Ernie Els, who I've followed since 1993, is looking younger and fitter following his BMW win in Germany last week. GW with @TheBig_Easy at @CallawayGolf this week pic.twitter.com/xPzvR5TM83
WTF is Clegg doing? The lib dems are not going to like this at all. Dear oh dear. Clegg might just find those whisper campaigns starting far sooner than he'd hoped.
Surely, ultimately, the long term answer is to reverse what created these communities in the first place:
"The miners and their families had come to the valleys from hundreds of miles around - some had literally walked to the valleys, drawn by the prospect of employment.
Since no one is willing to face up to that (and goodness knows how you do it sensitively and humanely) - all we do is prolong the agony.
On-topic, I suppose a safer bet might have been to put the £200k on the 1/50 shot that went in at Yarmouth this afternoon. Ok, you'd only walk out with £204k but that still beats any bank.
Having quickly tallied the seat changes using last night's Morgan poll to give the swing (it also gave regional swings), I have produced the following result:
NSW, Coalition +3, Lab -3 VIC , Coalition, +5, Lab -5 Q'land Coalition -11, Lab +11 WA NC SA NC TAS NC That would give Rudd's ALP a net gain of 3 seats since 2010 and probably a majority, thanks to the huge swing in Queensland more than offsetting losses in NSW and Victoria, but still could go either way
Off-topic: Sometimes in all the partisan stuff on here, it is easy to forget that it is the people that matter. Therefore this story should be of interest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078
It is an area where successive governments have utterly failed.The Conservatives did not help them. Labour did not help them. The coalition did not help them. Promise after promise broken.
This is not an area populated with workshy or lazy people - it is an area populated with people who have been let down by the system. Any laziness will be down to a lack of hope, a knowledge that their community is dying. I have seen this in areas of my native Derbyshire, where the problems were nowhere near as pronounced.
Sadly, I have no answers.
Even further off-topic: My ex-gf used to work at these premises, when it housed a different company (the premises were searched in the hunt for the missing girls from Soham). Bang! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23085513
The only long-term answer is that the towns have to reduce markedly in size. Probably the best thing would be for the government/s to buy surplus properties and demolish them, as otherwise people become imprisoned by the decline. The towns grew because of a specific local factor which is no longer relevant. No-one would sensibly want to set up a large-scale site at the top end of a cul-de-sac valley when far more accessible locations are available - as indeed they haven't, despite the funding and subsidies that have been available.
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
WTF is Clegg doing? The lib dems are not going to like this at all. Dear oh dear. Clegg might just find those whisper campaigns starting far sooner than he'd hoped.
It is about time the SNP got a backbone and said they would support an elected head of state.
That would be the first step to true independence.
Yes, President Blair, he wouldn't ask for more money would he ?
It is certainly possible to get rid of a bad monarch one way or another, as has been proven many times over the centuries.
You're entitled to your view but equally, I'm entitled to the view that there's no point changing something that works, irrespective of whether we'd design it this way were we starting from scratch.
Surely, ultimately, the long term answer is to reverse what created these communities in the first place:
"The miners and their families had come to the valleys from hundreds of miles around - some had literally walked to the valleys, drawn by the prospect of employment.
Since no one is willing to face up to that (and goodness knows how you do it sensitively and humanely) - all we do is prolong the agony.
I know that is an answer - and one that has been used before (*) - but I just find it abhorrent. We should be able to fix it without destroying what little community they have left. But there is so much to fix. Not just creating the right sort of employment, but also giving people hope and the skills they need.
(*) My favourite, if that word can be used, is Marsden village in Sunderland. You visit SOuter lighthouse now by walking over an area of grassland that looks ancient. In fact, it was the location of Marsden village, an old pit village.
Off-topic: Sometimes in all the partisan stuff on here, it is easy to forget that it is the people that matter. Therefore this story should be of interest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078
It is an area where successive governments have utterly failed.The Conservatives did not help them. Labour did not help them. The coalition did not help them. Promise after promise broken.
This is not an area populated with workshy or lazy people - it is an area populated with people who have been let down by the system. Any laziness will be down to a lack of hope, a knowledge that their community is dying. I have seen this in areas of my native Derbyshire, where the problems were nowhere near as pronounced.
Sadly, I have no answers.
