Yes he did - and in such an incompetent way that it was an absolute, unmitigated, world-class disaster, a major stain on British history, leading to the horrors of partition and a death toll which makes Blair's adventures look like a stroll in the park.
I guess you are one of those Tories who just see socialists as inferior in every conceivable way
On the other hand the Tories did take us into the European Union.
BTW, who is this Russell Brand fellow? I have a hazy idea that he's some kind of tedious comedian, do I need to know any more?
He isn't a tedious comedian he is a tedious 'comedian'.
And he has a monumentally high opinion of himself.
And a very thin skin, and bizarre interpretations of why anyone would criticise him (for instance, for being an overly verbose fool - apparently the elites don't like others to use fancy words)
I would like a Labour party that understands and incentivises aspiration, that uses the power of the state to deliver equality of opportunity and to ensure (not aspire to) a decent standard of living for all. I want one that advocates solidarity at home and abroad.
My Labour party would not care who provided services, but it would ensure that they were delivered to the very highest standards and that employees who worked in the state's name - even if they did not work for the state - were paid a living wage. Anti-discrimination legislation - too right; but also an absolute freedom to offend and to express any view, no matter how repugnant. The bedroom tax; my Labour party would understand that policy making should be evidence-based, not arbitrary. The EU? Hmmm, on balance probably yes, but not as it is now.
I'd write more and better, but I'm on the phone.
Thanks Southam.
The only thing is, there's hardly a word of that I would disagree with, and I think not a single word David Cameron would disagree with (except maybe the freedom to offend bit, where he's a shade on the Harriet side of the argument compared with me and, it seems, you).
You are describing a centre-right party, basically one-nation Conservatism.
I should hope we want the same outcomes. But I suspect my view of the state as an enabler and guarantor is not one shared by even One Nation Tories. I want the state interfering in the market by, for example, insisting all companies that get money from the state for services provided pay a living wage; and much more tightly regulating privately-owned public utilities. I am also totally opposed to selling off housing association properties and in favour of higher taxes for the best off. But, that said, I am a capitalist and I believe strongly in the profit motive, so there's a bit of me - probably a significant bit - that sees the world in the same way many Tories do. Put it this way, I get where Conservatism comes from. It's a coherent philosophy, but I start from a pisition - born of experience, no doubt - that the state is a good thing and should not be rolled back as a matter of principle.
Tories obsession with the small state is utterly irrational. There is barely a single innovation or progress that didn't rely on the state to nurture.
Casino There are media academics who are Tories, David Starkey being one of the most prominent, and arty types, eg Tracey Emin and showbiz types too, eg Jim Davidson, they just tend to be in a minority, Tories do better with sports stars and the business world as you say
I think the Russell Brand stuff and rent cap policy is an acknowledgement by Labour that they haven't been able to squeeze the Green vote as much as they thought they could during this campaign so far. They're down from their surge but are still causing damage to Labour at 5%.
To conclude tonight, everything is static as usual. Also I agree with this:
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 3h3 hours ago Miliband-Brand interview will be seen by more people than watch C4N or Newsnight...more importantly, people who would prob not watch either.
Goodnight.
So the lefty media is proclaiming that 'Ed's played a blinder'. Oh dear. This rarely ends well.
Nick Clegg has been on the Last Leg on a number occasions, played along and that is watched by a lot more than Newsnight (saying that I think there are plenty of channels on twitch that have more viewers than an episode of Newnsight these days) and is for the kidz..and it has done him errhhh no good at all.
I would like a Labour party that understands and incentivises aspiration, that uses the power of the state to deliver equality of opportunity and to ensure (not aspire to) a decent standard of living for all. I want one that advocates solidarity at home and abroad.
My Labour party would not care who provided services, but it would ensure that they were delivered to the very highest standards and that employees who worked in the state's name - even if they did not work for the state - were paid a living wage. Anti-discrimination legislation - too right; but also an absolute freedom to offend and to express any view, no matter how repugnant. The bedroom tax; my Labour party would understand that policy making should be evidence-based, not arbitrary. The EU? Hmmm, on balance probably yes, but not as it is now.
I'd write more and better, but I'm on the phone.
Thanks Southam.
The only thing is, there's hardly a word of that I would disagree with, and I think not a single word David Cameron would disagree with (except maybe the freedom to offend bit, where he's a shade on the Harriet side of the argument compared with me and, it seems, you).
You are describing a centre-right party, basically one-nation Conservatism.
He might be describing that, but one nation Conservatism isn't on offer with David Cameron. He doesn't offer the safety net for the poor that Southam wants, nor does he really offer aspiration (as shown by the fact he wants to engender unearned wealth with inheritance tax cuts, and his unwillingness to give people a proper chance to earn a decent wage).
I should hope we want the same outcomes. But I suspect my view of the state as an enabler and guarantor is not one shared by even One Nation Tories. I want the state interfering in the market by, for example, insisting all companies that get money from the state for services provided pay a living wage; and much more tightly regulating privately-owned public utilities. I am also totally opposed to selling off housing association properties and in favour of higher taxes for the best off. But, that said, I am a capitalist and I believe strongly in the profit motive, so there's a bit of me - probably a significant bit - that sees the world in the same way many Tories do. Put it this way, I get where Conservatism comes from. It's a coherent philosophy, but I start from a pisition - born of experience, no doubt - that the state is a good thing and should not be rolled back as a matter of principle.
That's all fair enough, and as you imply I wouldn't put the balance in quite the same place as you. However, that is the kind of grown-up debate we don't have in UK politics - instead, we have anti-Conservative prejudice which attributes malice to those who disagree with you about the means - and it's a powerful force because a lot of people are motivated by it.
(I'm still struggling a bit to see what you don't like about Labour, other perhaps than the competence of the present leadership. Its policy platform seems to match yours pretty closely).
I should hope we want the same outcomes. But I suspect my view of the state as an enabler and guarantor is not one shared by even One Nation Tories. I want the state interfering in the market by, for example, insisting all companies that get money from the state for services provided pay a living wage; and much more tightly regulating privately-owned public utilities. I am also totally opposed to selling off housing association properties and in favour of higher taxes for the best off. But, that said, I am a capitalist and I believe strongly in the profit motive, so there's a bit of me - probably a significant bit - that sees the world in the same way many Tories do. Put it this way, I get where Conservatism comes from. It's a coherent philosophy, but I start from a pisition - born of experience, no doubt - that the state is a good thing and should not be rolled back as a matter of principle.
That's all fair enough, and as you imply I wouldn't put the balance in quite the same place as you. However, that is the kind of grown-up debate we don't have in UK politics - instead, we have anti-Conservative prejudice which attributes malice to those who disagree with you about the means - and it's a powerful force because a lot of people are motivated by it.
(I'm still struggling a bit to see what you don't like about Labour, other perhaps than the competence of the present leadership. Its policy platform seems to match yours pretty closely).
I have no problem with trade unions, but I think they play a drstructive role in the Labour party and prevent many issues being properly debated. I don't think for a moment Labour is anti-business, but I don't think Labour understands it. I also have a big problem with Labour's approach to the NHS, which is probably strongly linked to my first point. And I hate the way so many Labour politicians embrace anti-free speech issues and initiatives. Finally, I'd like Labour to have the courage to rule out Trident and use the money more productively.
