Well one of the sectors to look at where there is a massive skills shortage is construction, and YoY pay growth is running at 6% there. If the skills shortage is being replicated in other sectors it won't be long until similar figures are seen.
I'm hearing a lot of anecdotal evidence of fairly major wage pressure in quite a few different areas: development, compliance, etc.
A friend of mine is an electrician and he has negotiated an increase in his day rate from £80 to £125. In our sector there is fairly major wage pressure, I know that some banks are reluctant to give major wage rises at the moment but they can only hold back the tide for so long.
For what it's worth, Leave has the (subsample) lead among 2015 Tory voters across ICM, Ipsos, Comres and Yougov.
Cameron is presently on the wrong side of the people who voted him in.
Wrong. Ipsos MORI CON voter split REMAIN 53% LEAVE 41%
Mike you place a lot of faith in Ipsos Mori polls these days. Is it just becuase they are Phone polls? Does anyone know how did Ipsos Mori phone polls did in 2015 in predicting GE 2015?
The markets will most likely support the PM, for a few days anyway. Unless the PM declares himself for Leave, then Remain will come in and Leave will go out. Although if the deal is as bad as is being reported the effect could be minimal before the press and half his own party tear into Cameron!
Even if it's only a quarter of his own (parliamentary) party, they will get a lot of attention.
How do you reach the conclusion in your second sentence? If Cameron backs LEAVE, then REMAIN will be finished. Cameron's popularity will rise - he'll be seen as a Churchill, not a Chamberlain - and REMAIN will be lucky to get as much support as the LDs did for electoral reform.
Meanwhile, any points raised by France about the City of London might get discussed on page 17 where few will notice. The British media will never accuse a British government and civil service elite of cocking up negotiations.
We are in agreement. Whichever side the PM backs will shorten in price initially.
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Pretty sure bunch of African economies have worst participation and productivity than us. You are correct that you can't interpret productiviy on own, but it still matters once you adjust for participation effect.
Fair point. If you're not careful I'll produce a chart showing productivity vs labour participation rates for countries with similar GDP per capita
Christopher Howard Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
To ask the stupid question, was it declared by the BBC when interviewing Kinnock that he is paid a pension by the EU, under the terms of which he is not allowed to criticise them publically?
The Leave campaign need a media hit squad to fire off formal complaints every time someone with an EU pension or employment is interviewed without making a declaration of interest.
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
For what it's worth, Leave has the (subsample) lead among 2015 Tory voters across ICM, Ipsos, Comres and Yougov.
Cameron is presently on the wrong side of the people who voted him in.
Wrong. Ipsos MORI CON voter split REMAIN 53% LEAVE 41%
Mike you place a lot of faith in Ipsos Mori polls these days. Is it just becuase they are Phone polls? Does anyone know how did Ipsos Mori phone polls did in 2015 in predicting GE 2015?
They were about 8 points wide of the mark four months before the GE and also SIndy in favour of Labour and No respectively. They, uniquely among phone pollsters, kept finding Labour leads between Jan-April.
Mike has also looked at current vote, rather than those who voted Tory in 2015. If we believe Ipsos, around 400,000 2015 Lib Dems are now Tories.
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
'Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
correct Robert, though harder to use that kind of argument about the US
Not really, the absolute employment rate in the US is about 68%, here it is about 74%. We have significantly more lower paid/skilled workers in the workforce than the US. The US BLS have just semi-gamed the statistics so that people automatically drop out of the workforce after a set amount of time being unemployed.
Some journalists tend to think rather a lot of themselves, imagining that what they say and write shakes the political establishment. Unsurprisingly, columnists are particularly prone to hubris and none more so than the Times’s Tim Montgomerie.
He made much in Thursday’s Times of quitting the Conservative party because he disagrees with David Cameron’s desire to keep Britain in the European Union.
His self-conceit will doubtless be bolstered by the fact that other journalists think his resignation significant enough to be worthy of reporting (yes, including here at the Guardian).
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Pretty sure bunch of African economies have worst participation and productivity than us. You are correct that you can't interpret productiviy on own, but it still matters once you adjust for participation effect.
Fair point. If you're not careful I'll produce a chart showing productivity vs labour participation rates for countries with similar GDP per capita
Thats because productivity x employment/capita = GDP per capita!! Correct by definition. Point is that raising productivity for same level of participation gets you HIGHER GDP per capita!!
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader. If you care to look on the last thread, you will find that my reaction to the news was a post very favourable to Tim Montgomerie.
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
No, the French want to impose their uncompetitive EMU reforms on the City because they know the Euro puts Paris at a disadvantage.
Breakfast this morning with one of Hillary's major backers (has dinner with her every 8 weeks or so)
- Email: it was stupid, but no one cares. If she wins in SC the investigation will be buried. Republicans and Fox will knock themselves out but it will have minimal impact.
