Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even with Scotland will LAB still be able to win more seat

124»

Comments

  • Options
    macisbackmacisback Posts: 382
    ydoethur said:

    macisback said:



    Agree on the class sizes, smaller class sizes has to be a way forwards. Poor teaching and low standards is though a major problem, especially in early years.

    Has it occurred to you the two might be linked? 40% of teachers quit teaching within five years because it is impossible to maintain a work-life balance. Who leaves? The best ones. Because the bad ones (a) don't care about getting it right anyway and (b) can't get other jobs (except possibly in OFSTED).

    With regard to GCSEs and A-levels, I'm worried that they are being rushed in. The new GCSE spec for RE (which I also teach) is due for examination in 2018, yet I have just been told that it won't be approved and available until October. Small problem - I teach the RE GCSE over three years. So do around 20% of other schools. So it seems not unreasonable to expect chaos this September. (The history GCSE has been released in draft over the last few weeks - in my view it's cutting it fine, but at least it's there). In many ways the content is an improvement - however, delivering the new history A-level is going to be fiendishly difficult without access to a university library, or JSTOR at the very least.

    And don't forget, Hunt has promised to cancel the A-level changes next month if Labour win...so we've got real uncertainty over that (which is very expensive as well as annoying).
    Sad situation, absolutely no doubt good quality teachers should be better paid in my mind but my experience is most of them are not up to the standard they should be. The best tend to gravitate to the schools in the most affluent areas as well, which is another huge problem, which has not even started to be addressed.

    What Hunt has promised on the A Levels crystallizes how crap this coming Labour government is likely to be, Union dominated to the detriment overall.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,136

    HYUFD said:

    PT On a literal basis if anyone is not in a job and claiming benefits then there is not full employment, even if I accept for statistical purposes a rate of 3% may be close to it

    How would someone like me count in the figures? Someone who has chucked in their job, however temporarily, and is not currently seeking work. Am I classed as jobless or economically inactive?

    (and no, lazy is not an acceptable answer) ;-)
    Economically inactive.

    Only those looking for a job are unemployed. If you'd only just chucked in your job and are currently looking for a new one and confidently expect to get one soon you'd fall under "frictional" unemployment.
    Thanks.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Roger said:

    Has anyone got Prof Fisher's latest projection? This is the only one I can find.



    Forecast Election Day Seats
    Con : 323
    Lab : 280
    LD : 20
    Con largest party, but short of a majority by 3

    http://electionsetc.com/2015/04/17/forecast-update-17-april-2015/

    It's been gradually edging toward reality for a while now.
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited April 2015
    PeterC said:

    GIN1138 said:

    TGOHF said:

    GIN1138 said:

    TGOHF said:

    Amazingly good employment numbers..highest on record..

    Hardly as important as a debate is it ?
    All these great economic figures just highlight's further two points:

    1. How terrible Cameron, Osborne and Lynton Crosby are at politics.

    2. How toxic the Tory brand must still be with the electorate.

    This is an election that the Tories should be walking. Historians will look back in 50 years time and wonder how it was that the Conservatives blew it (like they blew 2010).

    Bit early for post mortems ?

    Disbanding the party and starting again is probably something that should have happened after 1997.... They did get close with the "nasty party" stuff but didn't follow it through to it's natural conclusion.
    Wouldn't all existing Conservatives simply decamp to the new party? Changing a name is one thing, but how would substantive change come about and what would it need to be in your view?
    Constructively that's what happened to UKIP after the BNP imploded. The BNP support went to the next best thing. If we characterise UKIP as fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists, then the BNP cohort is the latter, and may be the largest single bloc comprising UKIP's support - the rest being a mosaic of different but overlapping neuroses related to gay marriage, Bongo Bongo Land, and the state of affairs behind the fridge.

    Someone once said that Christianity was great, the problem was with its adherents. Same thing with parties, in a way. The problem for UKIP is its supporters, and if they follow you wherever you go, you are no further forward.

    HYUFD said:

    PT On a literal basis if anyone is not in a job and claiming benefits then there is not full employment, even if I accept for statistical purposes a rate of 3% may be close to it

    How would someone like me count in the figures? Someone who has chucked in their job, however temporarily, and is not currently seeking work. Am I classed as jobless or economically inactive?

    (and no, lazy is not an acceptable answer) ;-)
    I've been in the same boat of having no income, a rented roof over my head and a redundo payout that took temporary care of both. On those occasions I believe I met the technical definition of "being in poverty".

    I don't know how you'd count in the figures. Do you wear a turban? If so, to Ed you're just a Sikh, and that would be all that need be said.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    PhilipThompson Agree there
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    edited April 2015
    Josias You would be counted as outside the Labour force I believe if you are not applying for work, however if you are over 18 and under 65 and not in paid employment or a student then technically I suppose you are unemployed though economically inactive as PT states may be more accurate
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,913
    PB

    "Wow thats a p-poor audience share. Don't suppose the 4.3m watched the whole thing either."

    Well that's twice as many as watched the Miliband/Cameron Q and A. I'd say a very creditable number. The seven way debate with Cameron and Clegg only got 7 million. But even if it was only a million it still seems a terrible waste of free air time.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108
    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    Scottish unemployment is rising because there is a significant reduction in employment in the north sea. Much of this is hidden because most people that work there are contractors not employees and their contracts are simply not renewed.

    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Alternatively, the delay in the UK government delaying tax rate reductions has exacerbated the lay offs and led to higher unemployment than was necessary during the transition period.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978

    Roger said:

    Has anyone got Prof Fisher's latest projection? This is the only one I can find.



    Forecast Election Day Seats
    Con : 323
    Lab : 280
    LD : 20
    Con largest party, but short of a majority by 3

    http://electionsetc.com/2015/04/17/forecast-update-17-april-2015/

    It's been gradually edging toward reality for a while now.

    Yep, he seems to be getting there. In fact, I reckon he is now a bit toppy on Labour. Given what I think will happen, I would take his central forecast as the result every day of the week.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    PT The last Tory leader to win a majority though was John Major
  • Options
    ArtistArtist Posts: 1,883
    edited April 2015
    If the Conservatives don't have a comfortable lead in seats in three weeks time then Fisher's projections throughout the last few years will be questioned.

    I don't think Labour would even attempt to form a government on 260 seats, even if the Conservatives couldn't form one themselves.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,136

    HYUFD said:

    PT On a literal basis if anyone is not in a job and claiming benefits then there is not full employment, even if I accept for statistical purposes a rate of 3% may be close to it

    How would someone like me count in the figures? Someone who has chucked in their job, however temporarily, and is not currently seeking work. Am I classed as jobless or economically inactive?

    (and no, lazy is not an acceptable answer) ;-)
    I've been in the same boat of having no income, a rented roof over my head and a redundo payout that took temporary care of both. On those occasions I believe I met the technical definition of "being in poverty".

    I don't know how you'd count in the figures. Do you wear a turban? If so, to Ed you're just a Sikh, and that would be all that need be said.

    I'm sorry to hear you were in that situation, although mine's a little different as I'm looking after a toddler whilst the wife works. ;-)
  • Options
    Roger said:

    PB

    "Wow thats a p-poor audience share. Don't suppose the 4.3m watched the whole thing either."

    Well that's twice as many as watched the Miliband/Cameron Q and A. I'd say a very creditable number. The seven way debate with Cameron and Clegg only got 7 million. But even if it was only a million it still seems a terrible waste of free air time.

    Err Roger 3 million watched the Cameron & Miliband Q&A
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    It has surprised me and that's why I mentioned it. I think the Tories and Labour were roughly level pegging at last election for youngest demographic.

    This thread has been fascinating today and has mentioned many more of the pertinent issues for this election than debates. Let us not forget the Cleggasm in the last election didn't amount to a great deal apart from probably setting expectation for LDs too high.

    If the Scots send a large SNP contingent to westminster is it democratic for a party committed to the break up of the union ruling? Is it undemocratic to exclude? Will this provoke a reaction from the English? If Edm takes the tartan backing will he be chided for taking power for power sake a la Clegg

    Will the LDs face wipe out at the election? I could only predict 13 seats yesterday.