Tories obsession with the small state is utterly irrational. There is barely a single innovation or progress that didn't rely on the state to nurture.
And yet curiously the US, with a smaller than average state sector, accounts for a disproportionate amount of all the world's innovation of the last 50 years, and the socialist countries, almost none.
It's the left who are ideologically obsessed about the size of the state. The rest of us just want whatever works best.
To be clear, I don't actually think the Labour party are going anywhere (nor even the LDs just yet), though if they cannot recover in Scotland they have to be worried about Wales leaving their comforting embrace and then the southern problem becomes a lot more serious. The Tories have been in this position already, and been working to fix it (with minimal success it would seem), so are at least more used to it at least.
I guess you are one of those Tories who just see socialists as inferior in very conceivable way
I'm just bemused by the myth that has been created over Attlee by the left. There were some good things, but overall it was a disaster of a government, and India was unquestionably one of the most appalling failures:
In the riots which preceded the partition in the Punjab region, between 200,000 to 500,000 people were killed in the retributive genocide. UNHCR estimates 14 million Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims were displaced during the partition; it was the largest mass migration in human history
Richard- there are very few Parliamentarians who reach the pantheons, the greats, the Beatles and BeachBoys, the Dylans and Doors of the post war era.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
The dislike may (or may not) be irrational (I think it has some basis, there are too many Tories who DO sneer); either way you can neutralise this significant problem quite easily by getting more ordinary people into top Tory positions, especially the leadership. Enough Etonians already..
I think the Russell Brand stuff and rent cap policy is an acknowledgement by Labour that they haven't been able to squeeze the Green vote as much as they thought they could during this campaign so far. They're down from their surge but are still causing damage to Labour at 5%.
Labour have spent a fortune with a Hollywood director to big up Miliband for a soft focus PPB. A director famous for a film about a man who had forgotten where he was from and did not know where he was going. Apt.
People are really commenting on an estimated, provisional, 2 parts in a 1000 GDP figure?
Blimey.
That's what happens when you create a 'cult of growth' and make GDP an economic virility symbol.
Of course we could talk about other economic data - government borrowing, off balance sheet debts, industrial production, productivity, the current account balance etc.
But perhaps its best for the government if we talk about GDP.
GDP is important, but the difference between 0.3% and 0.5% in the first estimate of a quarter's figure is not important.
But yes, you are right, lots of other figures are also important, most notably unemployment, the deficit, and public vs private sector employment. Household deleveraging continues to be going gently in the right direction. House prices are in the Goldilocks zone - not too hot, not too cold.
The deficit remains too high, but is coming down, probably as fast as could reasonably be expected without causing other major disruptions and increasing unemployment.
The current account balance in foreign trade remains dire.
Productivity will I think correct itself - I'm less worried about that.
GDP has been bigged up to such an extent that variations in it are now overemphasised.
Its possible that today's GDP data will be the equivalent of the 1970 trade data which supposedly influenced the election.
Incidentally can you remember when GDP became regarded as so important - I suspect it must have been when Brown was Chancellor.
I think real earnings increases are an undervalued figure - ultimately people work to earn money not for the joy of working.
As for household deleveraging the OBR predicts a massive increase will happen - I think they're wrong there.
House prices are probably okay for much of the country, the poorer parts that is, but certainly excessive in metropolitan areas and most of southern England.
Tories obsession with the small state is utterly irrational. There is barely a single innovation or progress that didn't rely on the state to nurture.
And yet curiously the US, with a smaller than average state sector, accounts for a disproportionate amount of all the world's innovation of the last 50 years, and the socialist countries, almost none.
It's the left who are ideologically obsessed about the size of the state. The rest of us just want whatever works best.
The US has the biggest defence budget, something that (together with state funded CERN) we're benefit ing from now.
To conclude tonight, everything is static as usual. Also I agree with this:
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 3h3 hours ago Miliband-Brand interview will be seen by more people than watch C4N or Newsnight...more importantly, people who would prob not watch either.
Goodnight.
So the lefty media is proclaiming that 'Ed's played a blinder'. Oh dear. This rarely ends well.
Nick Clegg has been on the Last Leg on a number occasions, played along and that is watched by a lot more than Newsnight (saying that I think there are plenty of channels on twitch that have more viewers than an episode of Newnsight these days) and is for the kidz..and it has done him errhhh no good at all.
Tories obsession with the small state is utterly irrational. There is barely a single innovation or progress that didn't rely on the state to nurture.
And yet curiously the US, with a smaller than average state sector, accounts for a disproportionate amount of all the world's innovation of the last 50 years, and the socialist countries, almost none.
It's the left who are ideologically obsessed about the size of the state. The rest of us just want whatever works best.
This is the same as Obama's "You didn't build that". Look how badly that went down over here.
Richard- there are very few Parliamentarians who reach the pantheons, the greats, the Beatles and BeachBoys, the Dylans and Doors of the post war era.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
Parliamentarians is a special category. An MP can be a great parliamentarian but rubbish in government or as a party leader (Benn, Foot, Cook, Powell).
Of current or recent MPs, Hague certainly counts as a great parliamentarian (I'll leave history to decide how good he was in government).
So one aspect that none of the parties have even acknowledged is extortionate agency fees on both landlords and tenants. Both parties need to really do something about it, my sister is just about to move into a bigger flat and she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord. What would really happen if Labour or the Tories just put a 5% limit on charges to the landlord and made it a maximum of £100 chargeable to the tenant on a per property basis. The only losers would be the estate agents and who really gives a shit about the likes of Foxtons.
To conclude tonight, everything is static as usual. Also I agree with this:
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 3h3 hours ago Miliband-Brand interview will be seen by more people than watch C4N or Newsnight...more importantly, people who would prob not watch either.
Goodnight.
So the lefty media is proclaiming that 'Ed's played a blinder'. Oh dear. This rarely ends well.
Nick Clegg has been on the Last Leg on a number occasions, played along and that is watched by a lot more than Newsnight (saying that I think there are plenty of channels on twitch that have more viewers than an episode of Newnsight these days) and is for the kidz..and it has done him errhhh no good at all.
Who is Nick Clegg ?
Wasn't he the character in Big Brother 7? No, no the Voice. I think I have it, did he get to the Masterchef semis? I give up. MY mind is a blank- I know I should know, but who is Nick Clegg?
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (12) Norwich South, Bradford East, Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Burnley, Birmingham Yardley, Redcar, Hornsey & Wood Green, Cardiff Central, Bermondsey, Bristol West, Leeds North West
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (20) Solihull, Mid Dorset, Wells, St Austell & Newquay, Somerton & Frome, St Ives, Chippenham, Cheadle, North Cornwall, Taunton Deane, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Torbay, Cheltenham, Brecon & Radnorshire, North Devon, Portsmouth South, Kingston & Surbiton, Hazel Grove, Yeovil, Bath
SNP GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (8) East Dunbartonshire, Argyll & Bute, Aberdeenshire West, Edinburgh West, Gordon, Inverness, North East Fife, Ross Skye & Lochaber
I think the Russell Brand stuff and rent cap policy is an acknowledgement by Labour that they haven't been able to squeeze the Green vote as much as they thought they could during this campaign so far. They're down from their surge but are still causing damage to Labour at 5%.