- I asked that if it was a problem could Biden be an option. He said the Hillary would need to release her delegates and direct them to Biden. "Difficult but not impossible". My contact's son, who'd also flown in for the meeting asked about Bloomberg - who was largely dismissed as too late to get on the ballot
- I asked him why he still supported her because, to me, she seems very uninspiring. Enlighting response: "She's my gal. I came to the dance with her and I'm going home with her or I'm going home alone.". Not a ringing endorsement!
Some journalists tend to think rather a lot of themselves, imagining that what they say and write shakes the political establishment. Unsurprisingly, columnists are particularly prone to hubris and none more so than the Times’s Tim Montgomerie.
He made much in Thursday’s Times of quitting the Conservative party because he disagrees with David Cameron’s desire to keep Britain in the European Union.
His self-conceit will doubtless be bolstered by the fact that other journalists think his resignation significant enough to be worthy of reporting (yes, including here at the Guardian).
On the subject of productivity there was a 1.7% increase in hours worked in 2015q4.
With GDP growth of only 0.5% in that quarter that's likely to mean a big drop in productivity unless the data is revised.
Now will government ministers and Conservative cheerleaders be as eager to tweet a drop in UK productivity as they were to tweet its increases in the previous two quarters ?
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
Also, what's German unemployment / non-participation like? In the US it's only 62% working, the rest being retired, students, unemployed or off the grid. Having little more than half your people working will make the productivity stats look great!
from memory germany has it's lowest unemploymeny figures for decades.
Though that may change now 1million migrants have rolled up.
Some journalists tend to think rather a lot of themselves, imagining that what they say and write shakes the political establishment. Unsurprisingly, columnists are particularly prone to hubris and none more so than the Times’s Tim Montgomerie.
He made much in Thursday’s Times of quitting the Conservative party because he disagrees with David Cameron’s desire to keep Britain in the European Union.
His self-conceit will doubtless be bolstered by the fact that other journalists think his resignation significant enough to be worthy of reporting (yes, including here at the Guardian).
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
Honestly, it's like watching ferrets in a sack. With UKIP's raison d'etre just a few months away they are fannying around like this, it makes you think that they don't really want Leave to prosper.
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
Honestly, it's like watching ferrets in a sack. With UKIP's raison d'etre just a few months away they are fannying around like this, it makes you think that they don't really want Leave to prosper.
With Farage's serial inability to become an MP, you can understand why he might not be so keen to give up his MEP's salary and attendant allowances.
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
No, UK is (or was before folding) concerned about Eurozone using bloc vote to add rules to single rulebook that particularly hurt City of London. E.g. rules on pay or limiting hedge fund leverage. Original draft negotiated allowance for different rules for Eurozone and non-Euro states in finance. That got watered down to different interpretations of same rules in second draft, so that Euro bloc vite could be used to push through new rules, but at least Bank of England could interpret them differently. On latest draft, even that language has been removed, so UK would have to apply ECB interpretation of rules forced through.
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
Is you take France as an example then for everyone employed the company has to pay a not insignificant sum to its national health service. A good incentive not to employ anyone. Workers themselves have to pay a good chunk to their health insurer as well, a good incentive to ask for a higher wage.
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
Honestly, it's like watching ferrets in a sack. With UKIP's raison d'etre just a few months away they are fannying around like this, it makes you think that they don't really want Leave to prosper.
With Farage's serial inability to become an MP, you can understand why he might not be so keen to give up his MEP's salary and attendant allowances.
It does make you wonder doesn't it.
Just like the Lib Dems and the coalition in 2014, the smarter option was to exit and move to supply and confidence in early 2014 so as to create a clear gap between them and the Tories (given their campaign was based on this idea) but AIUI the leadership were basically unwilling to give up with ministerial perks (higher salaries, drivers etc...) for the good of the campaign/party.
'Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
correct Robert, though harder to use that kind of argument about the US
So perhaps you should question the validity of the statistic?
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
No, the French want to impose their uncompetitive EMU reforms on the City because they know the Euro puts Paris at a disadvantage.
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
Is you take France as an example then for everyone employed the company has to pay a not insignificant sum to its national health service. A good incentive not to employ anyone. Workers themselves have to pay a good chunk to their health insurer as well, a good incentive to ask for a higher wage.
I've heard that the UK has similar schemes called income tax and national insurance.
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
Is you take France as an example then for everyone employed the company has to pay a not insignificant sum to its national health service. A good incentive not to employ anyone. Workers themselves have to pay a good chunk to their health insurer as well, a good incentive to ask for a higher wage.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
That's a rather long winded way of saying you can't bear to side with kippers no matter how crap the EU is and how much it damages your country.
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Pretty sure bunch of African economies have worst participation and productivity than us. You are correct that you can't interpret productiviy on own, but it still matters once you adjust for participation effect.