Even further off-topic: My ex-gf used to work at these premises, when it housed a different company (the premises were searched in the hunt for the missing girls from Soham). Bang! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23085513
The only long-term answer is that the towns have to reduce markedly in size. Probably the best thing would be for the government/s to buy surplus properties and demolish them, as otherwise people become imprisoned by the decline. The towns grew because of a specific local factor which is no longer relevant. No-one would sensibly want to set up a large-scale site at the top end of a cul-de-sac valley when far more accessible locations are available - as indeed they haven't, despite the funding and subsidies that have been available.
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
You need programs that offer to transfer whole extended families from low-employment to high-employment areas as a group. It'd be unpopular at first but catch on after the first few.
Off-topic: Sometimes in all the partisan stuff on here, it is easy to forget that it is the people that matter. Therefore this story should be of interest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078
It is an area where successive governments have utterly failed.The Conservatives did not help them. Labour did not help them. The coalition did not help them. Promise after promise broken.
This is not an area populated with workshy or lazy people - it is an area populated with people who have been let down by the system. Any laziness will be down to a lack of hope, a knowledge that their community is dying. I have seen this in areas of my native Derbyshire, where the problems were nowhere near as pronounced.
Sadly, I have no answers.
Even further off-topic: My ex-gf used to work at these premises, when it housed a different company (the premises were searched in the hunt for the missing girls from Soham). Bang! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23085513
The only long-term answer is that the towns have to reduce markedly in size. Probably the best thing would be for the government/s to buy surplus properties and demolish them, as otherwise people become imprisoned by the decline. The towns grew because of a specific local factor which is no longer relevant. No-one would sensibly want to set up a large-scale site at the top end of a cul-de-sac valley when far more accessible locations are available - as indeed they haven't, despite the funding and subsidies that have been available.
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
You need programs that offer to transfer whole extended families from low-employment to high-employment areas as a group. It'd be unpopular at first but catch on after the first few.
Getting NIMBYs in high-employment areas to allow more house-building? Good luck with that.
It is about time the SNP got a backbone and said they would support an elected head of state.
That would be the first step to true independence.
Yes, President Blair, he wouldn't ask for more money would he ?
It is certainly possible to get rid of a bad monarch one way or another, as has been proven many times over the centuries.
You're entitled to your view but equally, I'm entitled to the view that there's no point changing something that works, irrespective of whether we'd design it this way were we starting from scratch.
Surely, ultimately, the long term answer is to reverse what created these communities in the first place:
"The miners and their families had come to the valleys from hundreds of miles around - some had literally walked to the valleys, drawn by the prospect of employment.
Since no one is willing to face up to that (and goodness knows how you do it sensitively and humanely) - all we do is prolong the agony.
(*) My favourite, if that word can be used, is Marsden village in Sunderland. You visit SOuter lighthouse now by walking over an area of grassland that looks ancient. In fact, it was the location of Marsden village, an old pit village.
Off-topic: Sometimes in all the partisan stuff on here, it is easy to forget that it is the people that matter. Therefore this story should be of interest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078
It is an area where successive governments have utterly failed.The Conservatives did not help them. Labour did not help them. The coalition did not help them. Promise after promise broken.
This is not an area populated with workshy or lazy people - it is an area populated with people who have been let down by the system. Any laziness will be down to a lack of hope, a knowledge that their community is dying. I have seen this in areas of my native Derbyshire, where the problems were nowhere near as pronounced.
Sadly, I have no answers.
Even further off-topic: My ex-gf used to work at these premises, when it housed a different company (the premises were searched in the hunt for the missing girls from Soham). Bang! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23085513
The only long-term answer is that the towns have to reduce markedly in size. Probably the best thing would be for the government/s to buy surplus properties and demolish them, as otherwise people become imprisoned by the decline. The towns grew because of a specific local factor which is no longer relevant. No-one would sensibly want to set up a large-scale site at the top end of a cul-de-sac valley when far more accessible locations are available - as indeed they haven't, despite the funding and subsidies that have been available.
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
You need programs that offer to transfer whole extended families from low-employment to high-employment areas as a group. It'd be unpopular at first but catch on after the first few.
Getting NIMBYs in high-employment areas to allow more house-building? Good luck with that.
