Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s local by elections see holds for SNP, PC, CON a

SystemSystem Posts: 12,760
edited July 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s local by elections see holds for SNP, PC, CON and LAB but no seats changing hands

Thorniewood on North Lanarkshire (SNP defence)
Result:

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,547
    Sleazy broken UKIP on the slide.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    A mixed bag, can anyone identify a common theme?

    #peakkipper
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sleazy broken UKIP on the slide.

    Up 1% in North Lanarkshire I'll have you know.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    edited July 2015
    Thorniewood:

    UKIP -> Green
    Christian -> Green
    Christian -> Socialist party;
    Christian -> SNP
    UKIP -> Socialist
    Green -> Conservative
    Socialist -> Conservative
    UKIP -> SNP
    UKIP -> Labour
    Conservative -> SNP

    Can you guess the transfer numbers ? (All fairly low obviously)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    UKIP appear to be suffering from a lack of good media coverage. Things may pick up closer to the referendum, or if they dump Farage :lol:
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,547
    Tissue_Price said:

    A mixed bag, can anyone identify a common theme?

    #peakkipper

    Tactical unionist votes in Scotland is for the fairies?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    England 1.48 / 1.52
    Australia 4.8 / 5.3
    Draw 7.4 / 7.6

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event?id=27458861&exp=e
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,855
    AndyJS said:

    England 1.48 / 1.52
    Australia 4.8 / 5.3
    Draw 7.4 / 7.6

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event?id=27458861&exp=e

    Still lay the draw!
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    So much for Yorkshire
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,855
    Oh crap! Lyth out, 73/3. Bloody good catch though.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Generally, new governments get a honeymoon period where people who are ideologically similar give them the benefit of the doubt. I wonder whether this is happening with UKIP-sympathisers to a Tory government.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    Common Australi... er, I mean England!

    [runs diagnostic on Tebbit Chip]
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,621
    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PickardJE: Linklaters law firm announces the appointment of William Hague as chair of its newly created International Advisory Group.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,547
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!

    It might be a caTAFFrophe for Australia.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":

    https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,855
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!

    Unfortunately not. Will probably finish around tea tomorrow unless we can add a pile more runs quickly today.
    Draw is out to 10 now on Betfair.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!

    There's always the men's final at Wimbledon on the TV :)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Moody’s are predicting Greek banks could run out of deposits by Sunday, while Fitch has said an eventual exit from the eurozone is now the probable outcome for Greece. - Apart from that, everything’s looking triple A OK.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    JEO said:

    Generally, new governments get a honeymoon period where people who are ideologically similar give them the benefit of the doubt. I wonder whether this is happening with UKIP-sympathisers to a Tory government.

    There's probably some truth in that; I must admit I was surprised that the Tories won a majority, but it's a much better outcome than a continuation of the coalition. I thought the prospect of Ed as PM was quite funny, but I can't blame the people for rejecting a Labour-SNP stitch up.

    I was pleased with some of the announcements in the budget - especially the reduction in tax relief for BTL merchants. But I'm still sceptical about the deficit reduction - I think Osborne's counting on economic growth for another five years - and I just can't see it. That said, if does go tits up, Labour aren't exactly well placed to come riding to the country's rescue.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    One thing about "so-called" Islamic State. Was the IRA ever referred to as the so-called "Irish" Republican Army?

    My Irish colleague was always very careful to say Provisional IRA in order to differentiate between Adams' mob and the actual historical IRA.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,621
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!

    There's always the men's final at Wimbledon on the TV :)
    Have more hope of a 5th day in the cricket than a British player winning the mens singles.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Not looking hopeful for my day trip to Cardiff on Sunday!!!

    There's always the men's final at Wimbledon on the TV :)
    Have more hope of a 5th day in the cricket than a British player winning the mens singles.
    2013? ;)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The Economist magnificently out of touch with the average voter, as usual.
    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":

    https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243
    tlg86 said:

    JEO said:

    Generally, new governments get a honeymoon period where people who are ideologically similar give them the benefit of the doubt. I wonder whether this is happening with UKIP-sympathisers to a Tory government.