One thing it has done...and I presume on purpose...what is all the talk about today, MiliBrand...what will all the talk be about tomorrow...MiliBrand...the fact it has being dragged out over two days for one interview is rather telling. It doesn't take 2 days to edit a video together, the media outlets do them in no time.
If it had been an interview with [insert random radio station or webpage] there would be been a brief mention somewhere in the papers and that is about it. But the various sections of the media go loco over Brand, the lefties fawn over him as some sort of messiah of revoltionary politics and the Daily Mail get more uptight than when an Estonian turned up to install the new IT system.
Then Thursday is QT.
It has taken Labour / SNP issue off the media cycle.
I should hope we want the same outcomes. But I suspect my view of the state as an enabler and guarantor is not one shared by even One Nation Tories. I want the state interfering in the market by, for example, insisting all companies that get money from the state for services provided pay a living wage; and much more tightly regulating privately-owned public utilities. I am also totally opposed to selling off housing association properties and in favour of higher taxes for the best off. But, that said, I am a capitalist and I believe strongly in the profit motive, so there's a bit of me - probably a significant bit - that sees the world in the same way many Tories do. Put it this way, I get where Conservatism comes from. It's a coherent philosophy, but I start from a pisition - born of experience, no doubt - that the state is a good thing and should not be rolled back as a matter of principle.
That's all fair enough, and as you imply I wouldn't put the balance in quite the same place as you. However, that is the kind of grown-up debate we don't have in UK politics - instead, we have anti-Conservative prejudice which attributes malice to those who disagree with you about the means - and it's a powerful force because a lot of people are motivated by it.
(I'm still struggling a bit to see what you don't like about Labour, other perhaps than the competence of the present leadership. Its policy platform seems to match yours pretty closely).
But Tories also need to accept that this anti-Tory sentiment, fuelled by class envy and hatred, is not going away.
The dislike may (or may not) be irrational (I think it has some basis, there are too many Tories who DO sneer); either way you can neutralise this significant problem quite easily by getting more ordinary people into top Tory positions, especially the leadership. Enough Etonians already.
Thatcher the grocer's daughter was, notably, your most successful leader in 100 years. Major the Brixton boy got the most votes. Rinse and repeat.
Posh is okay if they also have empathy to people different to themselves and understand that loyalty and responsbility is a two way process.
Which is what many of the old 'military posh' had and knew.
But what the PPE gang don't - this applies to posh Labour PPEorachy as well as the posh Conservative PPEocrachy.
she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord..
Seems a very reasonable fee - in fact I'm surprised it's not more, but it is a very competitive business.
Of course fees will go up if there's more regulation and red tape. It's already bad enough - the pitfalls of being a landlord are huge.
she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord..
Seems a very reasonable fee - in fact I'm surprised it's not more, but it is a very competitive business.
Of course fees will go up if there's more regulation and red tape. It's already bad enough - the pitfalls of being a landlord are huge.
Nobody forces you to be a landlord. But many have no choice but to rent.
Richard- there are very few Parliamentarians who reach the pantheons, the greats, the Beatles and BeachBoys, the Dylans and Doors of the post war era.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
Parliamentarians is a special category. An MP can be a great parliamentarian but rubbish in government or as a party leader (Benn, Foot, Cook, Powell).
Of current or recent MPs, Hague certainly counts as a great parliamentarian (I'll leave history to decide how good he was in government).
Richard- I meant (obviously) Parliamentarians who genuinely had an impact on British life, not simply in the House. Hague's contribution to British life, aside from wearing a baseball cap, is his dismal 2001 campaign which kind of rules him out. Dennis Skinner is a great Parliamentarian too, but I would hardly put him in the Pantheon.
Dennis Healey, maybe knocks at the door, Willie Whitelaw too, Gordon Brown, possibly or Keith Joseph.
Like movies and music, the majority of the best are well in the past.
Tories obsession with the small state is utterly irrational. There is barely a single innovation or progress that didn't rely on the state to nurture.
And yet curiously the US, with a smaller than average state sector, accounts for a disproportionate amount of all the world's innovation of the last 50 years, and the socialist countries, almost none.
It's the left who are ideologically obsessed about the size of the state. The rest of us just want whatever works best.
God bless the patent system - a state-granted, time-limited right to exclude.
In the US almost all the big innovation from life sciencrs through to the internet has come out of federally-funded university an research institution labs.
Richard- I meant (obviously) Parliamentarians who genuinely had an impact on British life, not simply in the House.
Oh, in that case you have to include Cameron and Osborne, and probably Gove and IDS as well. Of course no-one is going to claim Cameron is a great parliamentarian in the sense of dramatic speeches in the House.
No way the LibDems will hold Berwickshire, they will also lose Ceredigion. I think they will struggle in Sheffield Hallam and might even lose Cambridge.
Richard- there are very few Parliamentarians who reach the pantheons, the greats, the Beatles and BeachBoys, the Dylans and Doors of the post war era.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
Parliamentarians is a special category. An MP can be a great parliamentarian but rubbish in government or as a party leader (Benn, Foot, Cook, Powell).
Of current or recent MPs, Hague certainly counts as a great parliamentarian (I'll leave history to decide how good he was in government).
Richard- I meant (obviously) Parliamentarians who genuinely had an impact on British life, not simply in the House. Hague's contribution to British life, aside from wearing a baseball cap, is his dismal 2001 campaign which kind of rules him out. Dennis Skinner is a great Parliamentarian too, but I would hardly put him in the Pantheon.
Dennis Healey, maybe knocks at the door, Willie Whitelaw too, Gordon Brown, possibly or Keith Joseph.
Like movies and music, the majority of the best are well in the past.
The MP with the single biggest impact on Britain after 1950 was TED Heath. Roy Jenkins deserves note if only for or legalising homosexuality.
So one aspect that none of the parties have even acknowledged is extortionate agency fees on both landlords and tenants. Both parties need to really do something about it, my sister is just about to move into a bigger flat and she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord. What would really happen if Labour or the Tories just put a 5% limit on charges to the landlord and made it a maximum of £100 chargeable to the tenant on a per property basis. The only losers would be the estate agents and who really gives a shit about the likes of Foxtons.
One can and should say the same about estate agents. Why should they pocket several grand just for sticking some details on Rightmove? If the market were working properly, other providers would move in and drastically cut fees. It hasn't happened though for whatever reason so a shove to kick-start it might be in order.
In the US almost all the big innovation from life sciencrs through to the internet has come out of federally-funded university an research institution labs.
Yes, in close collaboration with the private sector, with evil venture capitalists trying to make a fortune from pimping shares, and with the entrepreneurs allowed to become - if they succeed - staggeringly rich with relatively low taxation.
The small state in action (which doesn't mean no state involvement at all, of course), and the exact opposite of the dead hand of nationalised behemoths, with 'profit' a dirty word, so beloved of Labour (apart from a brief period of sanity on that point under Blair).
Jesus H Christ...Twitter are losing even more money this year than last.
Lost a staggering $162 million in the first 3 months of this year (which is up from same period last year where they ONLY lost $132m).