    What will the affect of the rise of Ukip greens Plaid SNP and collapse of LDs and BMP mean for efficiency of vote at this election? Is there some sort of peak Tory effect where Ukip, Labour and LDs rack up votes where they cannot win?
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,375
    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.

  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Josias You would be counted as outside the Labour force I believe if you are not applying for work, however if you are over 18 and under 65 and not in paid employment or a student then technically I suppose you are unemployed

    No, only those looking for work are unemployed. The proportion of those who're economically active is the participation rate.

    Otherwise eg people like my wife who stays at home (her choice) to look after our one year old daughter would be considered unemployed. Or my uncle who decided to retire early. My wife worked from leaving education until a month before our daughter was born but doesn't want to work currently so isn't part of the labour force. She'd be upset to be labelled unemployed.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    PT The last Tory leader to win a majority though was John Major

    So what?

    Since so many lefties seem to treat Blair with scorn, we could say that the last non-Blair Labour majority of just 5+ was elected under Harold Wilson in 1966. These statistics are meaningless.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125

    Roger said:

    PB

    "Wow thats a p-poor audience share. Don't suppose the 4.3m watched the whole thing either."

    Well that's twice as many as watched the Miliband/Cameron Q and A. I'd say a very creditable number. The seven way debate with Cameron and Clegg only got 7 million. But even if it was only a million it still seems a terrible waste of free air time.

    Err Roger 3 million watched the Cameron & Miliband Q&A
    Labour and numbers.....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    DavidL It is better and a good figure on an international basis, and certainly compared to most of the eurozone, but Germany has 4.8% unemployment and in 1960 UK unemployment was 1.7%
  • Options
    Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176

    Thanks again to antifrank for his write-up on the constituency odds.

    A thought on the Newton Abbot constituency. We still haven't received any election literature from the Conservatives, which is on the face of it very surprising for a seat with a majority less than 1,000, while having several leaflets from the Lib Dems in second place.

    We do live in a ward held by a Lib Dem councillor on Teignbridge council who is also facing the voters this year (as the leaflets make clear), so it's possible that the result of the general election in this constituency is seen so far as a foregone conclusion that the Tories are putting the effort in elsewhere, and the effort from the Lib Dems is focussed on holding their councillors so that they have a base from which to rebuild in the next Parliament.

    Here in Bury South, a seat Labour hold by 3,292 votes after an 8% swing to the Tories last time, we've had 2 leaflets from the labour incumbent and a personal mailing from labour hq to me. Nothing from the Tories. I've not seen a single election poster on any lamppost or house window.

    Concluding that the Tories aren't even bothering, presumably 100% focused on trying to hold Bury N, and Lab assume it's on the bag.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    DavidL said:

    Frictional unemployment, that is people between jobs was historically thought to be about 5%. There are a lot of reasons for thinking it might be somewhat higher now. 5.6% is pretty much full employment as I said.

    Of course many of those would like better jobs, more secure jobs and longer hours than they have at the moment. But it is an amazing record, it really is.

    You may have a point. Something like 3% IIRC used to be considered 'full employment' since there was always the job churn you talk about.
    Plus there is always going to be some structural unemployment due to numerous factors, ie changes in the nature of the economy and workers having the wrong skills.
  • Options
    CD13 said:

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about being lectured to by others.
    .

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about pretty well everything.
    Lithuanian workers want work more than British workers because they have poorer welfare benefits back in Lithuania.
    This comment shows how UKIP has it exactly arse backwards. British workers aren't on benefits because Lithuanians have taken all the jobs; Lithuanians have taken the jobs, because the British would rather be on benefits.

    And therefore, by your own reasoning, changing one thing in this mix - i.e. leave the EU so you can stop Lithuanians from coming here - will not cause British workers to take those jobs. Whether a Lithuanian takes the job is neither here nor there - what matters is the alternative to work.

    If you want to stop Lithuanians coming here, therefore, you make work more attractive to the indigenes than a life on benefits. The free movement of peoples thing is generally beneficial, and is only an issue if people who want to work are freely able to move to the countries of people who want not to work and you put up with the latter.

    The solution is not to remove the UK from the EU, but to remove non-working as an option.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,132
    Patrick said:

    Patrick's election / 2015 prediction:
    1. Ed is crap is PM - propped up by the SNP
    2. The long overdue market event comes along. (not because of 1 above but not helped by it!). 'Sell in May and go away'.
    3. Equities collapse, bond markets collapse, Eurozone and other banks go under. 2008 all over again only worse.
    4. Sovereign defaults. The 'Oh Shit' moment that years of 'extend and pretend' has been postponing is here.
    5. Depression / global GDP retrenchment.
    6. Fiat currencies all looking a bit worthless. Paper assets are worth paper.
    7. Tax revenues collapse and jobs destroyed en masse.
    8. Japan, the Eurozone GIPSIs, France, and many others become technically insolvent. EU crisis of epic proportions. They have no ammunition left to fire at this.
    9. EICIPM faces some horrific choices - actually not choices but forced decisions. The UK's ability to borrow is gone along with everyone else's. And you thought 2010-2015 was 'austerity' as spending increased every year from a high base.
    10. Huge economic imbalances built up over decades unwind themselves. Debts are wiped - and also credits.
    11. Wallace is our PM in the moment of our greateset need.

    1. I agree with you there

    2. Eurozone QE overflows into Europe, pushing up asset prices and boosting consumer spending. UK economic growth creeps up towards 3.5%.

    3. In Europe, the recovery in Spain, Portugal and Ireland continues apace, while the German consumer boom really starts to take off.

    4. Debt-to-GDP loads, which are already falling in some countries, continue coming down across Europe.

    5. Ecuador, Venezuela and many other commodity exporting countries that borrowed in US Dollars go bust, but the developed world continues fine.

    Everyone always thinks the next crisis will look like the last. It won't. It will look completely different.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    Roger 9.4 million watched the first 2010 debate
  • Options
    felix said:

    Roger said:

    PB

    "Wow thats a p-poor audience share. Don't suppose the 4.3m watched the whole thing either."

    Well that's twice as many as watched the Miliband/Cameron Q and A. I'd say a very creditable number. The seven way debate with Cameron and Clegg only got 7 million. But even if it was only a million it still seems a terrible waste of free air time.

    Err Roger 3 million watched the Cameron & Miliband Q&A
    Labour and numbers.....
    You do wonder about whether Millfield were value for money.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    PT You would be classed as economically inactive, but obviously there is a difference between someone who is looking after children and someone who has taken early retirement and someone who has stopped looking for work, the latter is for all intents and purposes unemployed even if the former is not
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Thanks again to antifrank for his write-up on the constituency odds.

    A thought on the Newton Abbot constituency. We still haven't received any election literature from the Conservatives, which is on the face of it very surprising for a seat with a majority less than 1,000, while having several leaflets from the Lib Dems in second place.

    We do live in a ward held by a Lib Dem councillor on Teignbridge council who is also facing the voters this year (as the leaflets make clear), so it's possible that the result of the general election in this constituency is seen so far as a foregone conclusion that the Tories are putting the effort in elsewhere, and the effort from the Lib Dems is focussed on holding their councillors so that they have a base from which to rebuild in the next Parliament.

    Here in Bury South, a seat Labour hold by 3,292 votes after an 8% swing to the Tories last time, we've had 2 leaflets from the labour incumbent and a personal mailing from labour hq to me. Nothing from the Tories. I've not seen a single election poster on any lamppost or house window.

    Concluding that the Tories aren't even bothering, presumably 100% focused on trying to hold Bury N, and Lab assume it's on the bag.
    Based on current odds, if the Conservatives were to take every seat up to and including Bury South on the implied probabilities of the seat markets, they would get 360 seats. The Conservatives are not going to get 360 seats. So giving up on Bury South is what you would expect a party that is husbanding its resources sensibly to do.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.

    What about a condescension of leftie elitists or a smugness?

