Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The second big PB GE2015 Commons Seats Prediction Prize Com

12346»

Comments

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    isam said:

    Chris Mullin (@chrismullinexmp)
    April 14
    Little known fact: Charlie Gow, son of Tory housing minister who introduced right-to-buy, owns at least 40 ex council properties

    I'm puzzled. Does this mean 40 people have moved up the housing ladder having sold their houses for their market value?
    Who is your local Labour MP? You clearly need to vote for him if you want to sleep at night.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited April 2015

    Reassuring - the TPD is happy.

    Mark Reckless‏@MarkReckless·6 mins6 minutes ago
    @LabourUncut I have had fantastic support from UKIP and @Nigel_Farage and don't agree with what you say + weird timing w manifesto acclaimed

    But he couldn't quite manage the 25 minute drive from Rochester to Thurrock for the manifesto launch.
    Your obsession regarding this matter is odd.

    Was every Tory MP at their manifesto launch, or Labour MP at theirs?
    Most Cabinet, and Shadow Cabinet would have been at their respective launches.

    It's funny that UKIPs 2 MPs couldn't make it to their own manifesto unveiling, in spite of the fact that the venue is on the direct route between their constituencies. .
    You are saucy.
    I suppose Reckless and Carswell have Farage on their election literature.
    Carswell does not seem to:

    https://electionleaflets.org/constituencies/66030/clacton/

    But Reckless has a couple of pictures of Farage on his March 16th one:

    https://electionleaflets.org/constituencies/66043/rochester_and_strood/
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Chris Mullin (@chrismullinexmp)
    April 14
    Little known fact: Charlie Gow, son of Tory housing minister who introduced right-to-buy, owns at least 40 ex council properties

    I'm puzzled. Does this mean 40 people have moved up the housing ladder having sold their houses for their market value?
    Who is your local Labour MP? You clearly need to vote for him if you want to sleep at night.
    The local mp isn't labour ting tong
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415
    https://yougov.co.uk/#/constituency/466/nowcast/

    "Leaning UKIP"

    Thurrock.

    Aker deserves favouritism, whether 4-6 is value is another matter.
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046

    SMukesh said:

    Canvassing today, the manifesto announcement that really got the voters excited/happy.

    The childcare announcement.

    No good for hardworking singletons :)
    I do wonder:Who are you voting for ?
    He's voting Tory.
    If only you knew the power of the Daft Side :)
    You voted Tory last time.

    "I feel you" coming back "Home" to the Blues. "It's No Good" voting for the "Useless" Wes Streeting.
    The Tories "Should Be Higher" in the polls. They should go for the "Policy of Truth" so that "Everything Counts" regarding their vote-share. It's just "A Question Of Time" before "New Life" is injected into the campaign!
    OTOH you could "Enjoy the Silence"
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    isam said:

    Chris Mullin (@chrismullinexmp)
    April 14
    Little known fact: Charlie Gow, son of Tory housing minister who introduced right-to-buy, owns at least 40 ex council properties

    I'm puzzled. Does this mean 40 people have moved up the housing ladder having sold their houses for their market value?
    Who is your local Labour MP? You clearly need to vote for him if you want to sleep at night.
    Precisely. I wonder how many of those forty households, who by definition of being in social housing, were most likely to be in the lower socio economic groups at the time, still live in a house they own. I would guess it would be between zero and one who are back renting.

    Social housing assists poor people while they are poor. Right to buy takes poor people out of poverty, in many cases forever.
  • trubluetrublue Posts: 103


    It's astonishing that NOM is still available at 1.14. This really is buying free money with only 3 weeks to collect.

    I don't like using terms "free money" or "buying money" but in this case I think it really is. Conservative majority has been the point of resistance, but now that price is about to burst into double figures we should see a rapid move for NOM pushing it down towards a settled price on election night. So backing now should see us able to lock in a good profit before a vote is even cast on election day.

    I'm thinking NOM settles at 1.0.3-1.04 on election day before exit polls and early results put all other outcomes at 1000 and NOM impossible to back.

    I'll be interested to see if exit polling remains as accurate as it has since 2001. This election is a bit different to the previous and I wouldn't be completely surprised if some of the trusted methods now require adjustment to be as accurate as in the past. But any slight inaccuracies won't be close to big enough to change the final result.
  • JGCJGC Posts: 64
    for a detailed discussion of the "can Comres and Ashcroft both be right question" see http://may2015.com/ideas/election-2015-new-regional-poll-suggests-lib-dems-will-win-fewer-than-19-seats-across-uk/
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,653

    UKIP are polling as much as the Greens and the Lib Dems combined: you wouldn't know it from the TV coverage.