It wouldn't need new housing if the political class weren't using supply and demand to wage economic warfare on the population.
It is about time the SNP got a backbone and said they would support an elected head of state.
That would be the first step to true independence.
Yes, President Blair, he wouldn't ask for more money would he ?
It is certainly possible to get rid of a bad monarch one way or another, as has been proven many times over the centuries.
You're entitled to your view but equally, I'm entitled to the view that there's no point changing something that works, irrespective of whether we'd design it this way were we starting from scratch.
Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand).
Julia Dobson (a teacher, stood in Isle of Anglesey locals this year) Daniel ap Eifion Jones (works for some charities, stood in Isle of Anglesey locals this year) Tal Michael (again. Alun Michael's son. Stood as PCC candidate for North Wales, shortlisted for Arfon 2015 nomination) Paul Penlington (Denbighshire councillor, the one who wasn't originally declared elected because they put his votes in the Tory pile; former LD GE Vale of Clwyd candidate)
Shame that we do not get the same option south of the border.
The Coalition has cut Corporation Tax by more than that since it came to power.
Yes, but another 3% would be welcome. If we get it low enough, then Vodaphone and co may be willing to pay it, even shift revenue from other jurisdictions.
Shame that we do not get the same option south of the border.
The Coalition has cut Corporation Tax by more than that since it came to power.
Yes, but another 3% would be welcome. If we get it low enough, then Vodaphone and co may be willing to pay it, even shift revenue from other jurisdictions.
why should we pander to multi nats ? they should just pay taxes like the rest of us.
An interesting market would be a spread on the yes %. I'd be tempted to buy if it was in the mid 30%'s, although that would be more on instinct than evidence.
The problem with lenient sentences isn't so much regarding those convicted of sex crimes like Stuart Hall and Jeremy Forrest, where I thought the tariffs were about right. The problem is with murder and manslaughter sentences, which are quite often far more lenient than warranted IMO.
Shame that we do not get the same option south of the border.
The Coalition has cut Corporation Tax by more than that since it came to power.
Yes, but another 3% would be welcome. If we get it low enough, then Vodaphone and co may be willing to pay it, even shift revenue from other jurisdictions.
Not sure that the Irish model of chasing ever lower corporation tax rates is one to follow
And the reason Vodaphone hasn't been paying corporation tax is because the UK allows it to be taxed through it's subsidiaries. Plus write down capital expenditure.
bang on. Why should multinats escape their responsibilities just because they can afford expensive shysters. They should cough up and stop passing the bill to consumers and smallcos.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
Yet Blair had to make Labour "Tory-lite" in order to win, and when Brown moved Labour away from Conservative ideas, he lost.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
Off-topic: Sometimes in all the partisan stuff on here, it is easy to forget that it is the people that matter. Therefore this story should be of interest: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23028078
It is an area where successive governments have utterly failed.The Conservatives did not help them. Labour did not help them. The coalition did not help them. Promise after promise broken.
This is not an area populated with workshy or lazy people - it is an area populated with people who have been let down by the system. Any laziness will be down to a lack of hope, a knowledge that their community is dying. I have seen this in areas of my native Derbyshire, where the problems were nowhere near as pronounced.
Sadly, I have no answers.
Even further off-topic: My ex-gf used to work at these premises, when it housed a different company (the premises were searched in the hunt for the missing girls from Soham). Bang! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23085513
The only long-term answer is that the towns have to reduce markedly in size. Probably the best thing would be for the government/s to buy surplus properties and demolish them, as otherwise people become imprisoned by the decline. The towns grew because of a specific local factor which is no longer relevant. No-one would sensibly want to set up a large-scale site at the top end of a cul-de-sac valley when far more accessible locations are available - as indeed they haven't, despite the funding and subsidies that have been available.
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
Sadly large areas of this country are so pathetically scared of new housebuilding that's not really an option.
The solution is massive housebuilding based around new towns, but in country that can no longer build a runway in less than ten years I'm not holding my breath
It's more than housebuilding. A 'housebuilding' mantra will just lead to more problems further down the line.
We do not need new towns, we need new communities.
The village I live in - Cambourne - has got it mostly right, despite the Guardinista's hatred of the place. We have houses built in different styles, in three different 'villages' separated by a country park, and a good network of paths and bridleways. There is hardly a single straight road in the place, which should keep traffic speeds down.