    Maybe a sub-Amis of right-wing thriller writers or a faux outrage?

  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    Following on from earlier this latest piece shows how illeberal and undemocratic the LibDems really are..

    http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Sutton-Lib-Dems-suspended-Nick-Mattey-councillors/story-26348342-detail/story.html

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    PT The last Labour majority before Blair was technically Wilson in October 1974, even if only 3 seats
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    Scottish unemployment is rising because there is a significant reduction in employment in the north sea. Much of this is hidden because most people that work there are contractors not employees and their contracts are simply not renewed.

    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Longterm, for Scotland, this is surely even more important.

    The collapse in the oil price has not (as expected) had a detrimental effect on the economics of fracking: shale oil and gas are still booming.

    http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21648622-fall-oil-price-has-not-curbed-fracking-nearly-much?fsrc/tw/te/pe/ed/unconventionalbutnormal

    "This contributes to a picture in which oil prices—barring big geopolitical upsets—look unlikely to rise sharply. True, global demand for oil is set to rise, and old oilfields are depleting, meaning that much of the industry needs to run in order to stand still. But the message from America is that finance and technology combined are more than a match for geology."

    i.e. the price of oil is quite unlikely to return to $100 a barrel, let alone the $500 a barrel or whatever it was Salmond predicted, enabling him to give every Scotsman a six metre wide golden mega-haggis, once the English had been sent away tae think agin.

    Financially, Scottish independence is a dead duck. But dead ducks can still honk.
    It was $110 a barrel, which was a whole 2 dollars more that what the oil futures market was trading at.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108
    SeanT said:

    The collapse in the oil price has not (as expected) had a detrimental effect on the economics of fracking: shale oil and gas are still booming.

    That's because shale gas is a Ponzi scheme.

    Just think what you wrote. Despite a price downturn, it is booming. Remind you of something? It should - those 25% return schemes that pop up in a downturn. Because they are Ponzi schemes.

    The Fracking industry is paying returns out of new investment.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,136

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.
    I can assure you that the Ice Twins is not 'torture porn'. In fact, it's really quite good.

    But you might be right with the rest of that, ;-)
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    PT On a literal basis if anyone is not in a job and claiming benefits then there is not full employment, even if I accept for statistical purposes a rate of 3% may be close to it

    How would someone like me count in the figures? Someone who has chucked in their job, however temporarily, and is not currently seeking work. Am I classed as jobless or economically inactive?

    (and no, lazy is not an acceptable answer) ;-)
    I've been in the same boat of having no income, a rented roof over my head and a redundo payout that took temporary care of both. On those occasions I believe I met the technical definition of "being in poverty".

    I don't know how you'd count in the figures. Do you wear a turban? If so, to Ed you're just a Sikh, and that would be all that need be said.
    I'm sorry to hear you were in that situation, although mine's a little different as I'm looking after a toddler whilst the wife works. ;-)

    Thanks. It passed, both times. It was instructive, though, because the first time it happened was the first time I'd ever thought about it. The poor are not a homogenous body but a state through which one can transition.

    You might be a NEET, unless full-time parenting is considered an occupation (which I would personally because it's necessary and elective).

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,005

    CD13 said:

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about being lectured to by others.
    .

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about pretty well everything.
    Lithuanian workers want work more than British workers because they have poorer welfare benefits back in Lithuania.
    This comment shows how UKIP has it exactly arse backwards. British workers aren't on benefits because Lithuanians have taken all the jobs; Lithuanians have taken the jobs, because the British would rather be on benefits.

    And therefore, by your own reasoning, changing one thing in this mix - i.e. leave the EU so you can stop Lithuanians from coming here - will not cause British workers to take those jobs. Whether a Lithuanian takes the job is neither here nor there - what matters is the alternative to work.

    If you want to stop Lithuanians coming here, therefore, you make work more attractive to the indigenes than a life on benefits. The free movement of peoples thing is generally beneficial, and is only an issue if people who want to work are freely able to move to the countries of people who want not to work and you put up with the latter.

    The solution is not to remove the UK from the EU, but to remove non-working as an option.

    I'm dubious that your approach of angrily hectoring the electorate would pay dividends for the Conservatives.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.

    What about a condescension of leftie elitists or a smugness?

    Maybe a sub-Amis of right-wing thriller writers or a faux outrage?

    Right-wing thriller writers? An Ambridge.
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    SeanT said:

    Offtopic, the Janner case is an absolute f*cking disgrace. Not prosecuting - not even expelling him from the Lords - will only encourage the idea that there is some vast Establishment pedo-cover-up.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3042821/Vile-abuse-3-bungled-probes-45-year-cover-PAUL-BRACCHI-reviews-decision-not-charge-Labour-peer-child-abuse-claims-Alzheimer-s.html

    Totally agree. The CPS are being weak again - need a good clearout.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Cyclefree said:

    ....

    What a stupid election-losing cretin that man is.

    Of course Ed and the others put the boot in. Why wouldn't they. Fair play to them.

    EdM looks more and more prime ministerial as every day passes in this campaign, he hasn't put a foot wrong. Whereas Dave just coasts along, hardly bothering.

    I'm warming to Ed. There's something in my make-up that, politics of it aside, wants Ed to win just for doing a good job, being human, and socking it to his detractors. And wants Dave to vanish into obscurity pronto, for turning out to be one of the biggest disappointments, wet blankets and let-downs in living memory.

    I never thought Ed was as bad as people claimed but I too have been more impressed than I thought I would be by his sheer doggedness, if nothing else.

    Cameron should have debated. If you want power; if you think you have the right way forward for a country you should be out there day in day our arguing your case, however hard it might be. You can't imagine Thatcher turning away from a debate. I was never so impressed by her as in the debate in Parliament on the day she resigned.

    I have very strong reservations about whether Labour as they are currently are the right party to be forming the mrct government but - Hobson's choice this - if it's a choice between a Labour majority or Labour having to share power with the SNP, PC or, God help us, Galloway, I'd prefer the former.

    Thatcher wasn't an empty vessel and knew what she was about. Cameron is neither, so whilst he can deliver a prepared setpiece with panache and confidence, he's in no position to be a good debater.
    Cameron has debated and has previously said he would debate with all the national (UK wide) party leaders. He travels the country extensively for public meetings as well.
    What was tried to be foisted was a 4 way including Farage and not the Greens. A set up.
    Bringing in the SNP and PC was a joke - but Cameron did debate with all the other 6. Whose idea was this challengers thing?
    Why should there be a need for another 7 way? Why should the entire election process (which involves more than just leaders parading their expensive suits dresses and even more expensively coached debating 'skills') be derailed because the broadcasters want to look good ?

    Why should Cameron just debate with Miliband? They do it all the time in parliament. In the whole history of the UK parliamentary elections, how many 'debates' have there been? One word sums up these debates - 'fraud'.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,132
    edited April 2015

    CD13 said:

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about being lectured to by others.
    .

    There is a feeling of resentment in Ukip about pretty well everything.
    Lithuanian workers want work more than British workers because they have poorer welfare benefits back in Lithuania.
    This comment shows how UKIP has it exactly arse backwards. British workers aren't on benefits because Lithuanians have taken all the jobs; Lithuanians have taken the jobs, because the British would rather be on benefits.

    And therefore, by your own reasoning, changing one thing in this mix - i.e. leave the EU so you can stop Lithuanians from coming here - will not cause British workers to take those jobs. Whether a Lithuanian takes the job is neither here nor there - what matters is the alternative to work.

    If you want to stop Lithuanians coming here, therefore, you make work more attractive to the indigenes than a life on benefits. The free movement of peoples thing is generally beneficial, and is only an issue if people who want to work are freely able to move to the countries of people who want not to work and you put up with the latter.

    The solution is not to remove the UK from the EU, but to remove non-working as an option.

    There are a number of different interlinked effects. And it is all to easy to just point at one symptom, and propose remedies to address that symptom, without thinking of the unintended consequences of that action.