    On average, no. Didn't we have UKIP/LD crossover in one poll recently? Then again, this is PB.com, where the Tories ought to be on 60% and UKIP ought to be on 30%, if you judged by the comments.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Also @trublue - we have to face facts that the Tories really didn't resoundingly win or convince last time round. It was through a statistical fluke, divided Labour votes, and a lot of hard campaigning and help in micro targeting from Lord Ashcroft that they ended up with 307 seats, and not 296 seats as I expected.

    If the latter had occurred, a Lab-LD coalition, prob without Brown, would have been a viable go-er with a small absolute overall majority.

    There is absolutely no margin for dropping at all for the Tories this time. Perhaps a maximum of a net 15 seats if they're very very lucky, but really about 5 seats if they want to keep pushing their agenda and hold power in office, so they were always going to need to do relatively well in this campaign to win the election.

    That hasn't happened, so we must probably start to reconcile ourselves to being a strong opposition now instead. It's not all doom-and-gloom, because I think any minority Labour administration will be very weak and have a torrid time. 2020GE could be even worse for them.

    Its never a good election to lose, but this parliament is going to be a very very hard one, especially for a party that has committed itself fiscally to closing the deficit, while campaigning against every effort that the incumbent government has made in doing so.

    We will see Labour MPs spat on in the streets by their own supporters by year four. They cannot do what they want to do without very hard decisions.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited April 2015
    EPG said:

    UKIP are polling as much as the Greens and the Lib Dems combined: you wouldn't know it from the TV coverage.

    Then again, this is PB.com, where the Tories ought to be on 60% and UKIP ought to be on 30%, if you judged by the comments.
    I know there are some optimistic Tories and some pessimistic Labour supporters around here, but I don't think either of those is the case from a judgement of the comments.

    Night all.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,044
    EPG said:

    UKIP are polling as much as the Greens and the Lib Dems combined: you wouldn't know it from the TV coverage.

    On average, no. Didn't we have UKIP/LD crossover in one poll recently? Then again, this is PB.com, where the Tories ought to be on 60% and UKIP ought to be on 30%, if you judged by the comments.
    That would be the ICM poll. Using the averages, they are pretty far apart:

    http://goo.gl/9RfFdf
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited April 2015
    Lord Skidelsky's take on the Tory manifesto

    'The Conservatives have continued to spin their familiar yarn of having rescued Britain from ‘Labour’s Great Recession’. This, as they must know, is the mother of all lies. The Great Recession was caused by the banks. Governments, the Labour government included, by bailing out the banks and continuing to spend, stopped the Great Recession from turning into a Great Depression. Yet practically everyone seems to believe that the Great Recession was manufactured by Gordon Brown.

    The Conservatives claim that ‘by halving the deficit we have restored confidence to the economy’. This cheerfully ignores the near academic consensus that their deficit-reduction policies over the last 5 years have made the British economy between 5 and 10% smaller than it would have been with more sensible policies.

    According to the Conservative manifesto ‘more borrowing – and the extra debt interest that brings – means that there is less money to spend on schools and hospitals’. But if less borrowing reduces the size of the economy – and therefore of government revenues – there will be even less to spend on schools and hospitals.

    ‘More spending means higher taxes for hardworking people’ – not if it causes the economy to grow more than the spending.
    Failure to control the national debt would be a ‘moral failing’ by ‘leaving our children or grandchildren with debts that they could never hope to repay’. How many people realise that over 60% of the holders of British government debt are British residents, for whom it will be an asset to leave to their children and grandchildren?

    The Conservative narrative has become the Overton Window of our day, outside of which policies are unthinkable. But sooner or later reality will break in, and what is now unthinkable will become sensible again. But not in this election.'

    http://www.skidelskyr.com/site/article/conservative-election-manifesto/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited April 2015
    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy."

    What a moronic post from a poster you would expect to know better.

    I often work in the US but always pay UK tax. Why on earth would you expect an American working here for two months to pay anything other than US tax? I'm not surprised by Urquhart's lack of knowledge. He's got the brains of a flea
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    trublue said:


    It's astonishing that NOM is still available at 1.14. This really is buying free money with only 3 weeks to collect.

    I don't like using terms "free money" or "buying money" but in this case I think it really is. Conservative majority has been the point of resistance, but now that price is about to burst into double figures we should see a rapid move for NOM pushing it down towards a settled price on election night. So backing now should see us able to lock in a good profit before a vote is even cast on election day.

    I'm thinking NOM settles at 1.0.3-1.04 on election day before exit polls and early results put all other outcomes at 1000 and NOM impossible to back.