    There's probably some truth in that; I must admit I was surprised that the Tories won a majority, but it's a much better outcome than a continuation of the coalition. I thought the prospect of Ed as PM was quite funny, but I can't blame the people for rejecting a Labour-SNP stitch up.

    I was pleased with some of the announcements in the budget - especially the reduction in tax relief for BTL merchants. But I'm still sceptical about the deficit reduction - I think Osborne's counting on economic growth for another five years - and I just can't see it. That said, if does go tits up, Labour aren't exactly well placed to come riding to the country's rescue.
    The govt is continuing to cut its own spending. This is the important point. Once its done that the economy has to stand on its own two feet. The legacy of the massive 3 figure deficits is the interest payments on debt. The economy has to start generating taxes if we are to seriously think about paying down debt.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,621
    edited July 2015
    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    A member of my family qualifies for the 75+ free license in a few weeks' time. They're not happy about this sudden obsession with changing the rules, or asking people to pay for it voluntarily.
  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243
    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,103
    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":

    https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    Where does your quote come from?
    Doesn't seem likely.
    'Progressive' has an economic meaning, are you saying that The Economist has got this wrong and you (or the person you're quoting) has got it right?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_progressivism
  • handandmousehandandmouse Posts: 213
    !AV Comment! - You might be surprised by the number of people discussing the Labour leadership who are having trouble understanding the voting system.

    I've now seen several FB comments along the lines of: 'I'm only putting down '1' for [preferred candidate] because giving a 2nd preference could harm [preferred candidate]'s chances'.

    I'm not sure how they think that could be the case, but apparently they do.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:



    And pre-crash, under Brown, there was either a surplus or a deficit smaller than run by the previous Conservative government. The plain fact is the deficit under whatever party had sod all to do with causing the global financial crisis.

    Just not true. Pre-crash there was a significant deficit each of the seven years before the recession. Which meant inevitably as soon as the recession happened we had the worst deficit for decades and worst in the OECD globally. A purely Labour problem, not a global problem.

    Keep sticking your head in the sand if you wish. Until you realise why you left us the worst deficit in the OECD you won't be electable. Denying reality doesn't make your fictions true.
    In 18 years of Conservative governments under Mrs Thatcher and John Major, there was a budget surplus in only two years. The largest deficits run by the Conservatives were greater than those run under Labour before the global crash.
    You mean the worst recession deficits under the Conservatives were worse than Labour ones during the boom years? It's this sort of obviously dishonest comparison that caused Labour to lose the economic argument. You can try to use all the clever wording and apples-to-orange comparisons you like, but the numbers don't lie:

    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/3/20/1363802502484/Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg

  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    CNN News breaking

    Omar sharif has died at age of 83
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Omar Sharif has died aged 83. - Cue theme music to Lawrence of Arabia. RIP.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,621
    AndyJS said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    A member of my family qualifies for the 75+ free license in a few weeks' time. They're not happy about this sudden obsession with changing the rules, or asking people to pay for it voluntarily.
    There are also some opportunities for some really naughty stuff here e.g. putting somebody on direct debit and / or automatic renewal of their voluntarily contribution. The same kind of stuff that charity muggers are so keen to get you to do.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If they want to save money, how about putting Alan Yentob in economy class instead of allowing him to jet all over the world in business or first.
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    AndyJS said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    A member of my family qualifies for the 75+ free license in a few weeks' time. They're not happy about this sudden obsession with changing the rules, or asking people to pay for it voluntarily.
    There are also some opportunities for some really naughty stuff here e.g. putting somebody on direct debit and / or automatic renewal of their voluntarily contribution. The same kind of stuff that charity muggers are so keen to get you to do.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    SimonStClare said:

    Omar Sharif has died aged 83. - Cue theme music to Lawrence of Arabia. RIP.

    http://youtu.be/ro7ustlPLuc
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Surely the longest anticipation shot in epic movie history?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud1zpHW3ito
    SimonStClare said:

    Omar Sharif has died aged 83. - Cue theme music to Lawrence of Arabia. RIP.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,961
    Mother LOVED Omar Sharif's eye's....
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited July 2015
    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Isn't it about time someone launched a legal challenge against the BBC license fee on the basis that it's not fair that people have to pay it when only a few channels out of hundreds are broadcast by the BBC?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243
    edited July 2015
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    The BBC refused to re-sign on the man who earns them £40mill a year. Thats the standard of their management. But now they want the oldest in our society to make up the difference? Which charity's cold call company will they use to persuade them. What a bunch of tossers the BBC are. How desperate they must be to see the return of a left wing government. Sell it off.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    AndyJS said:

    Isn't it about time someone launched a legal challenge against the BBC license fee on the basis that it's not fair that people have to pay it when only a few channels out of hundreds are broadcast by the BBC?

    TV Licence = TV Poll Tax!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited July 2015
    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off. If you think taking money away from poor people is a price worth paying in order to reduce the deficit, then fine - I don't agree with that opinion, but it's a perfectly legitimate viewpoint. But don't try to claim the sky is yellow by saying a Budget which takes £12bn away from poor people and only raises wages by a maximum of £4bn is somehow going to improve poor people's incomes.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    edited July 2015
    SimonStClare said:

    Omar Sharif has died aged 83. - Cue theme music to Lawrence of Arabia. RIP.

    The trick, William Potter, is not MINDING that it hurts.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Danny565 said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?
    No I just said one shouldn't automatically assume the IFS is independent just because it says it is.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited July 2015
    Plato said:

    Surely the longest anticipation shot in epic movie history?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud1zpHW3ito

    SimonStClare said:

    Omar Sharif has died aged 83. - Cue theme music to Lawrence of Arabia. RIP.

    A full on money shot that was a bit anticlimactic..... But longer lasting I suppose ......

    ( sorry mods is that allowed before the largershed?)

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Danny565 said:

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off.

    No they didn't:

    [Osborne] said Britain has a "welfare system that is unsustainable" and that we "can't have a welfare system that just grows and grows and grows".

    He said his aim was to create a welfare system that was "fair to those who need it and fair to those who pay for it".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33456160
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    I'm sure if Whittingdale thought he could get away with it he would introduce the BBC Crowdfunding Act 2015 !!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Danny565 said:

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off.

    No they didn't:

    [Osborne] said Britain has a "welfare system that is unsustainable" and that we "can't have a welfare system that just grows and grows and grows".

    He said his aim was to create a welfare system that was "fair to those who need it and fair to those who pay for it".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33456160
    So you agree that most poor people are going to be significantly worse off as a result of the Budget, then?
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Danny565 said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off. If you think taking money away from poor people is a price worth paying in order to reduce the deficit, then fine - I don't agree with that opinion, but it's a perfectly legitimate viewpoint. But don't try to claim the sky is yellow by saying a Budget which takes £12bn away from poor people and only raises wages by a maximum of £4bn is somehow going to improve poor people's incomes.
    Mr Danny,
    A lot of what you say has good sense and resonance with all political persuasions ...... However, you and people that agree with your views need to move off the fairytale toadstool and onto the real life barstool to understand what the public is thinking.

    Only then will yours and other views get a better hearing.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Danny565 said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off. If you think taking money away from poor people is a price worth paying in order to reduce the deficit, then fine - I don't agree with that opinion, but it's a perfectly legitimate viewpoint. But don't try to claim the sky is yellow by saying a Budget which takes £12bn away from poor people and only raises wages by a maximum of £4bn is somehow going to improve poor people's incomes.
    No-one is taking money away from anyone. They are just not giving them as much money as they did previously.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?
    No I just said one shouldn't automatically assume the IFS is independent just because it says it is.
    If anything, I'd have thought that the IFS has a right wing bias.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,056
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. 86, pish. They argued an earlier Coalition Budget was 'regressive' because it reduced welfare spending (on the assumption more people would be in work and therefore not eligible for JSA).

    Serious, if odd, tax question: there's an off-chance I might buy a new RPG Maker (had one but it doesn't work on the new OS). If I did, and used it to make a free game to promote Sir Edric's shenanigans (which would be the reason behind buying it), would that qualify as a business expense?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,103
    Flightpathl said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    BBC to ask over-75s to pay licence fee voluntarily to offset 10% budget cut

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/10/bbc-over-75s-to-licence-fee-voluntarily-budget-cut

    Following the Guardian again I see.