I have an idea for a business...I am going to set on fire $1 million a day (KLM styley)...it will lose you less than twitter.
They have $450 million a quarter revenue and still losing $150 million, so like very rough calcs they are burning through $200 million A MONTH on running the business.
Sorry to come back again, but the revisionist view of history is tedious.
After WW2,Trueman put pressure on the UK government to end what he saw as the evil of empire. The pressure for Independence in India was already high, so Mountbatten was made Viceroy and told to deal with it. Attlee was at the other side of a world with absolutely none of the modern telecommunications systems - wireless was patchy, telegraph was still being repaired and as for sending mail by flying boat or plane taking anything up to 48 hours to travel one way, 24 hours for a response with another trip back which made an effective week.
No, I am not blaming Mountbatten, or Nehru or even Jinna for the massacres. I believe that they acted in good faith but the pressures from the masses for some form of resolution lead to a festering resentment from and between the different religious and ethnic groups for nearly 300 years.
Something had to pop, unfortunately the explosion was Krakatoan.
As for Palestine, the British ended up fighting the Hagganah underground with a large US Jewish and Zionist movement putting pressure on the US administration to get the British out.
I also believe that the British leaving Palestine as they did, indirectly lead to the insurgencies in Cyprus, Malaysia, Burma and Indonesia.
So one aspect that none of the parties have even acknowledged is extortionate agency fees on both landlords and tenants. Both parties need to really do something about it, my sister is just about to move into a bigger flat and she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord. What would really happen if Labour or the Tories just put a 5% limit on charges to the landlord and made it a maximum of £100 chargeable to the tenant on a per property basis. The only losers would be the estate agents and who really gives a shit about the likes of Foxtons.
Max- I have some tenancies, and when I change or renew contracts I tell the agency not to charge the tenant. I pay 10% a month for them to manage the contract which I am happy with. If the agency protests, I simply say I will use a different agency. That usually settles it.
Estate agents charging exorbitant fees for ten minutes work is a joke. I feel so sorry for people in the rented sector who are at the mercy of all these shenanigans to make a quick buck.
No way the LibDems will hold Berwickshire, they will also lose Ceredigion. I think they will struggle in Sheffield Hallam and might even lose Cambridge.
Jesus H Christ...Twitter are losing even more money this year than last.
Lost a staggering $162 million in the first 3 months of this year (which is up from same period last year where they ONLY lost $132m).
I have an idea for a business...I am going to set on fire $1 million a day (KLM styley)...it will lose you less than twitter.
They have $450 million a quarter revenue and still losing $150 million, so like very rough calcs they are burning through $200 million A MONTH on running the business.
Will doing this bring you 100 million active users?
In the US almost all the big innovation from life sciencrs through to the internet has come out of federally-funded university an research institution labs.
Yes, in close collaboration with the private sector, with evil venture capitalists trying to make a fortune from pimping shares, and with the entrepreneurs allowed to become - if they succeed - staggeringly rich with relatively low taxation.
The small state in action (which doesn't mean no state involvement at all, of course), and the exact opposite of the dead hand of nationalised behemoths, with 'profit' a dirty word, so beloved of Labour (apart from a brief period of sanity on that point under Blair).
Yep, university R&D flourished in the Blair years. It was a golden time. Agree about VCs. They can be a powerful force for good. And people making money from coming up with great ideas and bringing them to market should be celebrated to the end of days.
Richard- there are very few Parliamentarians who reach the pantheons, the greats, the Beatles and BeachBoys, the Dylans and Doors of the post war era.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
Parliamentarians is a special category. An MP can be a great parliamentarian but rubbish in government or as a party leader (Benn, Foot, Cook, Powell).
Of current or recent MPs, Hague certainly counts as a great parliamentarian (I'll leave history to decide how good he was in government).
Richard- I meant (obviously) Parliamentarians who genuinely had an impact on British life, not simply in the House. Hague's contribution to British life, aside from wearing a baseball cap, is his dismal 2001 campaign which kind of rules him out. Dennis Skinner is a great Parliamentarian too, but I would hardly put him in the Pantheon.
Dennis Healey, maybe knocks at the door, Willie Whitelaw too, Gordon Brown, possibly or Keith Joseph.
Like movies and music, the majority of the best are well in the past.
The MP with the single biggest impact on Britain after 1950 was TED Heath. Roy Jenkins deserves note if only for or legalising homosexuality.
If you read up thread I put Heath firmly in the top ten. Jenkins, knocks on the door for sure. A great Home Secretary, and why Willie Whitelaw deserves a mention. Ken Clarke too is there or there abouts.
But, as said, like movies we have to look a long time in the past to see the greats.
That's all fair enough, and as you imply I wouldn't put the balance in quite the same place as you. However, that is the kind of grown-up debate we don't have in UK politics - instead, we have anti-Conservative prejudice which attributes malice to those who disagree with you about the means - and it's a powerful force because a lot of people are motivated by it.
(I'm still struggling a bit to see what you don't like about Labour, other perhaps than the competence of the present leadership. Its policy platform seems to match yours pretty closely).
But Tories also need to accept that this anti-Tory sentiment, fuelled by class envy and hatred, is not going away.
The dislike may (or may not) be irrational (I think it has some basis, there are too many Tories who DO sneer); either way you can neutralise this significant problem quite easily by getting more ordinary people into top Tory positions, especially the leadership. Enough Etonians already.
Thatcher the grocer's daughter was, notably, your most successful leader in 100 years. Major the Brixton boy got the most votes. Rinse and repeat.
Posh is okay if they also have empathy to people different to themselves and understand that loyalty and responsbility is a two way process.
Which is what many of the old 'military posh' had and knew.
But what the PPE gang don't - this applies to posh Labour PPEorachy as well as the posh Conservative PPEocrachy.
Ruth Davidson would be an ideal leader for the Tories. Wildly unexpected, lesbian, Scottish!!, ordinary, eloquent, passionate. She would totally outflank Labour.
PS she is probably a bit young right now, tho. So maybe next leader-but-one.
Wrong battlefield. Conservative governments aren't made in Scotland.
The Conservatives need a leader from the midlands.
So one aspect that none of the parties have even acknowledged is extortionate agency fees on both landlords and tenants. Both parties need to really do something about it, my sister is just about to move into a bigger flat and she was just telling me that they have to pay about £500 for all the fees put together and then they also collect 9-11% of the gross from the landlord. What would really happen if Labour or the Tories just put a 5% limit on charges to the landlord and made it a maximum of £100 chargeable to the tenant on a per property basis. The only losers would be the estate agents and who really gives a shit about the likes of Foxtons.
Max- I have some tenancies, and when I change or renew contracts I tell the agency not to charge the tenant. I pay 10% a month for them to manage the contract which I am happy with. If the agency protests, I simply say I will use a different agency. That usually settles it.
Estate agents charging exorbitant fees for ten minutes work is a joke. I feel so sorry for people in the rented sector who are at the mercy of all these shenanigans to make a quick buck.
You need to have competition in the real estate market - for example here on home sales the standard commission is 7%. But there are folks who undercut that such as.......
Jesus H Christ...Twitter are losing even more money this year than last.