    Lithuanians work in the UK because they get paid more than back at home in Lithuania, and because - especially if you're young - going to the UK and living in shared accommodation with a bunch of friends, and seeing the world, is fun.

    If you are a 24 year old Lithuanian with a university degree, you don't mind working at Pret on Piccadilly for £12.50/hour, especially if you're living in a house share in Stratford.

    If you are a 24 year old Brit with a university degree, you probably want something more than that. You want to start your career. But said Lithuanian is a lot more attractive to Pret than a less well educated Brit.

    We have a real problem with our tax and benefit system that is totally un-addressed by all political parties. And we have a problem with our education system.

    The immigration issue is a symptom of deeper causes. Pret - or the Norfolk farmer - is not economically irrational for employing Lithuanians. If we just "ban" our Lithuanian 24 year old from coming here, we don't solve the problem of a broken tax and benefits system, or an education system that produces people with the wrong skills.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    edited April 2015
    F1: P1 about to commence on the red button/online.

    Edited extra bit: soft/medium tyres.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,132
    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    Scottish unemployment is rising because there is a significant reduction in employment in the north sea. Much of this is hidden because most people that work there are contractors not employees and their contracts are simply not renewed.

    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Longterm, for Scotland, this is surely even more important.

    The collapse in the oil price has not (as expected) had a detrimental effect on the economics of fracking: shale oil and gas are still booming.

    http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21648622-fall-oil-price-has-not-curbed-fracking-nearly-much?fsrc/tw/te/pe/ed/unconventionalbutnormal

    "This contributes to a picture in which oil prices—barring big geopolitical upsets—look unlikely to rise sharply. True, global demand for oil is set to rise, and old oilfields are depleting, meaning that much of the industry needs to run in order to stand still. But the message from America is that finance and technology combined are more than a match for geology."

    i.e. the price of oil is quite unlikely to return to $100 a barrel, let alone the $500 a barrel or whatever it was Salmond predicted, enabling him to give every Scotsman a six metre wide golden mega-haggis, once the English had been sent away tae think agin.

    Financially, Scottish independence is a dead duck. But dead ducks can still honk.
    Did you read the piece I sent you?
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    antifrank said:

    Thanks again to antifrank for his write-up on the constituency odds.

    A thought on the Newton Abbot constituency. We still haven't received any election literature from the Conservatives, which is on the face of it very surprising for a seat with a majority less than 1,000, while having several leaflets from the Lib Dems in second place.

    We do live in a ward held by a Lib Dem councillor on Teignbridge council who is also facing the voters this year (as the leaflets make clear), so it's possible that the result of the general election in this constituency is seen so far as a foregone conclusion that the Tories are putting the effort in elsewhere, and the effort from the Lib Dems is focussed on holding their councillors so that they have a base from which to rebuild in the next Parliament.

    Here in Bury South, a seat Labour hold by 3,292 votes after an 8% swing to the Tories last time, we've had 2 leaflets from the labour incumbent and a personal mailing from labour hq to me. Nothing from the Tories. I've not seen a single election poster on any lamppost or house window.

    Concluding that the Tories aren't even bothering, presumably 100% focused on trying to hold Bury N, and Lab assume it's on the bag.
    Based on current odds, if the Conservatives were to take every seat up to and including Bury South on the implied probabilities of the seat markets, they would get 360 seats. The Conservatives are not going to get 360 seats. So giving up on Bury South is what you would expect a party that is husbanding its resources sensibly to do.
    But it's not what Bob would do.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    PT The last Labour majority before Blair was technically Wilson in October 1974, even if only 3 seats

    Hence why I said a majority of just five or more. That moves the goalpost to 1966.

    In reality the election is won by whoever is able to become PM and command Parliament. This was Cameron for five full years.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited April 2015
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.


    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).


    Heh. You cued me up. You've probably not noticed, but I've moved on a bit from torture porn. My latest novel has THESE reviews:

    ‘A magnificently creepy thriller’ Spectator

    ‘Beautifully paced, teeming with psychological shivers, The Ice Twins is a notable debut’ The Times, Best Crime Thrillers

    ‘Gripping, sad, and desperately poignant, this is a debut to die for’ Daily Mail

    ‘Stunning’ Mail on Sunday

    ‘The Ice Twins has grip, pace and bags of atmosphere … It also has one of the cleverest endings of recent thrillers’ Sunday Times

    ‘Unbearably gripping and suspenseful’ Sophie Hannah

    ‘Chilling and utterly compulsive … builds to an incredibly tense and shiver-inducing conclusion’ Sunday Mirror

    ‘A tense psychological thriller that builds with every page’ Sunday Post

    'Superb' Publishers Weekly USA (starred review)

    'psychological writing of a precious kind... intelligent and clairvoyant.... an irresistibly riveting psychodrama with great impact, and universal validity... this book is a saving angel of the genre' Aftenposten (Norway)

    'Unbearably excitiing' (DWDD - Dutch primetime TV show)

    ‘Genius’ Neil Oliver

    As for "Uzbekistan", of the three countries where ICE TWINS has so far been published, UK, Norway and Holland, it has been a top ten bestseller in two - UK, and Holland. We've so far sold the translation rights in 17 countries (including Korea and China this week), and we've sold the movie rights to Alcon Inc, a subsidiary of Warner Bros.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ice-Twins-S-Tremayne/dp/0007563035

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/alcon-entertainment-nabs-novel-ice-780569

    I'll take a pass on the beer.
    Alcon have a Distribution and Co-Financing deal with Warners. Otherwise they're an independent business.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.

    What about a condescension of leftie elitists or a smugness?

    Maybe a sub-Amis of right-wing thriller writers or a faux outrage?

    Right-wing thriller writers? An Ambridge.

    An entitlement of Conservatives.

    An innumerate of Labourites.

    An obsolescence of LibDems.

    A fury of UKIPers.

    A denial of ScotNats.



  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Enthusiasm-free voters broadcast an animation (7,2,3,8)
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.

    Roger- come to the Victoria at Beeston (Broxtowe) on the 5th May for a pre election night. I'm going to help out on Nick's campaign for a couple of days at the end of the campaign- and he's lodging me with a sympathiser.

    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).
    Peter the Punter is coming too, though earlier. Is there a short description for a pontificator who can't be arsed to do anything at all except write some more torture porn to become the best-selling paperback in Uzbekistan? You could come up and help the Tories, or UKIP, or whoever it is that you're idly supporting this week, then come for a drink.

    Is it an open invite? Though Tuesdays are not good for me.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Financier said:

    SeanT said:

    Offtopic, the Janner case is an absolute f*cking disgrace. Not prosecuting - not even expelling him from the Lords - will only encourage the idea that there is some vast Establishment pedo-cover-up.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3042821/Vile-abuse-3-bungled-probes-45-year-cover-PAUL-BRACCHI-reviews-decision-not-charge-Labour-peer-child-abuse-claims-Alzheimer-s.html

    Totally agree. The CPS are being weak again - need a good clearout.
    Jackofkent on the twitters reckons the case would have been thrown out in court for the same reasons the CPS dropped it, although if the CPS had been more cynical they could have brought the case then let the court take the blame...
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,016
    SeanT said:

    Carnyx said:

    SeanT said:

    Gah, I see that I missed the Official PB Prediction Game (though I did have quite a good reason - being in one of the world's most remote wildernesses - west Arnhemland, Australia)

    For the record, so people don't accuse me of backing every possible outcome so as to appear glowingly vindicated whatever happens, here's my Official S K Tremayne GE2015 Prognostication:


    Tories: 278
    Labour: 282
    LDs: 26
    UKIP: 2
    Green: 1
    SNP: 39

    Did you get to Woomera by any chance? The Timbuktu of the Dan Dare generation ...
    I was quite close to Woomera at one point - in the insane opal mining town of Coober Pedy (where everyone lives underground because it is too hot). I even met a lady from the missile range.

    However, truth be told I found the Red Heart of Oz a tiny bit underwhelming. Uluru and the deserts were incredible and all that, but I expected them to be incredible, so I felt a very slight *meh*.