    I wonder if letters asking for VOLUNTARILY payments will be as nice and clear about ones rights as the standard ones that get sent out demanding payment of the licence fee?

    The BBC refused to re-sign on the man who earns them £40mill a year. Thats the standard of their management. But now they want the oldest in our society to make up the difference? Which charity's cold call company will they use to persuade them. What a bunch of tossers the BBC are. How desperate they must be to see the return of a left wing government. Sell it off.
    The BBC aren't perfect but they're better than Fox. Clarkson shouldn't hit people, should he?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,056
    Mr. Song, didn't an ex-director general (the chap who preceded short-lived Entwhistle) bite someone?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Easy victory for Djokovic vs Gasquet. 7-6, 6-4, 6-4.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. 86, pish. They argued an earlier Coalition Budget was 'regressive' because it reduced welfare spending (on the assumption more people would be in work and therefore not eligible for JSA).

    I was thinking more historically and the people who founded it. I know the OBR is supposed to be independent, but I can't believe that Robert Chote would have got that gig if he hadn't been considered a sound man.

    Of course it doesn't really matter - how many people have heard of the IFS or know what it does?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,406
    Djokovic through to Wimbledon final after straight sets win against Gasquet.

    Murray v. Federer next!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2015
    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    It's all about the French wanting to keep their superpower dreams alive at all costs. It doesn't matter how much impoverishment it causes in countries like Greece, Spain and Italy.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    Morris_Dancer said:


    Serious, if odd, tax question: there's an off-chance I might buy a new RPG Maker (had one but it doesn't work on the new OS). If I did, and used it to make a free game to promote Sir Edric's shenanigans (which would be the reason behind buying it), would that qualify as a business expense?


    Yes - code it up to R&D Sundries.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. 86, pish. They argued an earlier Coalition Budget was 'regressive' because it reduced welfare spending (on the assumption more people would be in work and therefore not eligible for JSA).

    Serious, if odd, tax question: there's an off-chance I might buy a new RPG Maker (had one but it doesn't work on the new OS). If I did, and used it to make a free game to promote Sir Edric's shenanigans (which would be the reason behind buying it), would that qualify as a business expense?

    https://www.gov.uk/expenses-if-youre-self-employed/office-property

    In short, if the software is used exclusively for business, then it can be an expense.
    Be wary though, you can get caught put if the equipment/software is used for non-business reasons too...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    Walsgrave Hospital's 2nd greatest ever bloke from 1981-1982 gets a magnificent 50.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,056
    Mr. Barber, Mr. Pulpstar, cheers.

    It's only a maybe as it is.
  • handandmousehandandmouse Posts: 213
    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I can only think Tsipras knows something we don't. On the face of it, it's an astonishing capitulation that would seem to have rendered the votes of all those who said OXI to more austerity on Sunday meaningless.

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JEO said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:



    And pre-crash, under Brown, there was either a surplus or a deficit smaller than run by the previous Conservative government. The plain fact is the deficit under whatever party had sod all to do with causing the global financial crisis.

    Just not true. Pre-crash there was a significant deficit each of the seven years before the recession. Which meant inevitably as soon as the recession happened we had the worst deficit for decades and worst in the OECD globally. A purely Labour problem, not a global problem.

    Keep sticking your head in the sand if you wish. Until you realise why you left us the worst deficit in the OECD you won't be electable. Denying reality doesn't make your fictions true.
    In 18 years of Conservative governments under Mrs Thatcher and John Major, there was a budget surplus in only two years. The largest deficits run by the Conservatives were greater than those run under Labour before the global crash.
    You mean the worst recession deficits under the Conservatives were worse than Labour ones during the boom years? It's this sort of obviously dishonest comparison that caused Labour to lose the economic argument. You can try to use all the clever wording and apples-to-orange comparisons you like, but the numbers don't lie:

    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/3/20/1363802502484/Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg

    And your link shows that deficits were standard fare, as I've been saying. In the graph, blue means Conservative and red is Labour -- not blue surplus and red deficit.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,229
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. 86, pish. They argued an earlier Coalition Budget was 'regressive' because it reduced welfare spending (on the assumption more people would be in work and therefore not eligible for JSA).