Lost a staggering $162 million in the first 3 months of this year (which is up from same period last year where they ONLY lost $132m).
I have an idea for a business...I am going to set on fire $1 million a day (KLM styley)...it will lose you less than twitter.
They have $450 million a quarter revenue and still losing $150 million, so like very rough calcs they are burning through $200 million A MONTH on running the business.
Will doing this bring you 100 million active users?
I bet WhatsApp founders just look on and chuckle....800 million users, zero spent on advertising, profitable pretty much straight away, sold to Facebook for $22 bn...job done.
I also of course meant to say KLF, not KLM (freudian slip, as I was looking at some flights).
Max- I have some tenancies, and when I change or renew contracts I tell the agency not to charge the tenant. I pay 10% a month for them to manage the contract which I am happy with. If the agency protests, I simply say I will use a different agency. That usually settles it.
Estate agents charging exorbitant fees for ten minutes work is a joke. I feel so sorry for people in the rented sector who are at the mercy of all these shenanigans to make a quick buck.
It really is not that difficult to do your own paperwork if you are granting assured shorthold tenancies under the Housing Act 1988.
Yes, LibDem support got overestimated grossly last time round and they're again being overestimated this time round. I don't think the average voter knows what they stand for besides getting in bed with whoever has the most votes.
Their campaign has been poor, the brand is damaged. I did a survey that showed that they supposedly came closest to my values but I would never vote for these clowns.
I would have agreed with you, and I don't understand why anyone would be that surprised at this news in the run up to a closely contested GE. They do tend to have a habit of creating uncertainty which is bound to have effected investment until the result is known.
Noticeably, PBTories are not talking about the economy. Normally, they are all experts.
I'm quire proud of the fact I mentioned last week that the first quarter figures would be released today with the potential for a slowdown which met with universal 'it'll be solid growth, nothing to see here, move on' from the experts.
Max- I have some tenancies, and when I change or renew contracts I tell the agency not to charge the tenant. I pay 10% a month for them to manage the contract which I am happy with. If the agency protests, I simply say I will use a different agency. That usually settles it.
Estate agents charging exorbitant fees for ten minutes work is a joke. I feel so sorry for people in the rented sector who are at the mercy of all these shenanigans to make a quick buck.
It really is not that difficult to do your own paperwork if you are granting assured shorthold tenancies under the Housing Act 1988.
Exactly. Do all my own. Have a 98.5% of maximum rent recovery over 13 years, including voids. Only had to evict one. Did that myself too, and that process has got a little easier in the past year, in any case.
JOKE ALERT Nick Clegg wants the LibDems to be "the heart" in a coalition with the Conservatives or "the brain" in a coalition with Labour.
In fact, the Conservatives and Labour are much of the same, like 2 cheeks of the same bossom, with the LibDems squarely in the middle.
Yup. It would've always been a difficult election for the LibDems considering the past few years, but they made it ten times worse by selecting such incredibly bland themes for their campaign. They're just not saying anything interesting or distinctive which can compete in media coverage with the SNP and UKIP who, like them or them or loathe them, are saying interesting things.
I mean what utter utter nonsense. You don't need to create a law to make it illegal for the same government making the law not to raise taxes for the period of that government, you just don't do it while you are in power.
Besides, if the shit hits the fan, you repeal it and raise taxes anyway.
In the US almost all the big innovation from life sciencrs through to the internet has come out of federally-funded university an research institution labs.
Jesus H Christ...Twitter are losing even more money this year than last.
Lost a staggering $162 million in the first 3 months of this year (which is up from same period last year where they ONLY lost $132m).
I have an idea for a business...I am going to set on fire $1 million a day (KLM styley)...it will lose you less than twitter.
It takes a special skill to lose so much money from such a powerful, successful social medium as Twitter.
Just look at our discourse today: dominated by tweets and retweets. No one mentions Facebook.
Twitter is hugely influential. The owners should be minting it. Inept.
They should...as you say nobody mentioning Facebook,
"The social networking giant said profit in the first quarter of 2015 was $512m (£341m), down 20% on a year earlier."
but even though profits down...not sure they are going to run out of money quite yet when making $500m a quarter PROFIT.
Twitter is the "hot" thing and somehow they are burning at an ever faster rate.
My bad. Tired eyes. So Twitter is still making feckloads of profit, just not as much.
Makes sense. It really is a lot more diverting and influential than Facebook, but Facebook has a hegemonic grip on social life which is not going away.
But I am going away. Knackered. Schlaft gut.
No.....Facebook is still making boat loads of money, twitter is burning more money than ever and isn't even close to breaking even (let along a profit).
She'd be a fantastic tory leader - but I doubt she'd want the job. At least not yet.
Also, the tory party need another ten years or so for the old guard to die off before the membership would accept a socially liberal, openly gay scottish woman.
I expect the next leader will be a dull, grey, boringly ordinary & safely europhobic, rightwinger.
JOKE ALERT Nick Clegg wants the LibDems to be "the heart" in a coalition with the Conservatives or "the brain" in a coalition with Labour.
In fact, the Conservatives and Labour are much of the same, like 2 cheeks of the same bossom, with the LibDems squarely in the middle.
Yup. It would've always been a difficult election for the LibDems considering the past few years, but they made it ten times worse by selecting such incredibly bland themes for their campaign. They're just not saying anything interesting or distinctive which can compete in media coverage with the SNP and UKIP who, like them or them or loathe them, are saying interesting things.
SNP - No deal with the Tories, we'll make Labour even more Labour. More power for Scotland Plaid - A strong voice for Wales. DUP - Show me the money. Conservatives - Confident choice to avoid coalition of chaos Labour - More austerity, but not nasty Tory austerity. Lib Dems - Follow us down the yellow brick road, don't turn the car left or right !
A mother saw on TV her son was involved in the riot, looked for and found him, repeatedly hit him with her hands and beat the living shit out of him in the middle of the street on live TV. Eventually she carted him off home. She has won praise for being a responsible parent and authority figure with her son. It has been shown all day.
This got the network talking heads pondering if missing fathers and black family breakdown could be a major factor in these riots.
Some stats on both CNN and Fox thanks to the dvr - Baltimore is 63% black, yet 89% of those in jail are black. Much of this is mandatory drug stuff.
Nationwide 67% of black kids grow up in a single parent household, 25% of whites, Asian 16%, hispanic 42%.
2/3 of black kids have no male authority figure in their lives.
It is at least food for thought - how to fix the structure of the black family. Obama made it one of his key objectives some years back, and it is surely not a quick fix.
I mean what utter utter nonsense. You don't need to create a law to make it illegal for the same government making the law not to raise taxes for the period of that government, you just don't do it while you are in power.
Besides, if the shit hits the fan, you repeal it and raise taxes anyway.
Unconstitutional bollocks. It is a cardinal constitutional principle that the charge to income tax and the rates thereof are set annually by Parliament. If Cameron's proposal were adopted, would it also be proper to charge income tax and set the annual rates for an entire Parliament, or how about for the life of the Sovereign? This is madness. It is unsurprising from a government which introduced two wholly unconstitutional administrative powers of taxation in five years.