    I'll be interested to see if exit polling remains as accurate as it has since 2001. This election is a bit different to the previous and I wouldn't be completely surprised if some of the trusted methods now require adjustment to be as accurate as in the past. But any slight inaccuracies won't be close to big enough to change the final result.
    I'd be surprised to see it below 1.10 on election day. Even if we're still polling 35% each what price the polls are wrong?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,149
    Tabman said:

    SMukesh said:

    Canvassing today, the manifesto announcement that really got the voters excited/happy.

    The childcare announcement.

    No good for hardworking singletons :)
    I do wonder:Who are you voting for ?
    He's voting Tory.
    If only you knew the power of the Daft Side :)
    You voted Tory last time.

    "I feel you" coming back "Home" to the Blues. "It's No Good" voting for the "Useless" Wes Streeting.
    The Tories "Should Be Higher" in the polls. They should go for the "Policy of Truth" so that "Everything Counts" regarding their vote-share. It's just "A Question Of Time" before "New Life" is injected into the campaign!
    OTOH you could "Enjoy the Silence"
    You know how hard it is for me to "Shake the Disease" that gets hold of my tongue in situations like these.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited April 2015
    HYUFD

    'Lord Skidelsky's take on the Tory manifesto'


    He's belonged to almost as many political parties as Winston McKenzie,seems he's done the full circuit and is back with Labour.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Roger said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy."

    What a moronic post from a poster you would expect to know better.

    I often work in the US but always pay UK tax. Why on earth would you expect an American working here for two months to pay anything other than US tax? I'm not surprised by Urquhart's lack of knowledge. He's got the brains of a flea

    You mean he is not domiciled here for tax purposes? He is a non dom.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,569


    You'd have more credibility with this point had you not made exactly the same one 6 months ago, for well over a year, regularly highlighting how Labour had had a consistent 3-4% lead for "simply ages".

    Fair point. I think the Tories did narrow the gap from 3-4 to 0-1 a few months ago. But considering all the sound and fury before and since, the basic stability is striking.

    I don't totally buy the idea that people aren't paying attention, but it's like trying to get messages through on an old transistor radio with violent static. I get garbled versions of what we've said fed back to me ("I hear that Labour wants to abolish the NHS, not sure I agree with that" was one choice one) and I'm sure the other candidates do too. People are quite interested but don't see a killer pledge from anyone, so they are defaulting to their usual teams.

    Things that could still change the position: Miliband vs Sturgeon tomorrow will be interesting and might produce a significant shift in some direction - but probably not. The final round of leader interviews could produce a hideous blunder - but I suspect all three will play it safe. Apart that, it's black swans...

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,044
    notme said:

    Roger said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy."

    What a moronic post from a poster you would expect to know better.

    I often work in the US but always pay UK tax. Why on earth would you expect an American working here for two months to pay anything other than US tax? I'm not surprised by Urquhart's lack of knowledge. He's got the brains of a flea

    You mean he is not domiciled here for tax purposes? He is a non dom.
    But he's both non-resident and non-domicile. I think the big ho-ha is about resident non-doms, unless I am mistaken?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    John Zims I believe he was Labour, then SDP, then Tory and is now an Independent
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    Chris Mullin (@chrismullinexmp)
    April 14
    Little known fact: Charlie Gow, son of Tory housing minister who introduced right-to-buy, owns at least 40 ex council properties

    Nasty little smear there.

    Ian Gow was a good man, sadly missed.

    The fact that in the 20 years since his father's death, Charlie has assembled a BTL portfolio is entirely unconnected to any policy decision that his father made in the 80s.

    Vile behaviour. I had thought better of Chris Mullin.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    Notme

    "You mean he is not domiciled here for tax purposes? He is a non dom."

    He's not a non dom he doesn't live here.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2015
    ElectoralCalculus:

    Lab 282
    Con 280
    SNP 48
    LD 17
    PC 3
    UKIP 1
    Green 1

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited April 2015
    Charles

    "Vile behaviour. I had thought better of Chris Mullin."

    I think you make a fair point. But it just seems to be par for the course for this election. Everyone's at it. Read the trully ignorant post about non doms from Max and Urquhart. I think too many people have spent too much time on Staines's site
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Labour are paying their invisible man £300k a year, not a bad gig if you can get it.

    Speaking at a book launch in Iowa, Mr Axelrod insisted that he is in contact with Mr Miliband "all the time". He said: "It isn't always by phone - sometimes we email and sometimes we text."