Facilities are a problem; but there is a supermarket and a pub, and soon a Co-Op to join the multi-faith church, leisure centre and hotel.
But these are the bare minimum I would expect from a new community. You need more: there is a large business park and also a reasonable (if expensive) bus link to Cambridge, as well as a good dual carriageway that deposits you onto the A14.
It is already a community. It has many minor problems, for instance the paucity of facilities for the young, but mostly it works.
Any new town should look at Cambourne and see what works, and try to improve on it. Sadly it is not the cheapest way of doing things, and other new villages in Cambridgeshire, such as Northstowe, are going to be worse places to live.
It is more than just building houses: it is the whole package. And those extras cost money and political will.
On topic, oddly identical bets; presumably the same person or group of people?
I'll repeat my previous generous offer, No at 4/9 (double the best high st price) and take up to £100. Obviously the wee fearties with petit pois sized cullions who will only offer evens need not apply.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
That's the thing that I can never get my head around. The country has got itself into a situation where the British taxpayer has to top up the wages of people working for multinational corporations. It's madness, and it's not going to improve anytime soon.
followed by WW1 centenary in August and 75 years of WW2 in September. All those Union Jacks and spitfires and fighting U boats from the Clyde and Scapa.
Jeez, it's like Jim Davidson trying to turn Graham Norton straight by dangling Barbara Windsor in front of him. I'm amazed that someone who I seem to recall thinks the Great War was a colossally stupid waste of blood and treasure (with which I agree), is quite happy to strap on roseate blinkers when it comes to the Union.
followed by WW1 centenary in August and 75 years of WW2 in September. All those Union Jacks and spitfires and fighting U boats from the Clyde and Scapa.
Jeez, it's like Jim Davidson trying to turn Graham Norton straight by dangling Barbara Windsor in front of him. I'm amazed that someone who I seem to recall thinks the Great War was a colossally stupid waste of blood and treasure (with which I agree), is quite happy to strap on roseate blinkers when it comes to the Union.
It was, but it happened what are you going to do ignore it ? And blood ties will come through whether you like it or not.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
Now I am no supporter of the Conservatives but given that as recently as 2009 they held 30 out of 34 County Councils in England and even now hold 18 (including North Yorkshire) when Labour hold just 3 suggests that there is a considerable way to go before they are solely a 'South East' regional party.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
You may as well ague that the pits should've been kept open with state subsidies given your love of subsidising Starbucks jobs, rents and now mortgages with taxpayer cash.
Poor comeback tim - Kellyesque.
The only workers who get less than they paid in are the top 10% of earners. So 90% of workers are "subsidised by the state".
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
Now I am no supporter of the Conservatives but given that as recently as 2009 they held 30 out of 34 County Councils in England and even now hold 18 (including North Yorkshire) when Labour hold just 3 suggests that there is a considerable way to go before they are solely a 'South East' regional party.
As it goes aside Scotland the Tories real problems are in winning votes in urban areas whether they be in the North Midlands or South of the country
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
Now I am no supporter of the Conservatives but given that as recently as 2009 they held 30 out of 34 County Councils in England and even now hold 18 (including North Yorkshire) when Labour hold just 3 suggests that there is a considerable way to go before they are solely a 'South East' regional party.
Right so scotland wales and NI don't count ? The major cities don't count ? Stop looking at Labour's low points and start to look where the blues are today and how little DC has managed to push the the safe seat vote line further north. He's now south of the Trent.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
Whatever the pros and cons of cutting corporation tax to generate GDP growth, which I am sure are worthy of debate, we have the interesting prospect of the SNP gunning for the right wing vote with a tax policy explicitly favouring big business.
I am coming round to his canny style, should get a lot of support in Edinburghs financial sector (the non-nationalised bits at least)
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
Whatever the pros and cons of cutting corporation tax to generate GDP growth, which I am sure are worthy of debate, we have the interesting prospect of the SNP gunning for the right wing vote with a tax policy explicitly favouring big business.
I am coming round to his canny style, should get a lot of support in Edinburghs financial sector (the non-nationalised bits at least)
Of course rUk can always cut by 3p too or even more.