    Serious, if odd, tax question: there's an off-chance I might buy a new RPG Maker ....

    You can make Rocket-Propelled Grenades? Cool.....
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    handandmouse said:

    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I can only think Tsipras knows something we don't. On the face of it, it's an astonishing capitulation that would seem to have rendered the votes of all those who said OXI to more austerity on Sunday meaningless.

    I don't know why, but I'm getting the feeling that this has been one big stitch up and that a deal had been agreed some time ago and Tsipras just wanted to go through the motions of giving the Greek people the chance to vote No and make themselves feel good.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,408
    JEO said:

    Danny565 said:

    SquareRoot said:

    Danny565 said:

    Flightpathl said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":
    twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    'even' The Economist?
    The budget has announced increases in the minimum wage free childcare and increased basic tax allowances. For starters. If people did not have 8 children they would not be what the economist claims to be 'poor'.
    Except the IFS says the vast majority of people in the bottom third of the income scale are going to be made worse off, even taking into account the changes you mention.

    And yes, 'even' the Economist. They endorsed the Conservatives at the last two elections.
    The IFS claims to be independent.. that doesn't mean it actually is. Its a question of how an individual sees the IFS, not that it is independent because it says it is.. Who funds it for starters?
    So the IFS are part of the lefty conspiracy now too?

    The reason I keep going on about this is because the Tories actually had the chutzpah to claim the Budget would make poor people better off. If you think taking money away from poor people is a price worth paying in order to reduce the deficit, then fine - I don't agree with that opinion, but it's a perfectly legitimate viewpoint. But don't try to claim the sky is yellow by saying a Budget which takes £12bn away from poor people and only raises wages by a maximum of £4bn is somehow going to improve poor people's incomes.
    No-one is taking money away from anyone. They are just not giving them as much money as they did previously.
    This is where Lab falls down - it seems to be well aware of what it needs to do (accept that that cuts will have to be made...not everything in the garden will be rosy vs today..etc) but at the last minute the party falls prey to their recidivist far-left tendency of playing the popular socialist hero and opposing every cut, every change to the status quo.

    That is their challenge and when even Chuka, supposedly super-bright and business-friendly can't resist, then you know they are in trouble.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    FPT
    justin124 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    justin124 said:

    In 1983 the Tories had a majority of 144 compared with just 12 in 2015. That's quite a difference - and Labour was stronger in England in 2015 than it was in 1992 - never mind 1983. If accepting your base date Labour manages a 1987 scale advance next time by just winning 20 seats that might well suffice to remove the Tories from office simply because no party outside Ulster would wish to support them.

    A 20 seat swing would leave Labour on 252 and the Tories on 310.

    If Labour were to form a coalition of the losers from there then they would pay a major price the election after, its just not plausible.It would again rely upon being propped up by the SNP with all that entails. Plus that's assuming there's no boundary reforms.
    It would not be easy but I see no way that any of the small parties beyond Unionists and UKIP would prop the Tories up. Does anyone really believe that Farron and the LibDems would support them?
    If Labour are 60 seats behind then there is simply no way that a rainbow coalition would be sustainable, especially now that Labour are as unpopular, dead and buried as the Tories are in Scotland.

    The Lib Dems and the SNP etc wouldn't have to vote for the Tories if Labour are 60 seats behind. They'd simply need to abstain. In order to overcome that gap you'd need basically 100% of minor parties to line up religiously behind Labour and there's no reason for them to do that.

    Especially with EVEL on the books. A majority Tory England could (rightly) block any rainbow votes with SNP support.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    The Greek elite have done very well indeed out of the German taxpayer.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,851
    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I think it would be more accurate to say that Greece thinks Tsipras is the man who can get them the best deal, so when he asks them to say no they oblige, and when he says OK, this is the best we can get they say yes. Doesn't mean they're right, but it's not a problem of EU democracy. The EU is not obliged to accede to whatever one of its member states wants, any more than a referendum in Surrey or Yorkshire would be binding on Britain.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,540
    handandmouse said:

    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I can only think Tsipras knows something we don't. On the face of it, it's an astonishing capitulation that would seem to have rendered the votes of all those who said OXI to more austerity on Sunday meaningless.