Fair point. If you're not careful I'll produce a chart showing productivity vs labour participation rates for countries with similar GDP per capita
Thats because productivity x employment/capita = GDP per capita!! Correct by definition. Point is that raising productivity for same level of participation gets you HIGHER GDP per capita!!
I don't think we're enormously in disagreement. What we need to measure is:
For a worker of a given intelligence level, what is their output per hour. Otherwise, all we're doing is measuring labour participation rates.
SkyNews The Supreme Court has ruled the law on joint enterprise has been wrongly interpreted by criminal trial judges over the past 30 years
Can lawyers of this parish advise what the significance of this is?
Wasn’r someone who wasn’t at the scene, and anyway couldn’t see prosecuted under this rule?
Derek Bentley was shockingly hanged under this rule even though be was in police custody at the time and had a mental age of 10.
And it was argued that when he said “let him have it” he was telling his partner, who actually did the deed, to hand over the gun. The partner is now a (retired) plumber somewhere in the Home Counties IIRC.
I was, though, thinking of a more recent case i, again IIRC, Greater Manchester.
Christopher Howard Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
Lord Kinnockio of Brussels.
There are a of of idiots on either side of the argument. Corbyn is said to be lukewarm on Europe.
My contact's son, who'd also flown in for the meeting asked about Bloomberg - who was largely dismissed as too late to get on the ballot
I believe he's not quite too late to get on the ballot. The rules vary from state to state and are quite complicated - some states have a later deadline for independents. He can just about do it if he commits in early March, but it would require a massive effort to get the large number of signatures required in some states.
See the table here for the requirements for independents:
NIGEL Farage’s allies have launched a last-ditch bid to stop disgraced ex-Tory MP Neil Hamilton making a political comeback in Wales – warning he will use it to launch a coup.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
Honestly, it's like watching ferrets in a sack. With UKIP's raison d'etre just a few months away they are fannying around like this, it makes you think that they don't really want Leave to prosper.
With Farage's serial inability to become an MP, you can understand why he might not be so keen to give up his MEP's salary and attendant allowances.
There's no reason why Farage shouldn't remain as an EuroMP - all he would have to do is move to another country as for example:
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Pretty sure bunch of African economies have worst participation and productivity than us. You are correct that you can't interpret productiviy on own, but it still matters once you adjust for participation effect.
Fair point. If you're not careful I'll produce a chart showing productivity vs labour participation rates for countries with similar GDP per capita
Thats because productivity x employment/capita = GDP per capita!! Correct by definition. Point is that raising productivity for same level of participation gets you HIGHER GDP per capita!!
I don't think we're enormously in disagreement. What we need to measure is:
For a worker of a given intelligence level, what is their output per hour. Otherwise, all we're doing is measuring labour participation rates.
Change intelligence for aptitude and we're there!! Known a lot of smart but lazy buggers over the years!!
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
Is you take France as an example then for everyone employed the company has to pay a not insignificant sum to its national health service. A good incentive not to employ anyone. Workers themselves have to pay a good chunk to their health insurer as well, a good incentive to ask for a higher wage.
SkyNews The Supreme Court has ruled the law on joint enterprise has been wrongly interpreted by criminal trial judges over the past 30 years
Can lawyers of this parish advise what the significance of this is?
Wasn’r someone who wasn’t at the scene, and anyway couldn’t see prosecuted under this rule?
Derek Bentley was shockingly hanged under this rule even though be was in police custody at the time and had a mental age of 10.
And it was argued that when he said “let him have it” he was telling his partner, who actually did the deed, to hand over the gun. The partner is now a (retired) plumber somewhere in the Home Counties IIRC.
I was, though, thinking of a more recent case i, again IIRC, Greater Manchester.
“let him have it” is an odd choice of words to use if you want somone to hand over a gun in a heated situation.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
No - that is no more fair than saying that the More-in-Sorrow-than-in-Anger Remainers are the useful idiots of the scaredy cats.
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
And when in practice Britain post-Leave became illiberal and much more closed to the world, all you would have done is enabled those who you dislike to achieve their aims.
I see the question of EU membership as a means, not an end. I do not will the ends that the bulk of Leavers will. Therefore I cannot sensibly line up with them.
I don't think that will be the case - though it is a risk and one reason why (a) I have not finally decided; and (b) find this a difficult decision.
Other European countries are far more illiberal than Britain. It is not Britain which has significant fascist parties as Italy and Greece and France and Hungary do. Views on gay rights, on anti-Semitism, on women are often far more illiberal in some Continental countries. I would much rather be a professional woman working in Britain than in Italy, say.
I might equally say that you are enabling Britain to become a much more undemocratic country. You too are enabling those whom you think of as "dysfunctional", "mediocre, reactive and short-sighted" to continue playing a very significant part in the governance of Britain and without the "major reform" that even you agree the EU needs.
We want largely the same things, I think, and are politely (I hope) disagreeing about means.