    I will offer my services to Ed via email and text from half way around the world for a lot less than £300k :smiley:

    That shows he primarily lives in the USA. He presumably pays tax in the USA.


  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    AndyJS said:

    surbiton said:

    UKIP has 1% chance of winning Thurrock - Newsnight

    Total nonsense. It's around 20% IMO.
    Apart from wishful thinking, what is the basis of your projection ?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415
    LAB +1553.68 NOM +50 CON +454.62

    Is how I have my strict overall majority book and I'm going to leave it like that I think.

    The Labour price is ludicrous when you consider seat odds and the Conservative price is too long now to justify a lay to my mind.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415
    I could lose a tonne of seat bets too if Labour hoses up with a majority so need a fair amount of cover there too :D
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    So 21 days to go and where do we stand.

    Conservative - ridiculously populist manifesto, hardcore socialism such as right to buy combined with dogmatic libertarianism like continued cuts which aren't needed.

    Labour - desperate attempts to come across as financially sound, crying out loud about how hard they will cut even when accepting the cuts aren't needed.

    Liberals - Who? Oh, them. Ewwww.

    UKIP - sliding below the scale in relevance, still can't provide a remotely professional manifesto, still pursuing the hardcore racist vote over anything else.

    Greens - still being undermined by a leader who can't communicate policies that would be pretty well regarded, losing share and sliding almost as bad as UKIP.

    SNP - not much you can say other than winning.

    Plaid - completely unable to make meaningful progress but showing a faint heartbeat in latest poll
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    UKIP chances in South Basildon and East Thurrock?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    UKIP chances in South Basildon and East Thurrock?

    Solid third thanks to Liberal slump.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited April 2015
    Roger said:

    Charles

    "Vile behaviour. I had thought better of Chris Mullin."

    I think you make a fair point. But it just seems to be par for the course for this election. Everyone's at it. Read the trully ignorant post about non doms from Max and Urquhart. I think too many people have spent too much time on Staines's site

    Hi Old Rog....worked out if Zac Goldsmith is a non-dom or not yet....after repeatedly posting he is, which was totally false.

    Where have I said anything about Axelrod / non-dom status, no where...so jog on. I said he was a hypocrite nothing about non-dom status.

    As you will remember, I was the one having to inform you about non-doms, not the other way around.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited April 2015
    surbiton said:

    Labour are paying their invisible man £300k a year, not a bad gig if you can get it.

    Speaking at a book launch in Iowa, Mr Axelrod insisted that he is in contact with Mr Miliband "all the time". He said: "It isn't always by phone - sometimes we email and sometimes we text."

    I will offer my services to Ed via email and text from half way around the world for a lot less than £300k :smiley:

    That shows he primarily lives in the USA. He presumably pays tax in the USA.


    And...my point was Ed was paying £300k to guy who is totally invisible, which is a lovely gig, which I would be more than happy to undertake.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited April 2015
    Dair

    "hardcore socialism such as right to buy"

    Garbage. Try reading something other than comics. Privatising the housing stock isn't socialist
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Interesting piece by Anthony Wells - who composed the 2-stage question - over on UKPR:

    The results that ComRes got in their constituency question are actually extremely similar to the ones that Ashcroft got in his initial, national question.

    This sounds weird, but it’s actually what I’d expect. When I first wrote the two stage voting intention question back in 2008 my thinking was that when people answer opinion polls they want to register their support for the party they really support, not a tactical vote or a vote for their local MP… and even if you ask the question slightly differently, that’s the answer you are going to get. If you really wanted to get people’s local voting intentions, you needed to first give them the opportunity to express their national support and then ask them their local support.

    That though, is just the theory.


    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9355

    Personally I think that asking a 2-stage question may condition some respondents into thinking that they should change their response.

    As so often with these things, I reckon the truth is somewhere in the middle.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @FrancisUrquhart

    Any idea what's happened to Arnie Graf ?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    FrancisUrquhart Posts: 3,052
    April 15 edited April 15

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy.

    Terrible disease this hypocrisy virus, seems to spread so quickly.

    When it comes to tax issues, the leader is a hypocrite, the man advising the leader is a hypocrite, a man involved in writing the manifesto is a hypocrite, the party itself are hypocritical as they take money from tax dodgers and the even the hobbit doing the PEB is a hypocrite.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    john_zims said:

    @FrancisUrquhart

    Any idea what's happened to Arnie Graf ?

    Been taken to the "special place" at Heathrow for suspected illegal immigrants and never seen again?

    I seemed to remember he was last spotted in the UK at the end of 2014, apparently just doing a bit of sightseeing with a friendly journalist. He stated that he wasn't "working" for the Labour Party any more.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited April 2015
    Roger said:

    FrancisUrquhart Posts: 3,052
    April 15 edited April 15

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy.