    I think he's just ballsy. The vote was always to some degree meaningless as it in no way bound the other side to make concessions. Now it's about presenting a deal as a victory, and with the EU leaders grumbling due to the delay etc, he can try to call it a great victory. With his political capital pretty hig after the vote, he and no one wanting to kick Greece out for delaying on the deal with the vote, I'm sure they'll play ball to assist him in playing the hero, and he might be able to sell it.


  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,146
    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I wrote on Facebook: Last night at home, we had a vote on whether we should continue paying the mortgage. By a majority of three to one, it was decided that we should not. Today I asked our bank to respect our democratic decision.

    A deal has to be ratified on both sides.

    The German taxpayer and the IMF are simply not going to sign up to debt relief without substantial reforms. And the Greek people can choose not to take it. But then the ECB/the Eurozone and the IMF can choose not to give the Greeks any more money.

    The issue in Greece, surely, is that the "No" vote was achieved by a promise to the Greek people that, should they vote "No", then the banks would reopen on Tuesday (they did not) and that Greece could stay in the Euro without austerity (which it cannot).

    The vote in Greece was for a settlement which does not exist.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,855
    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,056
    Thanks to Mr. Hayfield for the thread, incidentally.

    Mr. Palmer, so a Scottish vote wouldn't be binding on Britain? :p
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    JEO said:



    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/3/20/1363802502484/Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg



    I genuinely don't see how someone can look at that, knowing when recessions were and when they were not and when Labour followed Conservative policy and when they did not, and go "yeah, Labour did a good job".
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,540
    There's 2 days left in the test - if we cannot bowl them out in 1.75-2 days, we deserve to lose, so absolutely no need declare tonight to give ourselved 2.15 days.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,675
    kle4 said:

    handandmouse said:

    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I can only think Tsipras knows something we don't. On the face of it, it's an astonishing capitulation that would seem to have rendered the votes of all those who said OXI to more austerity on Sunday meaningless.

    I think he's just ballsy. The vote was always to some degree meaningless as it in no way bound the other side to make concessions. Now it's about presenting a deal as a victory, and with the EU leaders grumbling due to the delay etc, he can try to call it a great victory. With his political capital pretty hig after the vote, he and no one wanting to kick Greece out for delaying on the deal with the vote, I'm sure they'll play ball to assist him in playing the hero, and he might be able to sell it.


    Depends on whether he gets any real and meaningful debt relief (along the lines of the 1953 London Agreement) as part of this new deal. If he does then he will have achieved a substantial improvement on the deal before the referendum. If he does not get it then the whole thing is pointless anyway as it is just a sophisticated can kicking exercise. Greece cannot survive economically long term without debt relief.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,146
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Thanks to Mr. Hayfield for the thread, incidentally.

    Mr. Palmer, so a Scottish vote wouldn't be binding on Britain? :p

    The Scots can't vote for DevoMax alone. They can't bind the English to do something that requires the agreement of both parties.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    Peloton all together with 18,5 ks to go in the TdF. Bit dodgy for my bet, someone might go for a long attack !
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Pakistan scored 382 to beat Sri Lanka a few days ago:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/33422926
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    rcs1000 said:

    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I wrote on Facebook: Last night at home, we had a vote on whether we should continue paying the mortgage. By a majority of three to one, it was decided that we should not. Today I asked our bank to respect our democratic decision.

    A deal has to be ratified on both sides.

    The German taxpayer and the IMF are simply not going to sign up to debt relief without substantial reforms. And the Greek people can choose not to take it. But then the ECB/the Eurozone and the IMF can choose not to give the Greeks any more money.

    The issue in Greece, surely, is that the "No" vote was achieved by a promise to the Greek people that, should they vote "No", then the banks would reopen on Tuesday (they did not) and that Greece could stay in the Euro without austerity (which it cannot).