But I am not going to be described by you - or anyone else, frankly - as hating foreigners or thinking of immigrants as vermin since it is not true. Thanks all the same.
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
No, the French want to impose their uncompetitive EMU reforms on the City because they know the Euro puts Paris at a disadvantage.
@Charles, the "decide by" date Bloomberg's set internally is the weekend of 5/6 March.
He's adding members to the team all the time, and I think there's a lot of internal momentum there. He's being doing a lot of private polling to see how he'd do in a Hillary vs Trump race.
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader. If you care to look on the last thread, you will find that my reaction to the news was a post very favourable to Tim Montgomerie.
On the other hand I have long regarded him as a one eyed self serving bigot...
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
UK manufacturing has narrowed the productivity gap re Germany and France during the last decade.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
Is you take France as an example then for everyone employed the company has to pay a not insignificant sum to its national health service. A good incentive not to employ anyone. Workers themselves have to pay a good chunk to their health insurer as well, a good incentive to ask for a higher wage.
The light yellow is 'social charges' - i.e. things that the employee doesn't see, such as Employer's National Insurance, etc.
France has by far the highest social charges in Europe, Italy and Belgium aren't far behind.
The dark purple section is mandatory unsubsidised employee benefits so should also be included in any comparison. I don't think the picture is all that different.
SkyNews The Supreme Court has ruled the law on joint enterprise has been wrongly interpreted by criminal trial judges over the past 30 years
Can lawyers of this parish advise what the significance of this is?
Wasn’r someone who wasn’t at the scene, and anyway couldn’t see prosecuted under this rule?
Derek Bentley was shockingly hanged under this rule even though be was in police custody at the time and had a mental age of 10.
And it was argued that when he said “let him have it” he was telling his partner, who actually did the deed, to hand over the gun. The partner is now a (retired) plumber somewhere in the Home Counties IIRC.
I was, though, thinking of a more recent case i, again IIRC, Greater Manchester.
“let him have it” is an odd choice of words to use if you want somone to hand over a gun in a heated situation.
He wasn't very bright. At the very least there is some doubt involved.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Mr Meeks so you will be voting to remain because you do not like some of the people advocating Leave. SeanT summarises this as a dislike of the oiks, you respond by saying he read your statement wrong. I have re-read it. Do you include Dan Hannan in the "regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin"? Are you that desperate to find a reason to Remain?
I do not like the overwhelming nature of the people mouthing Leave and the various ways they want to go if they win. Montgomerie is a case in point and so is Farage and his BNPlite party. SeanT telling everyone to eff off hardly helps. There you go... I call it as I see it. If we sensibly leave and join the EEA I myself can see little real difference so I view the odious nature of many prime leavers with deep suspicion. Even sensible Tory Leavers risk throwing away the hard work done over the years by vacating the centre ground.
To head the no-platformers off at the pass, York Union didn’t announce the venue until the day before, meaning no-one had enough time to organize against me.
So I got to look 180 York students in the eyes and say: “Banning International Men’s Day brought a deep, deep sense of shame on the University of York. Did anybody in this room sign the petition?” When one young woman raised her hand, I asked her, “could you please explain to me why?”
Her answer was: “I’d rather not say”. Which, ironically, says it all. I also learned that the Women’s Officer who spearheaded the campaign to block IMD had booked a ticket, yet didn’t even bother (or have the guts) to turn up.
This, I believe, is symptomatic of the cowardice that pervades the keyboard warriors of the no-platform movement. They desperately try to keep people away, then refuse to turn up when they fail. It's a nullifying, impotent form of non-debate.
The meningitis B issue is the NHS in a microcosm. It is an effective vaccine. It is also very expensive. Current price is £75 compared with £4.33 for meningitis C and £30 for the combined A, C, W and Y vaccine. Because of the cost clinical priories will have to be made and the current strategy is sound. Ask the public if they will pay more tax towards healthcare and they will say no (although no political party is honest enough to make the case), yet they seem to want everything to be available. Will the DoH back down? Probably as they already demonstrate muddle headed thinking in the light of publicity campaigns (e.g. The Cancer Drugs Fund) so the pressure then gets applied somewhere else.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader. If you care to look on the last thread, you will find that my reaction to the news was a post very favourable to Tim Montgomerie.
On the other hand I have long regarded him as a one eyed self serving bigot...
A remark which says far more about you than it does about him.
I might equally say that you are enabling Britain to become a much more undemocratic country. You too are enabling those whom you think of as "dysfunctional", "mediocre, reactive and short-sighted" to continue playing a very significant part in the governance of Britain and without the "major reform" that even you agree the EU needs.
We want largely the same things, I think, and are politely (I hope) disagreeing about means.
But I am not going to be described by you - or anyone else, frankly - as hating foreigners or thinking of immigrants as vermin since it is not true. Thanks all the same.