The Clinton Foundation and campaign is facing ever more investigation and examination
This list of donors to the Clinton foundation who lobbied State matters because it gives a sense of just how common it was for influence-seekers to give to the Clinton Foundation, and exactly which ones did.
A mother saw on TV her son was involved in the riot, looked for and found him, repeatedly hit him with her hands and beat the living shit out of him in the middle of the street on live TV. Eventually she carted him off home. She has won praise for being a responsible parent and authority figure with her son. It has been shown all day.
This got the network talking heads pondering if missing fathers and black family breakdown could be a major factor in these riots.
Some stats on both CNN and Fox thanks to the dvr - Baltimore is 63% black, yet 89% of those in jail are black. Much of this is mandatory drug stuff.
Nationwide 67% of black kids grow up in a single parent household, 25% of whites, Asian 16%, hispanic 42%.
2/3 of black kids have no male authority figure in their lives.
It is at least food for thought - how to fix the structure of the black family. Obama made it one of his key objectives some years back, and it is surely not a quick fix.
Stop putting people in jail for drugs.
Yup - I think we're at that point, if not past it. We've had the 'war on drugs' for decades, spent billions on it, without much result.
Maybe Colorado and Washington state have it right - legalize and tax it.
That alone isn't going to fix the black family breakdown, but it wouldn't hurt.
I see Australia is in uproar because Indonesia has executed 8 people, two of them Australians.
Meanwhile its 'full steam ahead' on a trade deal with China, which executes 7 people a day
To try and smuggle illegal drugs into Indonesia - of all countries - has an inevitable result if they catch you. If you attempt to do so, you deserve what happens. Whether I agree with it is not the issue - that is the situation.
I see Australia is in uproar because Indonesia has executed 8 people, two of them Australians.
Meanwhile its 'full steam ahead' on a trade deal with China, which executes 7 people a day
To try and smuggle illegal drugs into Indonesia - of all countries - has an inevitable result if they catch you. If you attempt to do so, you deserve what happens. Whether I agree with it is not the issue - that is the situation.
Indonesia has it right. The penalty for dealers in death is death...
I see Australia is in uproar because Indonesia has executed 8 people, two of them Australians.
Meanwhile its 'full steam ahead' on a trade deal with China, which executes 7 people a day
To try and smuggle illegal drugs into Indonesia - of all countries - has an inevitable result if they catch you. If you attempt to do so, you deserve what happens. Whether I agree with it is not the issue - that is the situation.
Indonesia has it right. The penalty for dealers in death is death...
Indeed, they are entitled to pass whatever laws they deem appropriate.
Indonesia has it right. The penalty for dealers in death is death...
If you apply that logic, the directors of alcohol and tobacco companies would be liable to capital punishment.
It's not about logic. For historical reasons, those potentially harmful substances are legal, although the tendency now is for increasingly stricter control.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
She'd be a fantastic tory leader - but I doubt she'd want the job. At least not yet.
Also, the tory party need another ten years or so for the old guard to die off before the membership would accept a socially liberal, openly gay scottish woman.
I expect the next leader will be a dull, grey, boringly ordinary & safely europhobic, rightwinger.
Philip Hammond or Theresa May, probably.
She would need to find a seat at Westminster which might be tricky considering the SNP ascendancy.Unless she went for a seat in England somewhere
Alastair Campbell has been a must follow on twitter in recent weeks. If you had any doubts about which parts of the Conservative GE campaign strategy are really hitting home hard, and more importantly hurting Ed Miliband and the Labour party campaign. Just look to Alastair Campbell's twitter feed and media appearances where he vociferously denounces and criticises these aspects of the Conservative campaign. Its a complete give away.
She'd be a fantastic tory leader - but I doubt she'd want the job. At least not yet.
Also, the tory party need another ten years or so for the old guard to die off before the membership would accept a socially liberal, openly gay scottish woman.
I expect the next leader will be a dull, grey, boringly ordinary & safely europhobic, rightwinger.
Philip Hammond or Theresa May, probably.
The Tory Party had a woman PM a generation ago. Not exactly gone down badly with the party as a never again. The Tory Party elected Cameron as a social liberal. As much as some act on mock horror that he's been socially liberal, it's what we overwhelmingly voted for. So only the openly gay, or the fact it's altogether. It wouldn't shock me to have the first openly gay PM to be a Tory just like the first of much else has been.
The big problem sadly is Scottish not any of your adjectives. Until the WLQ is addressed I think PM's should and will be English for the foreseeable future.
It's not about logic. For historical reasons, those potentially harmful substances are legal, although the tendency now is for increasingly stricter control.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
Historically all the harmful substances scheduled to MDA 1971 were legal. The question is whether there was a principled basis for their criminalisation. In any event, when the exceptions are broad enough, few reasonable men slavishly adhere to the rule. The real issue is why should any responsibility, ethical, legal or otherwise, attach to someone who sells someone a dangerous product, when the decision to self-administer it is the free voluntary and informed decision of the vendee?
It's not about logic. For historical reasons, those potentially harmful substances are legal, although the tendency now is for increasingly stricter control.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
Historically all the harmful substances scheduled to MDA 1971 were legal. The question is whether there was a principled basis for their criminalisation. In any event, when the exceptions are broad enough, few reasonable men slavishly adhere to the rule. The real issue is why should any responsibility, ethical, legal or otherwise, attach to someone who sells someone a dangerous product, when the decision to self-administer it is the free voluntary and informed decision of the vendee?
Because it may not be free, voluntary and informed. qv "addict". Because it is not in the public interest for people to experiment with dangerous substances, when it is the taxpayer who picks up the tab for those who miscalculate.
It's not about logic. For historical reasons, those potentially harmful substances are legal, although the tendency now is for increasingly stricter control.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
Historically all the harmful substances scheduled to MDA 1971 were legal. The question is whether there was a principled basis for their criminalisation. In any event, when the exceptions are broad enough, few reasonable men slavishly adhere to the rule. The real issue is why should any responsibility, ethical, legal or otherwise, attach to someone who sells someone a dangerous product, when the decision to self-administer it is the free voluntary and informed decision of the vendee?
Because it may not be free, voluntary and informed. qv "addict". Because it is not in the public interest for people to experiment with dangerous substances, when it is the taxpayer who picks up the tab for those who miscalculate.
The second point doesn't make sense because criminalization is expensive, whereas taxation is lucrative.
Totally agree Sean, and so does David Cameron who suggested her as a possible contender in the future. I first spotted Ruth Davidson when she was just a candidate for the last Holyrood elections, and I had the same reaction I did when I first saw David Cameron as Conservative Shadow Education Minister way back when Michael Howard was party Leader. I backed both Cameron and Davidson in their perspective Leadership contests, and Ruth has exceeded all my expectations.
Ruth is feisty, passionate and speaks her mind even if it means being at odds with the Westminster party. But above all, she always turns up at any interview or debate incredible well briefed and extremely knowledgeable on all the issues discussed. You always get far more honesty and facts from Ruth, where as Jim Murphy will tend to lean back and play it safe by relying on the usual spin and soundbites in true New Labour tradition. Sturgeon on the other hand, just doles out her usual bingo card of fantasy soundbites and policy promises.