    What has surprised me is Darwin and the Top End. I have been in the "cage of death" six inches from the world's largest captive saltwater crocodile. I have been in a helipubcrawl where they literally chopper you from pub to pub (some of them in remote rainforest riverine islands full of Deliverance-style croc hunters). I have discovered that the sensation of being quite drunk in a doorless helicopter flying over intractable wilderness is significantly brilliant.

    But best of all I've been to Arnhemland. One of the greatest nowherelands on earth. It's the size of GB, with a population of 17,000, and protected from any further incursion as it has been reserved aboriginal land since 1931. Only about 200 whitefellas are allowed in (temporarily) every year,

    And it is unutterably lovely.

    https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/588986280647602176

    https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/588545241545707521

    Many thanks. I was rather taken with the Red Heart myself but then I like the Fens and the Somerset Levels ... but I have been wondering about taking the Ghan train from Adelaide up to Alice, and now you've convinced me it is definitely a good idea to go the whole hog (or rather wombat) to Darwin.

  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Alistair said:

    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    Scottish unemployment is rising because there is a significant reduction in employment in the north sea. Much of this is hidden because most people that work there are contractors not employees and their contracts are simply not renewed.

    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Longterm, for Scotland, this is surely even more important.

    The collapse in the oil price has not (as expected) had a detrimental effect on the economics of fracking: shale oil and gas are still booming.

    http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21648622-fall-oil-price-has-not-curbed-fracking-nearly-much?fsrc/tw/te/pe/ed/unconventionalbutnormal

    "This contributes to a picture in which oil prices—barring big geopolitical upsets—look unlikely to rise sharply. True, global demand for oil is set to rise, and old oilfields are depleting, meaning that much of the industry needs to run in order to stand still. But the message from America is that finance and technology combined are more than a match for geology."

    i.e. the price of oil is quite unlikely to return to $100 a barrel, let alone the $500 a barrel or whatever it was Salmond predicted, enabling him to give every Scotsman a six metre wide golden mega-haggis, once the English had been sent away tae think agin.

    Financially, Scottish independence is a dead duck. But dead ducks can still honk.
    It was $110 a barrel, which was a whole 2 dollars more that what the oil futures market was trading at.
    So irresponsible then. Oil futures represents the midpoint of expected future prices with a possibility to go up or down. It has gone down. A responsible government that relies on oil prices would hedge below the futures price thus accounting for risk. Instead they went over and beyond it. Totally irresponsible.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,636
    edited April 2015
    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Mr Bond,

    My reasoning? I'm pointing out the problem. It's not being addressed by anyone, they prefer to resort to name-calling.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,189
    PT True, but a majority is a majority, and even if Cameron wins a majority of only 1 in May he would still have one which he did not in 2010
  • Options
    Justin will be along to tell us shortly, that the Lab lead is only 0.55% and only rounding made it 1%
  • Options

    It has surprised me and that's why I mentioned it. I think the Tories and Labour were roughly level pegging at last election for youngest demographic.

    What will the affect of the rise of Ukip greens Plaid SNP and collapse of LDs and BMP mean for efficiency of vote at this election? Is there some sort of peak Tory effect where Ukip, Labour and LDs rack up votes where they cannot win?

    SeanT said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Financially, Scottish independence is a dead duck. But dead ducks can still honk.
    So take that thought to its logical conclusion Sean. If oil were at $1 a barrel, how likely would Scottish independence be then? More likely than in 2014, or less likely?

    I say more likely. With Scotland as even more of a basket case, and no material number of Con or Lab seats left there - who in the Westminster establishment would be that anxious to keep Scotland?

    A Sindyref in those circumstances would encounter no awkward interventions from rUK. There'd be no chancellors popping up to rule out a currency union; Yes and England would just agree not to mention the poond at all.

    Likewise, nobody would mention the future of the nuke fleet. Scotland will be so desperate for English money, they'll do anything to keep it.

    The whole thing would simply into a massive La Babicora ranch, and you or your offspring will become the British Cormac McCarthy, writing heartrending novels about teenage Don Quixotes crossing the border in trilogies, taming wolves and plying their cocks among the colonised Scotch women.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,014
    Best of luck, Mr. T.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited April 2015
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    tyson said:

    Roger said:

    NickP

    "Sounds brilliant. I'm not a great bird fancier but my wife is and I've ordered a copy for her."

    On behalf of my cousin thank you very much! It's a very good well written book and when she comes to "Roger" in it that's me.


    Is there a collective noun for "a trio of odiously smug, pitifully silly, haplessly middlebrow lefties with no significant achievements in life"? Could be useful on 5th May, in Beeston (Broxtowe).


    Heh. You cued me up. You've probably not noticed, but I've moved on a bit from torture porn. My latest novel has THESE reviews:

    ‘A magnificently creepy thriller’ Spectator

    ‘Beautifully paced, teeming with psychological shivers, The Ice Twins is a notable debut’ The Times, Best Crime Thrillers

    ‘Gripping, sad, and desperately poignant, this is a debut to die for’ Daily Mail

    ‘Stunning’ Mail on Sunday

    ‘The Ice Twins has grip, pace and bags of atmosphere … It also has one of the cleverest endings of recent thrillers’ Sunday Times

    ‘Unbearably gripping and suspenseful’ Sophie Hannah

    ‘Chilling and utterly compulsive … builds to an incredibly tense and shiver-inducing conclusion’ Sunday Mirror

    ‘A tense psychological thriller that builds with every page’ Sunday Post

    'Superb' Publishers Weekly USA (starred review)

    'psychological writing of a precious kind... intelligent and clairvoyant.... an irresistibly riveting psychodrama with great impact, and universal validity... this book is a saving angel of the genre' Aftenposten (Norway)

    'Unbearably excitiing' (DWDD - Dutch primetime TV show)

    ‘Genius’ Neil Oliver

    As for "Uzbekistan", of the three countries where ICE TWINS has so far been published, UK, Norway and Holland, it has been a top ten bestseller in two - UK, and Holland. We've so far sold the translation rights in 17 countries (including Korea and China this week), and we've sold the movie rights to Alcon Inc, a subsidiary of Warner Bros.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ice-Twins-S-Tremayne/dp/0007563035

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/alcon-entertainment-nabs-novel-ice-780569

    I'll take a pass on the beer.
    Alcon have a Distribution and Co-Financing deal with Warners. Otherwise they're an independent business.
    Indeed. I was just using a shorthand. They're an interesting company.

    We're trying to get Peter Weir to direct. He knows my Aussie daughter well (and she, of course, is one of the Ice Twins, in effect).

    It's a long shot but if he agrees, YAY.
    You're a brave man drinking VB by the way. Bad mornings after.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,136
    SeanT said:

    Heh. You cued me up. You've probably not noticed, but I've moved on a bit from torture porn. My latest novel has THESE reviews:

    ‘A magnificently creepy thriller’ Spectator

    ‘Beautifully paced, teeming with psychological shivers, The Ice Twins is a notable debut’ The Times, Best Crime Thrillers

    ‘Gripping, sad, and desperately poignant, this is a debut to die for’ Daily Mail

    ‘Stunning’ Mail on Sunday

    ‘The Ice Twins has grip, pace and bags of atmosphere … It also has one of the cleverest endings of recent thrillers’ Sunday Times

    ‘Unbearably gripping and suspenseful’ Sophie Hannah

    ‘Chilling and utterly compulsive … builds to an incredibly tense and shiver-inducing conclusion’ Sunday Mirror

    ‘A tense psychological thriller that builds with every page’ Sunday Post

    'Superb' Publishers Weekly USA (starred review)

    'psychological writing of a precious kind... intelligent and clairvoyant.... an irresistibly riveting psychodrama with great impact, and universal validity... this book is a saving angel of the genre' Aftenposten (Norway)

    'Unbearably exciting' (DWDD - Dutch primetime TV show)

    ‘Genius’ Neil Oliver

    As for "Uzbekistan", of the three countries where ICE TWINS has so far been published, UK, Norway and Holland, it has been a top ten bestseller in two - UK, and Holland. We've so far sold the translation rights in 17 countries (including Korea and China this week), and we've sold the movie rights to Alcon Inc, a subsidiary of Warner Bros.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ice-Twins-S-Tremayne/dp/0007563035

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/alcon-entertainment-nabs-novel-ice-780569

    I'll take a pass on the beer.