You're right that it's silly to generalise about either side - there will be about 15 million people voting each way, and no doubt they will both include any number of both saintly and dodgy individuals. But for what it's worth I'd suggest that Britain is currently only in the upper middle of the European pack on liberalism, in the general terms that we tend to use it - attitudes to women, minorities, refugees, religious and non-religious freedom, gays and so on. Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands are on the whole more settled in their liberalism - each has its angry groups who dissent, but an amiable outward-looking attitude is the norm. Eastern Europe is decidedly less liberal, and other countries pretty mixed. Britain is liberal on free speech but we're still mixed-up kids over anything to do with sex, and religion of all kinds is still a biggish factor, if nothing like the US.
I think that for a liberal Leaver, it's a genuine problem that there is no dominant reasonable Leaver at the moment, making it hard to predict who will emerge as a post-Cameron Leaver leader (I can't see the Tories picking a Remain champion if we've voted to leave) or what their agenda will be, but I'd expect Britain to drift to a harder right position. It is difficult to change radically in any direction in the EU (Corbyn will find the same if he does by chance win), but some Leavers will see a mandate to strike out against what they see as political correctness and stifling preoccupation with individual rights.
Beware of turning into Badger and Ratty from 'The Wind in the Willows'. There are lots of stoats and weasles in every set of voters. Vote with your head and ignore your fellow travellers.
They can't all be middle class lawyers with 'progressive' values.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
@PeterMannionMP: In a motel room somwhere in South Carolina, Tim Montgomerie awakes with anticipation, only to find the world's still spinning. He weeps.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
That is interesting. It doesn't quite fit with my conversations on the doorsteps from the "What's the point in voting? None of them will do a thing about immigration...." brigade. I can see how it would apply to the youngsters, though do they admit to not voting?
There are issues though regarding how many Can't Be Arsed members the pollsters actually find. Let's face it, there's no great incentive to find them.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
It's unsurprising, older voters who favour Leave are more likely to vote than younger voters who favour Remain. As against that, middle class voters favour Remain, while working class voters favour Leave, but the difference between middle and working class turnout is far less than the difference between old and young turnout.
Over and above that, it's likely that the most passionately committed voters are disproportionately for Leave.
The rule book for financial services in the Single market will be Mifid II. This will apply inside and outside the EZ. I think you are getting confused about what is supposedly being negotiated here. Given Cameron's antics this is hardly your fault.
Incorrect. Mifid II is only one small chunk of European single rulebook. Think about it - UK already signed up for that so why would French be changing text to make sure European rulebook applies to UK if thats all it was??
Because we are talking about different things. What the French are talking about is the entire single market rule book applying to the UK. That must be so. It is of the essence of a single market.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
No, the French want to impose their uncompetitive EMU reforms on the City because they know the Euro puts Paris at a disadvantage.
For those that don't want to register, the url sums up the article.
It's not quite dead, rather kicked into the long grass.
Some of the core principles of the tax were agreed in December and there is technical work still going one. 2 states are hesitant about proceeding however so there would only be 8 in favour which means they can't use the enhanced co-operation procedure (which needs at least 9 states).
Even if these hurdles are overcome, no tax would come in until at least mid-2017 at the very earliest.
However, I would not be surprised to see it revived in some form at some point in the future when more states come - or are persuaded to come - on board.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
I am a can't be arsed. A month ago I was a cant be arsed favouring Remain. Now I am even more can't be arsed and if I did vote would likely be Leave.
Mr. Sandpit, I must admit, I didn't realise the season started so soon.
The grid looks very similar to last year. No major moves (I think the only midfield changes are at Renault, one of which was Grosjean by necessity, and the other of which is Maldonado going due to lack of money).
@PeterMannionMP: In a motel room somwhere in South Carolina, Tim Montgomerie awakes with anticipation, only to find the world's still spinning. He weeps.
It's not quite dead, rather kicked into the long grass.
Some of the core principles of the tax were agreed in December and there is technical work still going one. 2 states are hesitant about proceeding however so there would only be 8 in favour which means they can't use the enhanced co-operation procedure (which needs at least 9 states).
Even if these hurdles are overcome, no tax would come in until at least mid-2017 at the very earliest.
However, I would not be surprised to see it revived in some form at some point in the future when more states come - or are persuaded to come - on board.
But of the eight who are theoretically in favour, a number are not really in favour.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
Snip
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
It's unsurprising, older voters who favour Leave are more likely to vote than younger voters who favour Remain. As against that, middle class voters favour Remain, while working class voters favour Leave, but the difference between middle and working class turnout is far less than the difference between old and young turnout.
Over and above that, it's likely that the most passionately committed voters are disproportionately for Leave.
Miss Plato, just wondering if you've got any classical history books yet (a little while ago you asked for recommendations).
Also, I'm thinking of blogging about good starting points (as in, periods/people) and was wondering which time periods/people you looked at [if you were asking for recommendations blind, as it were, and don't have an answer, that's cool, I just thought it'd be useful to get your perspective].