Unless Labour are in power - then it will probably be put up 5p.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
The welfare system is being used to transfer wage costs from employers to taxpayers hence why driving wages down is increasing government expenditure.
On topic, oddly identical bets; presumably the same person or group of people?
There is more than enough strangeness around the bets for them to have to be taken with a suitable large pinch of salt.
Most bizarrre for me though it the timing. Political bets and particularly large ones are not presumably done on a whim but done with specific intelligence and knowledge of political factors that would swing things in a definitive or close to decisive manner.
There has been no big news on the Independence referendum lately nor are there any impending polls or huge events imminent as far as I know that could explain such a massive punt. Are these likely to be the best odds for No? Could a poll come out that would improve them with over a year to go? Like I say, bizarre.
It's a very odd story but for those who believe everything the PR departments of the bookies say then so be it.
I'll repeat my previous generous offer, No at 4/9 (double the best high st price) and take up to £100. Obviously the wee fearties with petit pois sized cullions who will only offer evens need not apply.
LOL
I wasn't sure if you had taken enough action from those who aren't chicken as it was. Nicely done.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
The welfare system is being used to transfer wage costs from employers to taxpayers hence why driving wages down is increasing government expenditure.
Then fix the tax and welfare system - think only Ukip are proposing anything radical there.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
You may as well ague that the pits should've been kept open with state subsidies given your love of subsidising Starbucks jobs, rents and now mortgages with taxpayer cash.
Poor comeback tim - Kellyesque.
The only workers who get less than they paid in are the top 10% of earners. So 90% of workers are "subsidised by the state".
And Osborne plans to give them a £120k state subsidy to remortgage a £600k house as of next Jan. I don't know how much a pit cost to keep open but the subsidies Scargill wanted won't have been any less than the Tory subsidy junkies demand the state must find to subsidise Starbucks wages and their employees housing costs.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
Yet the private sector has created loads of jobs - whadda coincidence.
State subsidised low paid jobs reliant on massive benefit spending while corporations move around between different territories competing with each other to slash corporation tax. And still corporation tax receipts fall as our govt has cut them.
I know you're a benefit junky when it comes to the state benefit system subsidising housing costs, but surely paying benefits to Starbucks workers to top up their pay on top of their rent might give you pause for thought.
What's wrong with working in Starbucks?
Nothing at all, but it's a state subsidised job, Starbucks pay little tax and rely on the state to pay a big chunk of their employees housing costs and top up their incomes.
All low paid jobs are state subsidised - you have to earn a huge wage to pay enough tax to cover education, health, defence etc etc. A silly obtuse argument.
You may as well ague that the pits should've been kept open with state subsidies given your love of subsidising Starbucks jobs, rents and now mortgages with taxpayer cash.
Poor comeback tim - Kellyesque.
The only workers who get less than they paid in are the top 10% of earners. So 90% of workers are "subsidised by the state".
And Osborne plans to give them a £120k state subsidy to remortgage a £600k house as of next Jan. I don't know how much a pit cost to keep open but the subsidies Scargill wanted won't have been any less than the Tory subsidy junkies demand the state must find to subsidise Starbucks wages and their employees housing costs.
But carry on, you're an addict.
Junkie seems to be winning your buzzword bingo tonight - bravo.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
Now I am no supporter of the Conservatives but given that as recently as 2009 they held 30 out of 34 County Councils in England and even now hold 18 (including North Yorkshire) when Labour hold just 3 suggests that there is a considerable way to go before they are solely a 'South East' regional party.
Right so scotland wales and NI don't count ? The major cities don't count ? Stop looking at Labour's low points and start to look where the blues are today and how little DC has managed to push the the safe seat vote line further north. He's now south of the Trent.
Since when did the South East start at the River Trent? By suggesting the Tories are a SE regional party the implication is they are 'locked out' of the other regions. . I would suggest that the results from 2009 and from 2013 prove that the Tories do still have the potential to gain significant support in most regions. The only region they are locked out of pretty much is Scotland (Northern Ireland has a completely different political outlook so using that as an example a non starter ).
Now as I said before the Tories have an urban problem which applies as much in the South and Midlands as it does in the North (Labour have a non-urban problem) and that is where the main divide is.
As for your safe seat concept. Did Labour move their 'safe seats' line in 13 years of government because it seems to me they didn't.