    Oi! You swine! You didn't mention the review I gave it:

    "the best first 30% of a book I have read so far this year (although that included a dull-as-dishwater biography of George Stephenson"

    It surely ranks up there with those. ;-)

    I'm not sure if I've mentioned it, but I soon finished the book, and very enjoyable it was too. Very much a change from your previous series. And I think I know the answer to the challenge you set about which PBer a character was based on ...

    I wish I could write as well. (end envy mode)
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Enthusiasm-free voters broadcast an animation (7,2,3,8)

    Masters Of The Universe.

    I might do an election-themed crossword for polling day, if OGH wants one.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    The Friday lead had been stuck at 2 for some time.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    GIN1138 said:

    TGOHF said:

    Amazingly good employment numbers..highest on record..

    Hardly as important as a debate is it ?
    All these great economic figures just highlight's further two points:

    1. How terrible Cameron, Osborne and Lynton Crosby are at politics.

    2. How toxic the Tory brand must still be with the electorate.

    This is an election that the Tories should be walking. Historians will look back in 50 years time and wonder how it was that the Conservatives blew it (like they blew 2010).

    I do think we may be nearing the point when the Tories/Conservatives have to admit that their brand is effectively Ratnered and they have to launch an entirely new party under an entirely new name...



    Yet the Labour brand is not so tarnished.

    Go figure
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Viewing figures from last night

    Debate 4.27m (20.5%)
    Reaction show 3.53m (17.0%)
    Question Time rounded 2.66m (27.3%)

    BBC topped the night as ITV was airing some programmes that sounded big flops just by looking at the name (Double Decker Driving School and Ice Rink on the Estate)


  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    I work across south west and south coast so can give the following update. In Thornbury and yate where I live we have been bombarded by what I can only assume is a very ambitious Tory candidate. Couple of mailings from Steve Webb the Lib dem MP and one from the green candidate. Few signs for Tory and a few houses festooned for LDs. I can only assume the Tory candidate who is local and young is trying to build a base for when Webb steps down.

    Was in Portsmouth South namely Southsea high st the day after Mike Hancock announced he would stand as independent. The Tories seemed pretty confident.

    Aside from that lots of signage for dineage. Caroline dineage standing for the Tories around Fareham / Gosport area. Lots of Labour signs up in Southampton Itchen.

    Can't really remember any others off the top of my head but from driving around and working in south and looking at my Facebook friends in the north where I grew up I have almost total wipe out for Tories in north with modest gains in south from LDs.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,016
    SeanT said:

    Carnyx said:

    SeanT said:

    Carnyx said:

    SeanT said:

    Gah, I see that I missed the Official PB Prediction Game (though I did have quite a good reason - being in one of the world's most remote wildernesses - west Arnhemland, Australia)

    For the record, so people don't accuse me of backing every possible outcome so as to appear glowingly vindicated whatever happens, here's my Official S K Tremayne GE2015 Prognostication:


    Tories: 278
    Labour: 282
    LDs: 26
    UKIP: 2
    Green: 1
    SNP: 39

    Did you get to Woomera by any chance? The Timbuktu of the Dan Dare generation ...
    I was quite close to Woomera at one point - in the insane opal mining town of Coober Pedy (where everyone lives underground because it is too hot). I even met a lady from the missile range.

    However, truth be told I found the Red Heart of Oz a tiny bit underwhelming. Uluru and the deserts were incredible and all that, but I expected them to be incredible, so I felt a very slight *meh*.

    What has surprised me is Darwin and the Top End. I have been in the "cage of death" six inches from the world's largest captive saltwater crocodile. I have been in a helipubcrawl where they literally chopper you from pub to pub (some of them in remote rainforest riverine islands full of Deliverance-style croc hunters). I have discovered that the sensation of being quite drunk in a doorless helicopter flying over intractable wilderness is significantly brilliant.

    But best of all I've been to Arnhemland. One of the greatest nowherelands on earth. It's the size of GB, with a population of 17,000, and protected from any further incursion as it has been reserved aboriginal land since 1931. Only about 200 whitefellas are allowed in (temporarily) every year,

    And it is unutterably lovely.

    https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/588986280647602176

    https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/588545241545707521

    Many thanks. I was rather taken with the Red Heart myself but then I like the Fens and the Somerset Levels ... but I have been wondering about taking the Ghan train from Adelaide up to Alice, and now you've convinced me it is definitely a good idea to go the whole hog (or rather wombat) to Darwin.

    My Red Heart article was actually pegged to a new Ghan service to Coober Pedy (though in the end I had to skip the train and drive, logistics prevented).

    Everyone I've talked to says you MUST take the Ghan the whole way, south to north, because only then do you see the marvellous change in climate and landscape, from pastoral south Oz to sterile desert to rainforest and jungle and then the Timor sea....
    Duly noted for the (not too distant I hope) future, thanks.

  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,045

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Covering for BigJohnOwls...

    EICIPM!
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    I always think that populus does not favour the blues so if it was ICM with these numbers it would be tories by circa 2
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Tiny sample size, but that 9% for the Lib Dems in Wales & the SW must be worrying.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Patrick said:

    Patrick's election / 2015 prediction:
    1. Ed is crap is PM - propped up by the SNP
    2. The long overdue market event comes along. (not because of 1 above but not helped by it!). 'Sell in May and go away'.
    3. Equities collapse, bond markets collapse, Eurozone and other banks go under. 2008 all over again only worse.
    4. Sovereign defaults. The 'Oh Shit' moment that years of 'extend and pretend' has been postponing is here.
    5. Depression / global GDP retrenchment.
    6. Fiat currencies all looking a bit worthless. Paper assets are worth paper.
    7. Tax revenues collapse and jobs destroyed en masse.
    8. Japan, the Eurozone GIPSIs, France, and many others become technically insolvent. EU crisis of epic proportions. They have no ammunition left to fire at this.
    9. EICIPM faces some horrific choices - actually not choices but forced decisions. The UK's ability to borrow is gone along with everyone else's. And you thought 2010-2015 was 'austerity' as spending increased every year from a high base.
    10. Huge economic imbalances built up over decades unwind themselves. Debts are wiped - and also credits.
    11. Wallace is our PM in the moment of our greateset need.

    How bad will it be?

    Should I be stocking up on gold, or on loo roll?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,005

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Almost a dead heat, in fact, looking at the numbers in detail.

    For England and Wales, the numbers are Con 35%, Lab 34%, UKIP 15%, Lib Dem 9%, Green 6%.
  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,045

    I always think that populus does not favour the blues so if it was ICM with these numbers it would be tories by circa 2

    Any facts to back up this assertion?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Viewing figures from last night

    Debate 4.27m (20.5%)
    Reaction show 3.53m (17.0%)
    Question Time rounded 2.66m (27.3%)

    BBC topped the night as ITV was airing some programmes that sounded big flops just by looking at the name (Double Decker Driving School and Ice Rink on the Estate)


    I've been keeping an eye on her blog so you dont have to - our Jane reacted very badly to Martin Salter allegedly writing to all the constituents in Reading West. She also got very excited about the burial of Richard III. Sadly nothing much more exciting than that lately.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,010

    Patrick said:

    Patrick's election / 2015 prediction:
    1. Ed is crap is PM - propped up by the SNP
    2. The long overdue market event comes along. (not because of 1 above but not helped by it!). 'Sell in May and go away'.
    3. Equities collapse, bond markets collapse, Eurozone and other banks go under. 2008 all over again only worse.
    4. Sovereign defaults. The 'Oh Shit' moment that years of 'extend and pretend' has been postponing is here.
    5. Depression / global GDP retrenchment.
    6. Fiat currencies all looking a bit worthless. Paper assets are worth paper.
    7. Tax revenues collapse and jobs destroyed en masse.
    8. Japan, the Eurozone GIPSIs, France, and many others become technically insolvent. EU crisis of epic proportions. They have no ammunition left to fire at this.
    9. EICIPM faces some horrific choices - actually not choices but forced decisions. The UK's ability to borrow is gone along with everyone else's. And you thought 2010-2015 was 'austerity' as spending increased every year from a high base.
    10. Huge economic imbalances built up over decades unwind themselves. Debts are wiped - and also credits.
    11. Wallace is our PM in the moment of our greateset need.