Not classical, but the Spectator review i read of "Tales from the Long Twelfth Century" intrigued - rather a lot happened between 1066 - 1215. Shame there are no comments on amazon yet..
Miss Plato, just wondering if you've got any classical history books yet (a little while ago you asked for recommendations).
Also, I'm thinking of blogging about good starting points (as in, periods/people) and was wondering which time periods/people you looked at [if you were asking for recommendations blind, as it were, and don't have an answer, that's cool, I just thought it'd be useful to get your perspective].
Not classical, but the Spectator review i read of "Tales from the Long Twelfth Century" intrigued - rather a lot happened between 1066 - 1215. Shame there are no comments on amazon yet..
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
.
That is interesting. It doesn't quite fit with my conversations on the doorsteps from the "What's the point in voting? None of them will do a thing about immigration...." brigade. I can see how it would apply to the youngsters, though do they admit to not voting?
There are issues though regarding how many Can't Be Arsed members the pollsters actually find. Let's face it, there's no great incentive to find them.
Among 9/10 and 10/10 most likely to vote respondents, Ipsos MORI have found a similar shift to Leave to other pollsters, from 54/36 Remain in December, to 52/41 in January, to 50/40 now. A big shift the other way, among those saying Certain not to Vote, has kept the headline numbers much the same.
Just laid sanders @ 11/1 & (re)backed Bloomberg @ 47/1
Those odds aren't correctly correlated.
Hmm... I'm currently playing a dutch backing game of all the republican candidates (Longest Trump) except Bush. +ve Bloomberg & Biden to zeroish.
I think one can overtrade.
I can spend an awful lot of time adjusting my positions on rather flaky data and innuendo, which does nothing but cost me time and stress for very marginal returns, that may be wrong anyway.
I will next review my GOP positions after South Carolina and Nevada, but I don't expect to change it much.
Must say it sounds like you think we should leave, but that the most vocal leavers are people whom you dislike on a political/personal basis. Making the decision based on association with voters you dislike rather than the issue itself (you do describe the deal as 'pisspoor' and the EU as 'dysfunctional') is up to you, but I think the issue matters more, and hope you reconsider.
The question for me is about how Britain develops in the future. To Remain or to Leave is a question about means, not ends. Remain is a poor means. But Leave is showing itself to be a worse one.
The only thing being revealed by your admission this morning is your own bigotry.
I would imagine that turnout will be an important factor in the EU Referendum. Only 34% voted in the last EU elections ... and UKIP + various obviously anti-EU parties got over 30% of votes. If the EU is as unimportant an issue as Fence-Sitter Meeks has repeatedly told us, then Leave have quite a lot going for them ....
My contact's son, who'd also flown in for the meeting asked about Bloomberg - who was largely dismissed as too late to get on the ballot
I believe he's not quite too late to get on the ballot. The rules vary from state to state and are quite complicated - some states have a later deadline for independents. He can just about do it if he commits in early March, but it would require a massive effort to get the large number of signatures required in some states.
See the table here for the requirements for independents:
@PeterMannionMP: In a motel room somwhere in South Carolina, Tim Montgomerie awakes with anticipation, only to find the world's still spinning. He weeps.
Montie probably hasn't wept so much since Cameron won a majority.
Mr. Sandpit, I must admit, I didn't realise the season started so soon.
The grid looks very similar to last year. No major moves (I think the only midfield changes are at Renault, one of which was Grosjean by necessity, and the other of which is Maldonado going due to lack of money).
Yes, the top teams are all unchanged in drivers from last season and the midfield changes were forced by Grosjean.
Haas and Manor are the teams to watch next year. Coming from nowhere and right at the back respectively, with quick young drivers, major team changes, lots of outside support and a desire to come out of the box scoring points. Should be a good season.
Oh, and yes the Melbourne race is at 05:00 GMT, an hour earlier than last year to be sure they don't finish in the dark if there's a storm or a red flag.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
I am a can't be arsed. A month ago I was a cant be arsed favouring Remain. Now I am even more can't be arsed and if I did vote would likely be Leave.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
I suspect that turnout will be a bell curve in favour of REMAIN. The most ardent voters will be the 3.5m Kippers. I also suspect that the Can't Be Arsed Party will be strongly for LEAVE. High or low turnout favours Leave; but Remain occupies the Goldilocks zone.
If Ipsos MORI are correct, the can't be arsed favour Remain, heavily. Remain lead by 32% among those who say they are certain not to vote in the Referendum. The lead falls to 10% among those who say they are 9/10 likely to vote (the number that MORI uses for headline voting intention, and to 7% among those who are 10/10 likely to vote (the number MORI used for headline voting intention prior to the last election.
I am a can't be arsed. A month ago I was a cant be arsed favouring Remain. Now I am even more can't be arsed and if I did vote would likely be Leave.
