian Film Producer to discuss a new script from one of my novels..Exciting... even if nothing comes of it."
Lets have a name. I know a few of those.
Douglas Carswell (@DouglasCarswell)
06/04/2015 15:11
Spotted in #Clacton - we have mo #ukip pic.twitter.com/p8xiLeFKxs
All we can really say about the Laffer curve is that there is AT LEAST one point where there will be a local maximum.
One seems to be the most likely number by far.
Completely agree we have no idea where we are on the curve though. My hunch would be on the right of the peak, but it's only a hunch. It's also quite likely that the peak moves.
That's the same with many policies, isn't it? It's difficult to get 'evidence' on the effects of a policy until that policy is implemented: we can look at what happened before (if it was done before), but times change; we can look at what has happened in other countries, but their economies are different. This is particularly true for economic policies.
Labour's hypocrisy on this after the rate was at 40p for nearly all their time in power is breathtaking, but unsurprising.
We're now so close some short-odds certainties are increasingly attractive. I'm torn between 1/10 on Labour taking Brent Central, 1/5 on Labour holding Ashfield, or even just the 1/20 on Bennett being Green leader as the best one.
As for the worst? WillHill still have 5/1 on UKIP winning 50+ seats, despite most bookies having the over/under at 4.5.
Of course that result portraits the problem that for the Tories to be ahead in seats they must ravage the LD's for every available seat.
Thus the total coalition seats will still be way bellow the threshold for a majority.
But if I use the latest yougov poll of CON 34, LAB 33, LD 10 the result in seats for E&W only is CON 273, LAB 279, LD 19
Which makes Labour the largest party, but again the overall coalition seats are again about the same, just bellow 300 seats.
And all the above results are also using a model that is a simple swing which is flawed and does not take into account tactical voting that may favour the LD against the Tories a bit or UKIP.
In addition, if they think this is just the start of many squeezing-the-rich changes, then it will also increase avoidance.
For this reason, I'd tentatively suggest a Conservative or Lib Dem government increasing higher rate tax might cause less new avoidance than a Labour government, who seem to revel in pseudo-hatred of the rich (e.g. Roger below). Unless, of course, they are rich and Labour supporters.
Putting our posts, together, it would mean the Laffer curve is not a curve, but a diffuse cloud of probabilities existing in a 3D-space. ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election
In individual seats, Ipswich is almost a certain Labour gain with good odds at the moment, Stroud too is a good bet for Labour.
The most riskiest bets at the moment are UKIP seats both in total and individual because you don't know if they will gain any other than Clacton if they are at present levels, but if they move up a bit they might get a dozen seats.
The uncertainty about UKIP is very great, there is no past model or result to compare it with.
"MD..Plato..thank you..Roger..no names until contracts..if any..are drawn up"
Fair enough. But if his name is Alessandro C. and his partner is very beautiful and called Susanne say hallo from Roger.
Maybes.
We've got an interesting Thanet South market out tomorrow.
I'd expect a LOT of polling mid-week.
But I might be wrong :-)
With inflation so low I can't see that happening.
Just been polled by YouGov. Thought some of the questions were poor and leading, so difficult to give sensible answers .
For Lab to beat Con in Thanet South (regardless of what UKIP does) would imply a national Lab vote lead of at least 5% (it would be 10% on UNS) which would be Lab majority territory - available at 47-1 on Betfair.
"Are you allowed to say what they were?"
A Yougov online poll. Today, it was voting intention, certainty to vote, any knowledge of good/bad announcements by parties followed by somewhat leading questions on topics in the political news eg ZHCs, tax proposals and immigration.
Of course, I realise not every seat performs exactly the same way. But for Lab to beat Con in Thanet South and Lab not to get a majority would require Thanet South to perform way, way, way out of line with the national picture.
And the ComRes Thanet poll released yesterday found the Con retention rate (from 2010) was higher than the Lab retention rate.
Perhaps a moment to catch the collective breath as I suspect there aren't going to be many evenings without a poll between now and May 7th.
Out and about this weekend I get little sense of the election campaign catching the imagination or really having started (almost certainly not the case in the marginals). I think Labour has weathered the initial Conservative barrage fairly well but there's a long way to go from here.
The key television "debate" is the QT on the 30th with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg . A key test for all three with just a week before polling with (I believe) both a formal interview and questions from the audience and an opportunity for UKIP and SNP supporters to pose the awkward ones.
How's it going to end up ? I have no idea - probably the most equally inconvenient result for everybody because that's how life works.
I keep thinking of his uncle when I hear "Michael Marra"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1Zy7CYuhp4
English Votes for English Laws is what Watling, Carswells tory opponent, is proposing. He is using the flag of St George to advertise that; you would hardly expect him to wave the Saltire, unlike say the winner of The Voice?
Letting Labour in by voting UKIP will certainly stuff the English, what is your policy?
In a devolved age what flag would an English Parliament fly?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11518444/David-Cameron-ridicules-desperate-attention-seeker-Nick-Clegg.html
I wouldn't expect it to rate that highly - certainly lower than the ITV debate last week - but obviously far higher than a normal QT.
Normal QT gets about 2.7m - this should get about 5m - it will almost certainly be 8.30pm to 10pm.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 33m 33 minutes ago
Week-ending 5th April 2015 - First ever Tory lead in ELBOW! Con 34.1, Lab 33.8, UKIP 13.7, LD 8.0, Greens 4.8
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585148261985611777
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 36m 36 minutes ago
Party leads in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August 2014. Cons finally take the lead w/e 5th April!
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585149148980187136
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 35m 35 minutes ago
Cons and Lab in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Cons finally take the lead w/e 5th April
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585149864926965760
It may indeed be the only time many people will focus on the election as, for all the anecdotal evidence on here, most people never meet a canvasser or read a political leaflet.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 31m 31 minutes ago
#LibDems and #Greens in ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) since August - Greens now in free-fall?
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585151283759357952
If lollipops were the measure of electoral chances then Norman would be a shoe in. Certainly it looks like he gas a very effective ground game going.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 30m 30 minutes ago
The Rise and Fall (possibly?) of UKIP? ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week), update for w/e 5th Apr 2015 (13.7%)
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585152029879836673
1.12 in Christchurch
1.10 in Hereford
1.25 in Louth and Horncastle.
A 20% probability of a UKIP victory? Otherwise Tory
No doubt many more but I'd rather part with my money a bit nearer the day.
It was very good. Shame I can't vote for them.
But the reason it will rate lower is because it won't be marketed as a "debate" - so the public will think of it as more like a normal political programme.
Evan Davis will also be interviewing the four leaders (ie inc Farage) in separate programmes on BBC1 in prime-time - from memory they got about 2.5m in 2010 (when done by Paxman).