    How bad will it be?

    Should I be stocking up on gold, or on loo roll?
    Dunno, I told my colleague to buy Euros before the election for her Hols though ;)
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Isabel Hardman writes to the PB Tories:
    The Tories have fallen for their own spin on Miliband

    If the Tories fail to make it back into government after this general election, one of the things they will have to come to terms with is that they fell for their own spin about Ed Miliband, without realising that the public might not.
    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/the-tories-have-fallen-for-their-own-spin-on-miliband/
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    TOPPING said:

    GIN1138 said:

    TGOHF said:

    Amazingly good employment numbers..highest on record..

    Hardly as important as a debate is it ?
    All these great economic figures just highlight's further two points:

    1. How terrible Cameron, Osborne and Lynton Crosby are at politics.

    2. How toxic the Tory brand must still be with the electorate.

    This is an election that the Tories should be walking. Historians will look back in 50 years time and wonder how it was that the Conservatives blew it (like they blew 2010).

    I do think we may be nearing the point when the Tories/Conservatives have to admit that their brand is effectively Ratnered and they have to launch an entirely new party under an entirely new name...



    They might be bad at politics but they are good at running the country. Which would you prefer your politicians to be good at?

    How many times can the IMF praise the UK's economic performance, and how distant a memory does the recession have to become before those people who "enjoyed" half a generation of profligacy begin to believe that naught percent finance and self-certifying mortgages is not the route to happiness and wealth?

    IMO Dave & George have done all they can - it is now up to the public and, much like Ed's reply on RTB last night, Lab have nothing to say other than the Cons policies are nasty and in Lab's hands the very same policies would be nice.
    We had a Lib Dem leaflet last night which used that exact word "nasty" when referring to the tories.

    Amusingly a work colleague had a leaflet from Labour (Ipswich constituency) and didn't even open it just wrote "return to sender"
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,010

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Tiny sample size, but that 9% for the Lib Dems in Wales & the SW must be worrying.
    I was called a Tory fantasist for suggesting it might be possible to drive from Land's End to John O Groats without passing through a single Lib Dem or Labour constituency a while back ;)
  • Options

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Tiny sample size, but that 9% for the Lib Dems in Wales & the SW must be worrying.
    Fits in with the ComRes Lib Dem marginal polling.

    Lib Dems on course for a shellacking.

    Nota Bene: Lord Ashcroft says otherwise
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    I didn't know he wrote to everybody. But I 've seen him pictured on Labour leaflets along the new candidate and I immediately thought about how she would have taken it
    Neil said:

    Viewing figures from last night

    Debate 4.27m (20.5%)
    Reaction show 3.53m (17.0%)
    Question Time rounded 2.66m (27.3%)

    BBC topped the night as ITV was airing some programmes that sounded big flops just by looking at the name (Double Decker Driving School and Ice Rink on the Estate)


    I've been keeping an eye on her blog so you dont have to - our Jane reacted very badly to Martin Salter allegedly writing to all the constituents in Reading West. She also got very excited about the burial of Richard III. Sadly nothing much more exciting than that lately.
  • Options

    So irresponsible then. Oil futures represents the midpoint of expected future prices with a possibility to go up or down.

    The futures price is the price today for delivery in the future.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:


    Maybe most people just understand that the financial crisis in 2008 was an international one that hit all economies regardless of their political make-up. Not everybody buys into the Mail's view of the world.

    Our financial crisis was building up long before 2008 with £1 out of every £4 being borrowed money. All the financial crisis of 2008 did was to make people admit that such a stupid strategy was untenable.

    The 2008 crisis is long gone, the enormous, eye-watering debt accrued by Labour pre-2008 is still with us.


    One might say it is still with us because the Tories have failed to do anything about in 5 years despite all the rhetoric about impending armaggedon in 2010. One could be excused for thinking that all the terrible things we were told would ensue if we didn't reduce the debt was Tory posturing - it hasn't reduced and we are still here and the Tories now seem to be promising to spend money in all directions in the run up to May.
    Debt? !!
    The tories said they would reduce the deficit. How can anyone take your argument seriously.
    The tories have been cutting spending and are going to continue to do that at a sustainable rate.
    We need to cut spending because we have a massive structural deficit Without cutting the structural deficit we can never even begin to think about cutting the debt.
    Browns massive increase in spending between 2000 and 2010 is a real disaster for our country. I'd have some sympathy for the SNP except that Blair Brown and Darling were all Scottish.
    Campbell's father was a Gaelic-speaker from the island of Tiree, his mother was from Ayrshire.
    Before them there was Smith, then there was Cook Irving Strang Browne Robertson Dewar ...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,010

    Populus

    Lab 34 (+1) Con 33 (nc) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 14 (-1) Greens 4 (-1)

    http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_17-04-2015_BPC.pdf

    Tiny sample size, but that 9% for the Lib Dems in Wales & the SW must be worrying.
    Fits in with the ComRes Lib Dem marginal polling.

    Lib Dems on course for a shellacking.

    Nota Bene: Lord Ashcroft says otherwise
    Back the Tories in the seats the Ashcroft polling says the Lib Dems will lose in the SW ;)

    No incumbency is even better.

    Mid Dorset North Poole
    Somerton Frome
    Taunton Deane
    Portsmouth South

    All fit the bill
  • Options
    New Thread
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,698

    Roger said:

    Has anyone got Prof Fisher's latest projection? This is the only one I can find.



    Forecast Election Day Seats
    Con : 323
    Lab : 280
    LD : 20
    Con largest party, but short of a majority by 3

    http://electionsetc.com/2015/04/17/forecast-update-17-april-2015/

    It's been gradually edging toward reality for a while now.
    On Fisher's figures today, Con+LD+DUP just gets to 323 seats. I do wonder what would happen in such circumstances. Very difficult for that to hold together for long but the alternative would be a Lab-SNP-PC-SDLP deal just as weak.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    I didn't know he wrote to everybody. But I 've seen him pictured on Labour leaflets along the new candidate and I immediately thought about how she would have taken it

    Badly. Very, very badly!
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:


    Maybe most people just understand that the financial crisis in 2008 was an international one that hit all economies regardless of their political make-up. Not everybody buys into the Mail's view of the world.

    Our financial crisis was building up long before 2008 with £1 out of every £4 being borrowed money. All the financial crisis of 2008 did was to make people admit that such a stupid strategy was untenable.

    The 2008 crisis is long gone, the enormous, eye-watering debt accrued by Labour pre-2008 is still with us.


    One might say it is still with us because the Tories have failed to do anything about in 5 years despite all the rhetoric about impending armaggedon in 2010. One could be excused for thinking that all the terrible things we were told would ensue if we didn't reduce the debt was Tory posturing - it hasn't reduced and we are still here and the Tories now seem to be promising to spend money in all directions in the run up to May.
    Debt? !!
    The tories said they would reduce the deficit. How can anyone take your argument seriously.
    The tories have been cutting spending and are going to continue to do that at a sustainable rate.
    We need to cut spending because we have a massive structural deficit Without cutting the structural deficit we can never even begin to think about cutting the debt.
    Browns massive increase in spending between 2000 and 2010 is a real disaster for our country. I'd have some sympathy for the SNP except that Blair Brown and Darling were all Scottish.
    Campbell's father was a Gaelic-speaker from the island of Tiree, his mother was from Ayrshire.
    Before them there was Smith, then there was Cook Irving Strang Browne Robertson Dewar ...
    Economic illiteracy writ large.
  • Options
    JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,018
    murali_s said:

    I always think that populus does not favour the blues so if it was ICM with these numbers it would be tories by circa 2

    Any facts to back up this assertion?
    Yes, Populus hasn't shown a Tory lead all year when other pollsters have been, in some cases quite regularly.