David Herdson said "Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent. I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
truth in that YC we have a conservative party which is increasingly becoming a SE regional party and labour which no longer represents workers. Is politics ready for some radical change or can the big 2 get theit act together ?
Now I am no supporter of the Conservatives but given that as recently as 2009 they held 30 out of 34 County Councils in England and even now hold 18 (including North Yorkshire) when Labour hold just 3 suggests that there is a considerable way to go before they are solely a 'South East' regional party.
Right so scotland wales and NI don't count ? The major cities don't count ? Stop looking at Labour's low points and start to look where the blues are today and how little DC has managed to push the the safe seat vote line further north. He's now south of the Trent.
Since when did the South East start at the River Trent? By suggesting the Tories are a SE regional party the implication is they are 'locked out' of the other regions. . I would suggest that the results from 2009 and from 2013 prove that the Tories do still have the potential to gain significant support in most regions. The only region they are locked out of pretty much is Scotland (Northern Ireland has a completely different political outlook so using that as an example a non starter ).
Now as I said before the Tories have an urban problem which applies as much in the South and Midlands as it does in the North (Labour have a non-urban problem) and that is where the main divide is.
As for your safe seat concept. Did Labour move their 'safe seats' line in 13 years of government because it seems to me they didn't.
for a decade labour did they won seats in the south under Blair they wont win today .
Comments
The Queen in my opinion has been an excellent cermonial type monarch.
Keeping above party politics 99.9% of the time.
However what ever arguments you use in a modern democratic state, born to be head of it should not exist.
GW with @TheBig_Easy at @CallawayGolf this week pic.twitter.com/xPzvR5TM83
I thought the lib dem base was ready to rip little Danny a new one already. Turns out we've seen nothing yet.
WTF is Clegg doing? The lib dems are not going to like this at all. Dear oh dear.
Clegg might just find those whisper campaigns starting far sooner than he'd hoped.
"The miners and their families had come to the valleys from hundreds of miles around - some had literally walked to the valleys, drawn by the prospect of employment.
Since no one is willing to face up to that (and goodness knows how you do it sensitively and humanely) - all we do is prolong the agony.
On-topic, I suppose a safer bet might have been to put the £200k on the 1/50 shot that went in at Yarmouth this afternoon. Ok, you'd only walk out with £204k but that still beats any bank.
NSW, Coalition +3, Lab -3
VIC , Coalition, +5, Lab -5
Q'land Coalition -11, Lab +11
WA NC
SA NC
TAS NC
That would give Rudd's ALP a net gain of 3 seats since 2010 and probably a majority, thanks to the huge swing in Queensland more than offsetting losses in NSW and Victoria, but still could go either way
How you manage the process politically is a tricky one, and presumably the reason - along the stubborn refusal to admit the need - that it hasn't happened.
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/students/student-loans-tuition-fees-changes
I heard him on the radio saying that removing the interest rate cap would be bad, but he was struggling to get answers from the government.
WTF is Clegg doing? The lib dems are not going to like this at all. Dear oh dear.
Clegg might just find those whisper campaigns starting far sooner than he'd hoped.
(*) My favourite, if that word can be used, is Marsden village in Sunderland. You visit SOuter lighthouse now by walking over an area of grassland that looks ancient. In fact, it was the location of Marsden village, an old pit village.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/wear/content/articles/2005/06/29/coast05walks_stage2_walk.shtml
The future king has not taken the example of staying out of party politics 99,9% of the time.
The trouble with Conservative politicans like yourself , is you always stick to tradition when its needs a change.
Against Home Rule for Ireland
Against Devolution for Scotland
Against a Welsh Assembly.
For once get ahead of the times and when this Queen goes, take the oppurtunity to change, like Benjamin Disraeli did over voting reform.
The world is full of abandoned communities whose time came and went
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatehpur_Sikri
Well I never, there is hope for him yet.
Shame that we do not get the same option south of the border.
Julia Dobson (a teacher, stood in Isle of Anglesey locals this year)
Daniel ap Eifion Jones (works for some charities, stood in Isle of Anglesey locals this year)
Tal Michael (again. Alun Michael's son. Stood as PCC candidate for North Wales, shortlisted for Arfon 2015 nomination)
Paul Penlington (Denbighshire councillor, the one who wasn't originally declared elected because they put his votes in the Tory pile; former LD GE Vale of Clwyd candidate)
Thanks for the Ynys Mon details. For a long time I used to think it was spelt "Yns Mon".