I have a wee punt on Ruth as next Conservative Leader, but I suspect she has more chance of becoming FM as Holyrood seems to be where her heart lies. I also think that she would comfortable manage to win a FPTP constituency rather than having to rely on Holyrood List next time around if she goes down that route.
Anecdote alert! My oldest and youngest lads were at the BBC Scotland Leadership debate held at Aberdeen University recently, and the oldest lad got his brother to take his picture with Ruth Davidson. As they were stood chatting, another member of the audience, a lassie active in another party ran up to Ruth and told her that she really wished she could vote Conservative, just so she could vote for her!!
"In these locations, most people were not giving any thought to the Conservatives. Even so, the groups had a very good opinion of Ruth Davidson, even though (they sympathised) she was “flogging a dead horse.” “In the debates she was strong. She gave as good as she got from Nicola Sturgeon and it was good to see the two of them”; “She excellent – genuine and conducts herself well. But I could never vote for her policies”; “The thing about her is that she’s true to what she believes in, so I respect her. Whereas with Jim Murphy, you never really know.”"
Ruth Davidson would be an ideal leader for the Tories. Wildly unexpected, lesbian, Scottish!!, ordinary, eloquent, passionate. She would totally outflank Labour.
PS she is probably a bit young right now, tho. So maybe next leader-but-one.
One of the least useful election forecasting techniques going. If winning the poster war meant anything I'd never have been involved in a losing campaign in my life.
It's not about logic. For historical reasons, those potentially harmful substances are legal, although the tendency now is for increasingly stricter control.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
Historically all the harmful substances scheduled to MDA 1971 were legal. The question is whether there was a principled basis for their criminalisation. In any event, when the exceptions are broad enough, few reasonable men slavishly adhere to the rule. The real issue is why should any responsibility, ethical, legal or otherwise, attach to someone who sells someone a dangerous product, when the decision to self-administer it is the free voluntary and informed decision of the vendee?
Legalise all drugs except cocaine.
Use the income from duty for programs to educate people on the effects (social, physical, mental etc), of all harmful substances included those that would be class A drugs if invented today i.e alcohol and nicotine.
Stop bad people who would not think twice about taking another persons life from having the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy, prospering from a war on drugs that is not working.
Comments
(I'm still struggling a bit to see what you don't like about Labour, other perhaps than the competence of the present leadership. Its policy platform seems to match yours pretty closely).
It's the left who are ideologically obsessed about the size of the state. The rest of us just want whatever works best.
Night all.
Atlee and Bevan, MacMillan, Wilson, Powell, Benn, Heath, Thatcher, Heseltine, Blair- my top ten off the top of my head. 5 Tories, 5 Labour. The only newbie knocking at this door of the greats is possibly Salmond.
Apt.
Its possible that today's GDP data will be the equivalent of the 1970 trade data which supposedly influenced the election.
Incidentally can you remember when GDP became regarded as so important - I suspect it must have been when Brown was Chancellor.
I think real earnings increases are an undervalued figure - ultimately people work to earn money not for the joy of working.
As for household deleveraging the OBR predicts a massive increase will happen - I think they're wrong there.
House prices are probably okay for much of the country, the poorer parts that is, but certainly excessive in metropolitan areas and most of southern England.
Of current or recent MPs, Hague certainly counts as a great parliamentarian (I'll leave history to decide how good he was in government).
Starting with predictions of Lib Dem seats
LIB DEM HOLDS (17)
Sutton & Cheam, Eastbourne, Eastleigh, Carshalton & Wallington, Berwickshire, Cambridge, Southport, Thornbury & Yate, Colchester, Lewes, Caithness, Twickenham, Ceredigion, North Norfolk, Westmorland & Lonsdale, Sheffield Hallam (narrowly), Orkney & Shetland
LABOUR GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (12)
Norwich South, Bradford East, Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Burnley, Birmingham Yardley, Redcar, Hornsey & Wood Green, Cardiff Central, Bermondsey, Bristol West, Leeds North West
TORY GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (20)
Solihull, Mid Dorset, Wells, St Austell & Newquay, Somerton & Frome, St Ives, Chippenham, Cheadle, North Cornwall, Taunton Deane, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Torbay, Cheltenham, Brecon & Radnorshire, North Devon, Portsmouth South, Kingston & Surbiton, Hazel Grove, Yeovil, Bath
SNP GAINS FROM LIB DEMS (8)
East Dunbartonshire, Argyll & Bute, Aberdeenshire West, Edinburgh West, Gordon, Inverness, North East Fife, Ross Skye & Lochaber
If it had been an interview with [insert random radio station or webpage] there would be been a brief mention somewhere in the papers and that is about it. But the various sections of the media go loco over Brand, the lefties fawn over him as some sort of messiah of revoltionary politics and the Daily Mail get more uptight than when an Estonian turned up to install the new IT system.
Then Thursday is QT.
It has taken Labour / SNP issue off the media cycle.
Then just a week to go.
Which is what many of the old 'military posh' had and knew.
But what the PPE gang don't - this applies to posh Labour PPEorachy as well as the posh Conservative PPEocrachy.
Of course fees will go up if there's more regulation and red tape. It's already bad enough - the pitfalls of being a landlord are huge.
Agencies are an utter blight.
Dennis Skinner is a great Parliamentarian too, but I would hardly put him in the Pantheon.
Dennis Healey, maybe knocks at the door, Willie Whitelaw too, Gordon Brown, possibly or Keith Joseph.
Like movies and music, the majority of the best are well in the past.
In the US almost all the big innovation from life sciencrs through to the internet has come out of federally-funded university an research institution labs.
Sutton & Cheam, Eastbourne, Eastleigh, Carshalton & Wallington, Berwickshire, Cambridge, Southport, Thornbury & Yate, Colchester, Lewes, Caithness, Twickenham, Ceredigion, North Norfolk, Westmorland & Lonsdale, Sheffield Hallam (narrowly), Orkney & Shetland
No way the LibDems will hold Berwickshire, they will also lose Ceredigion. I think they will struggle in Sheffield Hallam and might even lose Cambridge.
In 1979 there was a poll which put Labour narrowly ahead.
In 1983 the Alliance closed on Labour
In 1987 the Conservative lead dipped dangerously.
In 1992 three polls put Labour clear - leading to Kinnock's loss of control in Sheffield.
Even in 1997 there was a rogue poll which had the Labour lead under 10%.
The small state in action (which doesn't mean no state involvement at all, of course), and the exact opposite of the dead hand of nationalised behemoths, with 'profit' a dirty word, so beloved of Labour (apart from a brief period of sanity on that point under Blair).
Lost a staggering $162 million in the first 3 months of this year (which is up from same period last year where they ONLY lost $132m).
I have an idea for a business...I am going to set on fire $1 million a day (KLM styley)...it will lose you less than twitter.
They have $450 million a quarter revenue and still losing $150 million, so like very rough calcs they are burning through $200 million A MONTH on running the business.
After WW2,Trueman put pressure on the UK government to end what he saw as the evil of empire. The pressure for Independence in India was already high, so Mountbatten was made Viceroy and told to deal with it. Attlee was at the other side of a world with absolutely none of the modern telecommunications systems - wireless was patchy, telegraph was still being repaired and as for sending mail by flying boat or plane taking anything up to 48 hours to travel one way, 24 hours for a response with another trip back which made an effective week.