2/10 voting likleyhood
So, Mr Owls, what could be done or said in the next few months that might make you arsed to vote, or are you fed up of it all already and just wished it over with?
Mr. Megalomaniacs, not read that, but have a passing knowledge of the period, and it's certainly very interesting.
Henry II buggered it up, though, making a similar error to Diocletian. It's all very well being a clever dick and making a complicated system, but if it collapses the moment you leave power, it's pointless.
Edited extra bit: snipped off the end bit. Nothing bad, but if I were thinking of buying a history and someone posted interesting bits out of context I *might* be annoyed. So I axed them.
Comments
Does anyone know how did Ipsos Mori phone polls did in 2015 in predicting GE 2015?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-35600546
The Leave campaign need a media hit squad to fire off formal complaints every time someone with an EU pension or employment is interviewed without making a declaration of interest.
The sector where the UK has the lowest relative productivity is Private Non-Financial services where Germany has 43% higher productivity, France 48% and even Italy has 9% higher productivity than the UK. These productivity gaps have rapidly increased during the last decade.
But then what can you expect when 'Private Non-Financial Services' ie wealth consumption is subsidised by UK governments by the hundreds of billions.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_433580.pdf
Mike has also looked at current vote, rather than those who voted Tory in 2015. If we believe Ipsos, around 400,000 2015 Lib Dems are now Tories.
What the UK is talking about is the risk that additional rules will be introduced within the EZ bloc as a means of regulating their internal market which have an adverse effect on those not in the EZ bloc. An obvious example is the FTT which the EZ wants to impose on all transactions involving Euros whether they take place in the EZ or in London (as most of them do). The UK is challenging their right to impose a duty on us to collect a tax of their citizens. We want the right to stop such changes if they adversely affect us. The French want the right of the EZ to regulate their own affairs.
Friends of Mr Farage accuse Mr Hamilton – a member of the party’s ruling national executive committee – of trying to “stitch up” his own selection for the Welsh Assembly and of plotting with its only MP Douglas Carswell to “kill off” Ukip.
As Ukip members vote on whether to include Mr Hamilton on the list of Assembly candidates tomorrow, a senior party source in London warned the ex-Tory would use a Welsh comeback to “make a power play”.
They even threatened that Mr Farage could boycott campaigning in Wales – where Ukip is on course for a major breakthrough – if Mr Hamilton is selected.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6938517/Ukip-at-war-in-Wales-as-Farage-behind-bid-to-stop-Neil-Hamilton-making-a-comeback.html
Goodness you sound like a Marxist
Those odds aren't correctly correlated.
"I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader"
how could any reach such a conclusion Richard ?
On the FTT, it's dead.
- Email: it was stupid, but no one cares. If she wins in SC the investigation will be buried. Republicans and Fox will knock themselves out but it will have minimal impact.
- I asked that if it was a problem could Biden be an option. He said the Hillary would need to release her delegates and direct them to Biden. "Difficult but not impossible". My contact's son, who'd also flown in for the meeting asked about Bloomberg - who was largely dismissed as too late to get on the ballot
- I asked him why he still supported her because, to me, she seems very uninspiring. Enlighting response: "She's my gal. I came to the dance with her and I'm going home with her or I'm going home alone.". Not a ringing endorsement!
Journalist in love the self importance of journalists shock
With GDP growth of only 0.5% in that quarter that's likely to mean a big drop in productivity unless the data is revised.
Now will government ministers and Conservative cheerleaders be as eager to tweet a drop in UK productivity as they were to tweet its increases in the previous two quarters ?
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=YBUS&dataset=lms&table-id=07
Though that may change now 1million migrants have rolled up.
TBH, this is the same guy who was banging on about how the lose of the Indy was major major earth shattering news.
I think UKIP has sensible chaps in it, but the leadership's a cult.
There's nothing wrong with wealth consumption, I do it all the time.
The problem is if you do not create enough wealth of your own to pay for the wealth you consume. And then 'pay' for the excess through borrowing.
Just like the Lib Dems and the coalition in 2014, the smarter option was to exit and move to supply and confidence in early 2014 so as to create a clear gap between them and the Tories (given their campaign was based on this idea) but AIUI the leadership were basically unwilling to give up with ministerial perks (higher salaries, drivers etc...) for the good of the campaign/party.
For a worker of a given intelligence level, what is their output per hour. Otherwise, all we're doing is measuring labour participation rates.
I was, though, thinking of a more recent case i, again IIRC, Greater Manchester.
Really? Not John Major then? you know - ex Prime minister...?
or Heseltine, Lawson, etc even Dan Hannan who has had some interesting things to say today to say the least.
Anyway still of some significance. more interesting will be if Gove, BoJo etc come out for Out.