    Terrible disease this hypocrisy virus, seems to spread so quickly.

    When it comes to tax issues, the leader is a hypocrite, the man advising the leader is a hypocrite, a man involved in writing the manifesto is a hypocrite, the party itself are hypocritical as they take money from tax dodgers and the even the hobbit doing the PEB is a hypocrite.

    Very good..and which bit is mine.....I will give you a clue, nothing about non-doms. I read the article and my comment relates to how is pay is arranged, again I will give you a clue, it is tax "efficient" and Ed has made it super clear any sort of tax efficient behaviour is disgusting and amoral.

    I don't have the power to edit other people's comment to correct incorrect statements. Now Zac Goldsmith, are you going to correct the record on that? You stated that on a number of occasions, despite people repeatedly telling you that you were wrong.


  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    RodCrosby said:

    GIN1138 said:

    RodCrosby said:

    MP_SE said:


    UKIP holding steady with 3 weeks to go.

    The seats UKIP might win are pretty much independent of the national vote share, which ordinarily would win them nothing at all...
    How do you see the current state of play Rod?
    Either the polls are wrong, or I am. (^_-)
    OTOH if the polls are right then your by-election swingback model is awesome, again.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415

    Interesting piece by Anthony Wells - who composed the 2-stage question - over on UKPR:

    The results that ComRes got in their constituency question are actually extremely similar to the ones that Ashcroft got in his initial, national question.

    This sounds weird, but it’s actually what I’d expect. When I first wrote the two stage voting intention question back in 2008 my thinking was that when people answer opinion polls they want to register their support for the party they really support, not a tactical vote or a vote for their local MP… and even if you ask the question slightly differently, that’s the answer you are going to get. If you really wanted to get people’s local voting intentions, you needed to first give them the opportunity to express their national support and then ask them their local support.

    That though, is just the theory.


    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9355

    Personally I think that asking a 2-stage question may condition some respondents into thinking that they should change their response.

    As so often with these things, I reckon the truth is somewhere in the middle.

    It didn't seem to happen with the SLAB/SNP seats though.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    RobD said:

    notme said:

    Roger said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy."

    What a moronic post from a poster you would expect to know better.

    I often work in the US but always pay UK tax. Why on earth would you expect an American working here for two months to pay anything other than US tax? I'm not surprised by Urquhart's lack of knowledge. He's got the brains of a flea

    You mean he is not domiciled here for tax purposes? He is a non dom.
    But he's both non-resident and non-domicile. I think the big ho-ha is about resident non-doms, unless I am mistaken?
    What the whole "non dom" thing highlighted to me is just how few people understood what the concept actually meant.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Wow. Utter car crash on Scotland Tonight with David Coburn.

    Much as I hate the slug, it's almost hard to watch.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,044
    Dair said:

    Wow. Utter car crash on Scotland Tonight with David Coburn.

    Much as I hate the slug, it's almost hard to watch.

    He really is a bit crap!
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RobD said:

    notme said:

    Roger said:

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html

    Non-domtastic. More Labour hypocrisy."

    What a moronic post from a poster you would expect to know better.

    I often work in the US but always pay UK tax. Why on earth would you expect an American working here for two months to pay anything other than US tax? I'm not surprised by Urquhart's lack of knowledge. He's got the brains of a flea

    You mean he is not domiciled here for tax purposes? He is a non dom.
    But he's both non-resident and non-domicile. I think the big ho-ha is about resident non-doms, unless I am mistaken?
    What the whole "non dom" thing highlighted to me is just how few people understood what the concept actually meant.
    Domicile is the determinant of liability to UK Inheritance Tax (on assets outside the UK), which I guess is what most of the "non-doms" are trying to avoid...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited April 2015
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    Innocent woman, acquitted of all charges by a jury of her peers.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited April 2015

    Innocent woman, acquitted of all charges by a jury of her peers.
    Absolutely, but you know that wont matter to some sections. You only have to look at the reactions have been when the verdicts have come down for lots of the cases.

    Be interesting to see how she is treated compared to oh I don't know lets say Campbell or McBride or Maguire.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046

    Innocent woman, acquitted of all charges by a jury of her peers.
  • AlasdairAlasdair Posts: 72
    I see there is an error in my entry; It totals 640 seats (18 NI, 3 PC). The CON total should be 5 more = 319 and the LAB total should be = 245, also 5 more.

    The entry was on page one, line 13.

    If it could be corrected, thanks.

    Alasdair
This discussion has been closed.