    The vote in Greece was for a settlement which does not exist.
    Oh, I agree. But the people voted to reject the terms, and they're now accepting the same terms. Either reject the deal, or get a fresh backing to accept it. You can't accept a deal that the public have just voted against. It's completely undemocratic.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,855
    Pulpstar said:

    Peloton all together with 18,5 ks to go in the TdF. Bit dodgy for my bet, someone might go for a long attack !

    Bloody hell - Cricket, tennis, cycling, PB and Betfair all at the same time now!
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I am in Germany and was driving with an agent for an hours car journey so I broached the subject of Greece. What followed was quite interesting.

    The German driver agreed that Germany was at some fault that his country had lent the money to someone they knew could not or would not pay it back and simply to keep the EU show on the road.

    On the other hand he threw a question at me about the UK referendum and stated that the UK had no alternative to stay in because the main trading blocks were ever increasing and the Chinese Far East block would export more and if not united Europe would be impoverished. He was he stated worried we would vote no and just leave.

    Whatever the view and however you much agree / disagree with that driver that I spoke to yesterday between Bremen and Bremerhaven, that view was straight form the horses mouth.

    Yes absolutely simply an anecdote so treat with caution. It was though from someone who's walks the street rather than corridors of power.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited July 2015
    NickPalmer said:

    JEO said:

    On Greece, is it really the case that an EU offer was put to the Greek people, they voted against it by a huge margin just a week ago, and now a deal is going to be signed on almost identical terms?

    Whenever the EU is involved, democracy gets ignored. It's incredible.

    I think it would be more accurate to say that Greece thinks Tsipras is the man who can get them the best deal, so when he asks them to say no they oblige, and when he says OK, this is the best we can get they say yes. Doesn't mean they're right, but it's not a problem of EU democracy. The EU is not obliged to accede to whatever one of its member states wants, any more than a referendum in Surrey or Yorkshire would be binding on Britain.
    "so when he asks them to say no they oblige, and when he says OK, this is the best we can get they say yes"

    If that's what you think then fine: ask the Greeks again. But the Greeks just voted to reject a deal and the government is turning around and agreeing to it. You can't come up with mental logistics to pretend they voted yes when they voted no.

    The anti-democratic action is by the Greek government, of course, not the EU, but the EU will be complicit if they go along with pretending the new deal is different to the one that was just rejected.

    It's rather reminiscent of the Lisbon Treaty, when the British public were promised a referendum, re-elected the government on that basis, and that government then signed the treaty without a fresh mandate, pretending it was a different treaty.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    Sandpit said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Peloton all together with 18,5 ks to go in the TdF. Bit dodgy for my bet, someone might go for a long attack !

    Bloody hell - Cricket, tennis, cycling, PB and Betfair all at the same time now!
    The peloton is leaving two of the original breakaway hanging out the front.

    That's ideal for the sprinters.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":

    https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    Did you see the YG polling on the budget. the people appear to disagree with both you and the Economist?

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/07/09/osbornes-first-all-tory-budget-initial-scorecard/

    More to the point why are you going on and on and on ... Labour accept the need for cuts in the absurd tax credit system but squeal when someone has the guts to do it. The public see right through this kind of silliness. Until you come up with a credible alternative way of clearing the deficit you and your party are on a treadmill to nowhere.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
    I can't see any justification for a declaration today.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    JEO said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:



    And pre-crash, under Brown, there was either a surplus or a deficit smaller than run by the previous Conservative government. The plain fact is the deficit under whatever party had sod all to do with causing the global financial crisis.

    Just not true. Pre-crash there was a significant deficit each of the seven years before the recession. Which meant inevitably as soon as the recession happened we had the worst deficit for decades and worst in the OECD globally. A purely Labour problem, not a global problem.