See the table here for the requirements for independents:
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_access_for_presidential_candidates
The first deadline is Texas, 9th May, but he'd need to have 80,000 signatures lined up in the state by then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ari_Vatanen
The light yellow is 'social charges' - i.e. things that the employee doesn't see, such as Employer's National Insurance, etc.
France has by far the highest social charges in Europe, Italy and Belgium aren't far behind.
Other European countries are far more illiberal than Britain. It is not Britain which has significant fascist parties as Italy and Greece and France and Hungary do. Views on gay rights, on anti-Semitism, on women are often far more illiberal in some Continental countries. I would much rather be a professional woman working in Britain than in Italy, say.
I might equally say that you are enabling Britain to become a much more undemocratic country. You too are enabling those whom you think of as "dysfunctional", "mediocre, reactive and short-sighted" to continue playing a very significant part in the governance of Britain and without the "major reform" that even you agree the EU needs.
We want largely the same things, I think, and are politely (I hope) disagreeing about means.
But I am not going to be described by you - or anyone else, frankly - as hating foreigners or thinking of immigrants as vermin since it is not true. Thanks all the same.
https://global.handelsblatt.com/edition/369/ressort/finance/article/financial-transaction-tax-dies-a-quiet-death?5f62
For those that don't want to register, the url sums up the article.
He's adding members to the team all the time, and I think there's a lot of internal momentum there. He's being doing a lot of private polling to see how he'd do in a Hillary vs Trump race.
SeanT telling everyone to eff off hardly helps.
There you go... I call it as I see it.
If we sensibly leave and join the EEA I myself can see little real difference so I view the odious nature of many prime leavers with deep suspicion. Even sensible Tory Leavers risk throwing away the hard work done over the years by vacating the centre ground.
I'd disagree with that, but even were it so, the interests of the UK trump the interests of the Conservative Party.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/how-no-platforming-works--and-why-it-is-doomed-to-fail/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35601621
First Indonesian driver?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3451560/Obama-snubs-Scalia-funeral-President-NOT-attend-requiem-conservative-Supreme-Court-justice.html
I think that for a liberal Leaver, it's a genuine problem that there is no dominant reasonable Leaver at the moment, making it hard to predict who will emerge as a post-Cameron Leaver leader (I can't see the Tories picking a Remain champion if we've voted to leave) or what their agenda will be, but I'd expect Britain to drift to a harder right position. It is difficult to change radically in any direction in the EU (Corbyn will find the same if he does by chance win), but some Leavers will see a mandate to strike out against what they see as political correctness and stifling preoccupation with individual rights.
Beware of turning into Badger and Ratty from 'The Wind in the Willows'. There are lots of stoats and weasles in every set of voters. Vote with your head and ignore your fellow travellers.
They can't all be middle class lawyers with 'progressive' values.
There are issues though regarding how many Can't Be Arsed members the pollsters actually find. Let's face it, there's no great incentive to find them.
Over and above that, it's likely that the most passionately committed voters are disproportionately for Leave.
That's the last piece in the jigsaw, all teams have now announced their two drivers for the start of the season in Melbourne, only four weeks away! Nyooooom!
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2016/02/18/the-line-up-for-the-year/
Some of the core principles of the tax were agreed in December and there is technical work still going one. 2 states are hesitant about proceeding however so there would only be 8 in favour which means they can't use the enhanced co-operation procedure (which needs at least 9 states).
Even if these hurdles are overcome, no tax would come in until at least mid-2017 at the very earliest.
However, I would not be surprised to see it revived in some form at some point in the future when more states come - or are persuaded to come - on board.
2/10 voting likleyhood
The grid looks very similar to last year. No major moves (I think the only midfield changes are at Renault, one of which was Grosjean by necessity, and the other of which is Maldonado going due to lack of money).
As we can see here, some find it a difficult experience.
Just looking at GE 2015 Tories who prefer Leave is quite misleading.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/the-realm-of-england-from-the-pennines-to-the-pyrenees/
I can spend an awful lot of time adjusting my positions on rather flaky data and innuendo, which does nothing but cost me time and stress for very marginal returns, that may be wrong anyway.
I will next review my GOP positions after South Carolina and Nevada, but I don't expect to change it much.
Haas and Manor are the teams to watch next year. Coming from nowhere and right at the back respectively, with quick young drivers, major team changes, lots of outside support and a desire to come out of the box scoring points. Should be a good season.
Oh, and yes the Melbourne race is at 05:00 GMT, an hour earlier than last year to be sure they don't finish in the dark if there's a storm or a red flag.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/vote2014/eu-uk-results
You vote Remain, to cancel out my Leave vote.
I feel bad voting against David Cameron (pbuh)
Henry II buggered it up, though, making a similar error to Diocletian. It's all very well being a clever dick and making a complicated system, but if it collapses the moment you leave power, it's pointless.
Edited extra bit: snipped off the end bit. Nothing bad, but if I were thinking of buying a history and someone posted interesting bits out of context I *might* be annoyed. So I axed them.