No, I am not blaming Mountbatten, or Nehru or even Jinna for the massacres. I believe that they acted in good faith but the pressures from the masses for some form of resolution lead to a festering resentment from and between the different religious and ethnic groups for nearly 300 years.
Something had to pop, unfortunately the explosion was Krakatoan.
As for Palestine, the British ended up fighting the Hagganah underground with a large US Jewish and Zionist movement putting pressure on the US administration to get the British out.
I also believe that the British leaving Palestine as they did, indirectly lead to the insurgencies in Cyprus, Malaysia, Burma and Indonesia.
Atul Hatwal in Labou Uncut - The Tories’ tartan scare was made in America by Jim Messina
YouTube - Conservative Election Campaign - 1992 comparison - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVsmEtOH50o&feature=youtu.be
Max- I have some tenancies, and when I change or renew contracts I tell the agency not to charge the tenant. I pay 10% a month for them to manage the contract which I am happy with. If the agency protests, I simply say I will use a different agency. That usually settles it.
Estate agents charging exorbitant fees for ten minutes work is a joke. I feel so sorry for people in the rented sector who are at the mercy of all these shenanigans to make a quick buck.
#SWwipeout
But, as said, like movies we have to look a long time in the past to see the greats.
The Conservatives need a leader from the midlands.
http://www.duffyrealtyofatlanta.com/index
I also of course meant to say KLF, not KLM (freudian slip, as I was looking at some flights).
In fact, the Conservatives and Labour are much of the same, like 2 cheeks of the same bossom, with the LibDems squarely in the middle.
"The social networking giant said profit in the first quarter of 2015 was $512m (£341m), down 20% on a year earlier."
but even though profits down...not sure they are going to run out of money quite yet when making $500m a quarter PROFIT.
Twitter is the "hot" thing and somehow they are burning at an ever faster rate.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-freddie-gray-sharpton-20150427-story.html
It has to be said - Baltimore PD has hardly been forthcoming on details of Freddie Gray's death in custody, and it is really troubling.
Money saved by not using an agent? Probably £65k.
A Tory government will introduce a law guaranteeing no rise in income tax rates, VAT or National Insurance before 2020, David Cameron will say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32506490
I mean what utter utter nonsense. You don't need to create a law to make it illegal for the same government making the law not to raise taxes for the period of that government, you just don't do it while you are in power.
Besides, if the shit hits the fan, you repeal it and raise taxes anyway.
Tracey Magee @Tracey_utv 4h4 hours ago
SDLP's Mark Durkan says his party will oppose a Conservative government #GE2015
How many MPs they'll have after the GE is another matter altogether, mind.
Agreed on Ruth Davidson.
She'd be a fantastic tory leader - but I doubt she'd want the job. At least not yet.
Also, the tory party need another ten years or so for the old guard to die off before the membership would accept a socially liberal, openly gay scottish woman.
I expect the next leader will be a dull, grey, boringly ordinary & safely europhobic, rightwinger.
Philip Hammond or Theresa May, probably.
http://www.betterforsheffield.co.uk
You'd barely know he's Labour - and Ed who?
Plaid - A strong voice for Wales.
DUP - Show me the money.
Conservatives - Confident choice to avoid coalition of chaos
Labour - More austerity, but not nasty Tory austerity.
Lib Dems - Follow us down the yellow brick road, don't turn the car left or right !
This list of donors to the Clinton foundation who lobbied State matters because it gives a sense of just how common it was for influence-seekers to give to the Clinton Foundation, and exactly which ones did.
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/28/8501643/Clinton-foundation-donors-State
'Presenting DISASTER (Danny's Inexplicably Shit Attempt at Simulating The Election Result)'
I hope you are right,I'm on the 11-20 seats and just in case it's a repeat of the Euro wipe out also 0 -10 seats.
Meanwhile its 'full steam ahead' on a trade deal with China, which executes 7 people a day
Maybe Colorado and Washington state have it right - legalize and tax it.
That alone isn't going to fix the black family breakdown, but it wouldn't hurt.
The fact they remain legal is not a ground to legalise yet more harmful substances.
The Tory Party elected Cameron as a social liberal. As much as some act on mock horror that he's been socially liberal, it's what we overwhelmingly voted for.
So only the openly gay, or the fact it's altogether. It wouldn't shock me to have the first openly gay PM to be a Tory just like the first of much else has been.
The big problem sadly is Scottish not any of your adjectives. Until the WLQ is addressed I think PM's should and will be English for the foreseeable future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxjCJxfECD8
Because it is not in the public interest for people to experiment with dangerous substances, when it is the taxpayer who picks up the tab for those who miscalculate.
Never seen so many posters and placards. If those households alone vote Lib Dem, then they Simon Hughes will have enough votes.
I quite like him, a proper lefty Lib Dem, who adapted well to coalition without getting his knickers in a twist.
I'd vote for him but I am a couple of miles down the road.
I can choose from Labour drone certain to win seat, or a number of candidates with no chance.
Seriously thinking of spoiling my paper.
Ruth is feisty, passionate and speaks her mind even if it means being at odds with the Westminster party. But above all, she always turns up at any interview or debate incredible well briefed and extremely knowledgeable on all the issues discussed. You always get far more honesty and facts from Ruth, where as Jim Murphy will tend to lean back and play it safe by relying on the usual spin and soundbites in true New Labour tradition. Sturgeon on the other hand, just doles out her usual bingo card of fantasy soundbites and policy promises.
I have a wee punt on Ruth as next Conservative Leader, but I suspect she has more chance of becoming FM as Holyrood seems to be where her heart lies. I also think that she would comfortable manage to win a FPTP constituency rather than having to rely on Holyrood List next time around if she goes down that route.
Anecdote alert! My oldest and youngest lads were at the BBC Scotland Leadership debate held at Aberdeen University recently, and the oldest lad got his brother to take his picture with Ruth Davidson. As they were stood chatting, another member of the audience, a lassie active in another party ran up to Ruth and told her that she really wished she could vote Conservative, just so she could vote for her!!
ConservativeHome - Lord Ashcroft: The Conservatives lead by six points in this week’s Ashcroft National Poll
"In these locations, most people were not giving any thought to the Conservatives. Even so, the groups had a very good opinion of Ruth Davidson, even though (they sympathised) she was “flogging a dead horse.” “In the debates she was strong. She gave as good as she got from Nicola Sturgeon and it was good to see the two of them”; “She excellent – genuine and conducts herself well. But I could never vote for her policies”; “The thing about her is that she’s true to what she believes in, so I respect her. Whereas with Jim Murphy, you never really know.”" Ruth Davidson would be an ideal leader for the Tories. Wildly unexpected, lesbian, Scottish!!, ordinary, eloquent, passionate. She would totally outflank Labour.
PS she is probably a bit young right now, tho. So maybe next leader-but-one.
Use the income from duty for programs to educate people on the effects (social, physical, mental etc), of all harmful substances included those that would be class A drugs if invented today i.e alcohol and nicotine.
Stop bad people who would not think twice about taking another persons life from having the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy, prospering from a war on drugs that is not working.