An interesting market would be a spread on the yes %. I'd be tempted to buy if it was in the mid 30%'s, although that would be more on instinct than evidence.
The huge reduction in corporation tax already implemented is costing billions, the deficit would take a pounding if it was extended even further.
"Conservatives are frequently in favour of change or reform but usually only to either prevent the risk of revolution, or to improve what's there. Change for change's sake isn't on the agenda (that's not to say that all the change works or that, in retrospect, it would have better to have left things be but both of those are with the benefit of hindsight, rather than intent beforehand"
I think the present conservative party is to complacent.
I always used believe the Tony Blair comment in the late 90`s that the Conservatives would not die, they were just asleep.
I am not to sure now a party that hardly exists in Scotland compared to the 1950s and was still against devolution and a PR voting system is in reality willing to commit suicide in certain parts of the United Kingdom, and be totally dependent on the fptp in the south of england is a death spiral strategy in the long run.
We do not need new towns, we need new communities.
The village I live in - Cambourne - has got it mostly right, despite the Guardinista's hatred of the place. We have houses built in different styles, in three different 'villages' separated by a country park, and a good network of paths and bridleways. There is hardly a single straight road in the place, which should keep traffic speeds down.
Facilities are a problem; but there is a supermarket and a pub, and soon a Co-Op to join the multi-faith church, leisure centre and hotel.
But these are the bare minimum I would expect from a new community. You need more: there is a large business park and also a reasonable (if expensive) bus link to Cambridge, as well as a good dual carriageway that deposits you onto the A14.
It is already a community. It has many minor problems, for instance the paucity of facilities for the young, but mostly it works.
Any new town should look at Cambourne and see what works, and try to improve on it. Sadly it is not the cheapest way of doing things, and other new villages in Cambridgeshire, such as Northstowe, are going to be worse places to live.
It is more than just building houses: it is the whole package. And those extras cost money and political will.
I'll repeat my previous generous offer, No at 4/9 (double the best high st price) and take up to £100. Obviously the wee fearties with petit pois sized cullions who will only offer evens need not apply.
It is only fptp holding the big two together.
I believe austerity until 2020 will eventualy create some radical change and break the duopoly.
I'm amazed that someone who I seem to recall thinks the Great War was a colossally stupid waste of blood and treasure (with which I agree), is quite happy to strap on roseate blinkers when it comes to the Union.
The only workers who get less than they paid in are the top 10% of earners. So 90% of workers are "subsidised by the state".
I think Cameron starting off with it as a 'celebration' set the tone. We'll try and keep it dignified up here, no flypasts or flag waving preferably.
I am coming round to his canny style, should get a lot of support in Edinburghs financial sector (the non-nationalised bits at least)
Unless Labour are in power - then it will probably be put up 5p.
Most bizarrre for me though it the timing. Political bets and particularly large ones are not presumably done on a whim but done with specific intelligence and knowledge of political factors that would swing things in a definitive or close to decisive manner.
There has been no big news on the Independence referendum lately nor are there any impending polls or huge events imminent as far as I know that could explain such a massive punt. Are these likely to be the best odds for No? Could a poll come out that would improve them with over a year to go? Like I say, bizarre.
It's a very odd story but for those who believe everything the PR departments of the bookies say then so be it. LOL
I wasn't sure if you had taken enough action from those who aren't chicken as it was.
Nicely done.
Laurie Penny @PennyRed
On BBC Newsnight tonight talking about hardening attitudes to welfare. My top has a huge rip and I've no time to go home and change
There is a new consensus about the economy and – believe it or not – Labour called it first
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/there-new-consensus-about-economy-and-believe-it-or-not-labour-called-it-first
Labour - bankrupt of ideas.
https://twitter.com/EricPickles/status/350262397321244672/photo/1
Now as I said before the Tories have an urban problem which applies as much in the South and Midlands as it does in the North (Labour have a non-urban problem) and that is where the main divide is.
As for your safe seat concept. Did Labour move their 'safe seats' line in 13 years of government because it seems to me they didn't.