    Keep sticking your head in the sand if you wish. Until you realise why you left us the worst deficit in the OECD you won't be electable. Denying reality doesn't make your fictions true.
    In 18 years of Conservative governments under Mrs Thatcher and John Major, there was a budget surplus in only two years. The largest deficits run by the Conservatives were greater than those run under Labour before the global crash.
    You mean the worst recession deficits under the Conservatives were worse than Labour ones during the boom years? It's this sort of obviously dishonest comparison that caused Labour to lose the economic argument. You can try to use all the clever wording and apples-to-orange comparisons you like, but the numbers don't lie:

    http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/3/20/1363802502484/Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg

    And your link shows that deficits were standard fare, as I've been saying. In the graph, blue means Conservative and red is Labour -- not blue surplus and red deficit.
    Yes, mild deficits during recoveries before peaking into surplus before the next recession hit, whereby they got medium deficits. Then we had Labour have medium deficits during the the boom years and stonking great deficits during the recession. If you can't see that post-2001 New Labour was substantially fiscally worse than the governments before then you're refusing to.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    DaemonBarber said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
    I can't see any justification for a declaration today.
    Threat of weather on sunday.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,621
    edited July 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
    Think would be a mistake to force it just to get them in again tonight. Keep it going, get 400+ ahead, 2 days (even with potentially a bit of dodgy weather early on Sunday) is plenty.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Pulpstar said:

    DaemonBarber said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
    I can't see any justification for a declaration today.
    Threat of weather on sunday.
    Yeah, so get the first session in tomorrow, then see. But declaring today?
    No.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    felix said:

    Danny565 said:

    Now even the Economist is joining the lefty conspiracy to do down "the most progressive Budget in history":

    https://twitter.com/EconBizFin/status/619433643396702208

    Did you see the YG polling on the budget. the people appear to disagree with both you and the Economist?

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/07/09/osbornes-first-all-tory-budget-initial-scorecard/

    More to the point why are you going on and on and on ... Labour accept the need for cuts in the absurd tax credit system but squeal when someone has the guts to do it. The public see right through this kind of silliness. Until you come up with a credible alternative way of clearing the deficit you and your party are on a treadmill to nowhere.
    Firstly, what is this "you"? I don't speak for Labour as a whole. I don't care about whether the deficit is cleared or not - though if I did, I would start by not pissing away money on countless freebies for the rich (top-rate tax cut, corporation tax cut, inheritance tax cut).

    Now I'll wait for the farcical argument of how "cutting taxes on the super-rich increases the tax take".
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,376
    DaemonBarber said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good to see Ian Bell with 50 before tea.

    Okay, so the lead is 271 with 37 overs left in the day after some good batting. If England bat like they did against NZ, what chance that we declare 400 in front and give the bowlers 8 or 10 overs at the Aussie top order this evening?

    Sorry Mr Urquhart, it looks like your day out on Sunday isn't going to happen.

    Draw is in to 5.5 now, no idea why. Keep laying it.

    The weather looks a bit dodgy on Sunday - always a difficult call for a captain - but I think they should look to accelerate and declare once they are 400 in front.
    Cookie is always a bit of a cautious captain though.

    Not sure we'll have the Aussies back in tonight.
    I can't see any justification for a declaration today.
    No, I'd let them stew on it overnight, have dart in the morning and keep the openers guessing as to when the declaration is coming - but they cannot rely on much play on Sunday in my opinion.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,289
    edited July 2015
    England can game it out, a loss is worth -1, a draw 0 and a win +1. You assign each probabilities and should ideally declare when the expected value of the sum is highest... ;)
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Pulpstar said:

    Morris_Dancer said:


    Serious, if odd, tax question: there's an off-chance I might buy a new RPG Maker (had one but it doesn't work on the new OS). If I did, and used it to make a free game to promote Sir Edric's shenanigans (which would be the reason behind buying it), would that qualify as a business expense?


    Yes - code it up to R&D Sundries.
    R&D sundries?

    I once did that ( though code was slightly different) for identifying the best pub and then restaurant for an office Christmas party .

    I got a verbal warning despite all my good efforts and despite pointing out this was actually done out of office hours and in my own time. Oddly ......HR also refused my overtime claim?

    Just goes to show they always talk about teamwork, working together and fighting for the good of the company but when actually you go out of your way to " take one for the team " you just get a verbal warning for your efforts......
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025