  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Patrick said:

    Patrick's election / 2015 prediction:
    1. Ed is crap is PM - propped up by the SNP
    2. The long overdue market event comes along. (not because of 1 above but not helped by it!). 'Sell in May and go away'.
    3. Equities collapse, bond markets collapse, Eurozone and other banks go under. 2008 all over again only worse.
    4. Sovereign defaults. The 'Oh Shit' moment that years of 'extend and pretend' has been postponing is here.
    5. Depression / global GDP retrenchment.
    6. Fiat currencies all looking a bit worthless. Paper assets are worth paper.
    7. Tax revenues collapse and jobs destroyed en masse.
    8. Japan, the Eurozone GIPSIs, France, and many others become technically insolvent. EU crisis of epic proportions. They have no ammunition left to fire at this.
    9. EICIPM faces some horrific choices - actually not choices but forced decisions. The UK's ability to borrow is gone along with everyone else's. And you thought 2010-2015 was 'austerity' as spending increased every year from a high base.
    10. Huge economic imbalances built up over decades unwind themselves. Debts are wiped - and also credits.
    11. Wallace is our PM in the moment of our greateset need.

    How bad will it be?

    Should I be stocking up on gold, or on loo roll?
    Wine and shotgun cartridges are a better bet.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I loved the Parlez-Franglais with Nicola...
    Nicola: "Je ne suis pas wee, Monsieur Grenouille. Je suis plus tall que Jimmy Crankie et aussi votre President Monsieur Sarkozy.

    L'Ambassadeur: Tout le monde est plus tall que Sarko...

    Tous les deux: Hahahahah (C'est un moment d'entente cordiale entre allies historiques, unis dans leurs contempt pour les Rosbifs)

    This Private Eye SNP cartoon is on the money...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCyPhBeWIAA2Vcq.jpg

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139

    Mr. G, a party with a vested interest in causing internal conflict in the United Kingdom by promoting separation and division between its constituent parts (mostly Scotland and England) is not suited to govern the United Kingdom.

    The SNP cannot say it wants what is best for the United Kingdom because it wants the United Kingdom to end, and has something to gain by causing discord within the country.

    I disagree with other parties, but none of those seeks to break up the union.

    So there is no democracy in UK then.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    malcolmg said:

    Mr. G, a party with a vested interest in causing internal conflict in the United Kingdom by promoting separation and division between its constituent parts (mostly Scotland and England) is not suited to govern the United Kingdom.

    The SNP cannot say it wants what is best for the United Kingdom because it wants the United Kingdom to end, and has something to gain by causing discord within the country.

    I disagree with other parties, but none of those seeks to break up the union.

    So there is no democracy in UK then.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139

    malcolmg said:


    Considering England have had the power to trash the 15% of people in Scotland for 300 hundred years it is a bit rich to come up with your argument.

    Excuse me? It was the scots who asked for the Act of Union after the Darien scheme bankrupted their economy. If you want to leave then why not have a referendum and see what the result is?

    Excuse me , I presume history is not your chosen subject. A few criminal nobles who were most likely of English origin made the decision , the people had no say in the matter. Another referendum will be coming along soon.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139
    TGOHF said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:


    She is Scottish and we are not supposed to be able to influence democracy in the UK.

    I don't think anybody objects to Scotland having a say in the running of the UK, MalcolmG. What does concern a number of people is the idea that one party dedicated only to furthering the interests of 15% of the population would have effective veto over 100% of the decisions of the government, including on those matters that would not directly affect Scotland. They believe that the SNP would use this leverage to ensure e.g. a better financial package for Scotland at England's expense, or changes to the English NHS that would be irrelevant in Scotland.

    Where Sturgeon may have made an error in the earlier debate is not reiterating that the SNP would abstain in votes on devolved matters. Or did she do so and I missed it?
    Considering England have had the power to trash the 15% of people in Scotland for 300 hundred years it is a bit rich to come up with your argument. Now that their rigged system is falling apart they want to change the rules. It just shows up what liars these people are after all the crap during the referendum about "Better Together " , "pooling and sharing" etc. Now when it looks like they are not getting it all their own way and some democracy may be involved they start throwing their toys out of the pram. Happy to throw us some crumbs as long as we don't get so uppity as to expect to actually be able to make decisions.
    Scotland seems to be doing a good job on it's own malc - the SNP have managed to reverse falling unemployment in Scotland quite spectacularly as it continues to fall in the rest of the Uk. Best hope Ed wins in May so rUk can join the misery in time for 2016.
    That's those dastardly fiends in London that are causing that though Harry. They are trying unsuccessfully to inconvenience the SNP, their continued budget cuts and meddling will be their undoing.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139
    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    TGOHF said:

    This run will come to an end if its PM Nicward ..

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2015/sty-labour-market-statistics--april-2015.html

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 45s46 seconds ago
    UK unemployment fell by 76,000 to 1.84m (5.6%) between Dec & Feb, @ONS says http://bbc.in/1G07Iyx

    That is virtually full employment and no inflation at all. I feel a dose of MacMillan coming on. The electorate are ungrateful bastards, they really are.
    Under the SNP , unemployment is going the opposite direction - why does Ed want to team up with a job destroying party ?
    Scottish unemployment is rising because there is a significant reduction in employment in the north sea. Much of this is hidden because most people that work there are contractors not employees and their contracts are simply not renewed.

    It is yet another threat that Scotland would be vulnerable to if Sturgeon gets her full fiscal autonomy as her price for letting Ed pretend he is in power for a while.
    Not just that - socialist tinkering taking its toll

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-32248834

    "The lowering of the legal drink-drive limit in Scotland has affected business in the hospitality sector, according to a new report.

    The Bank of Scotland said restaurants and bars were seeing "a changing pattern of spending" because of the new law, which came into force in December.

    The comments came in the bank's latest survey of Scottish purchasing managers.
    Its PMI report indicated a slight fall in overall service sector activity last month.

    In February, purchasing consortium Beacon published a survey of hospitality sector customers that suggested Scottish businesses saw bar sales drop by up to 60% in the two months after the introduction of the new limit."
    Bloody scandal that one
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,139
    SeanT said:

    Offtopic, the Janner case is an absolute f*cking disgrace. Not prosecuting - not even expelling him from the Lords - will only encourage the idea that there is some vast Establishment pedo-cover-up.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3042821/Vile-abuse-3-bungled-probes-45-year-cover-PAUL-BRACCHI-reviews-decision-not-charge-Labour-peer-child-abuse-claims-Alzheimer-s.html

    by encourage do you not mean confirm
  • Options
    OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,924

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:


    Maybe most people just understand that the financial crisis in 2008 was an international one that hit all economies regardless of their political make-up. Not everybody buys into the Mail's view of the world.

    Our financial crisis was building up long before 2008 with £1 out of every £4 being borrowed money. All the financial crisis of 2008 did was to make people admit that such a stupid strategy was untenable.

    The 2008 crisis is long gone, the enormous, eye-watering debt accrued by Labour pre-2008 is still with us.


    One might say it is still with us because the Tories have failed to do anything about in 5 years despite all the rhetoric about impending armaggedon in 2010. One could be excused for thinking that all the terrible things we were told would ensue if we didn't reduce the debt was Tory posturing - it hasn't reduced and we are still here and the Tories now seem to be promising to spend money in all directions in the run up to May.
    Representative democracy, among other things, is a system for maximising public debt. Until someone - here or anywhere else - can show me (show, not just say) a safer place for my savings than gilts, gilts are where they'll be.

    Because safety is the prime concern of most individual savers, who, like me, are pensioners.
    Fully agree, I was just pointing out that the Tories talk a good story on debt but in reality there is very little difference to Labour.
This discussion has been closed.