politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview : March 3rd 2016

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview : March 3rd 2016

Bloomfield (Lab defence) on Blackpool
Result of council at last election (2015): Labour 29, Conservatives 13 (Labour majority of 16)
Result of ward at last election (2015) : Emboldened denotes elected
Labour 1,045, 902 (45%)
United Kingdom Independence Party 585 (25%)
Conservative 463, 294 (20%)
Green Party 202 (9%)
Independent 37 (2%)
Candidates duly nominated:

Read the full story here

SimonStClare

1st

rcs1000

FPT:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

Wanderer said:

rcs1000 said:

Fellow Leavers.

If we vote to Remain, it does not mean we are destined to join a European superstate, the Euro, etc. It merely means that we will need to wait until either (a) about a decade has passed, or (b) the Eurocrats make too blatant a power grab. The population of today does not decide for the population of tomorrow: if being inside the EU is sufficiently electorally unpopular, then we will leave the EU.

^This

If anyone thinks a Remain result means we agree to anything and everything they will get an unpleasant shock.

And that's exactly what some people said in 1975.

Until now, Richard, there has not been a consensus for leaving. When political parties stood on a "leave the EU platform", such as Labour in 1983, or UKIP in 2010, they did very badly.

Yet joining the Euro was sufficiently politically unpopular that we did not do it, even when ostensibly pro-EU parties were elected.

We are being given an opportunity now because anti-EU parties have made an impact. If we vote to Remain, then we have the opportunity to elect UKIP MPs and Eurosceptics from other parties. That is the nature of democracy.

That's true but if there's two things that's been proved this year is that the establishment will never stand up to the EU and that the establishment will do anything to remain in the EU.

By the time you've elected all your Eurosceptic MPs a lot of damage could have been done.

And getting those Eurosceptic MPs might be easier said than done - IIRC Cameron claimed to be more Eurosceptic than Davis back in 2005, the reality we see now has come as a shock to many (but not to me).

Which is why UKIP has risen, and it's why if the government rolls over post a Remain vote, it will continue to rise.

MarkSenior

rcs1000 said:

FPT:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

Wanderer said:

rcs1000 said:

Fellow Leavers.

If we vote to Remain, it does not mean we are destined to join a European superstate, the Euro, etc. It merely means that we will need to wait until either (a) about a decade has passed, or (b) the Eurocrats make too blatant a power grab. The population of today does not decide for the population of tomorrow: if being inside the EU is sufficiently electorally unpopular, then we will leave the EU.

^This

If anyone thinks a Remain result means we agree to anything and everything they will get an unpleasant shock.

And that's exactly what some people said in 1975.

Until now, Richard, there has not been a consensus for leaving. When political parties stood on a "leave the EU platform", such as Labour in 1983, or UKIP in 2010, they did very badly.

Yet joining the Euro was sufficiently politically unpopular that we did not do it, even when ostensibly pro-EU parties were elected.

We are being given an opportunity now because anti-EU parties have made an impact. If we vote to Remain, then we have the opportunity to elect UKIP MPs and Eurosceptics from other parties. That is the nature of democracy.

That's true but if there's two things that's been proved this year is that the establishment will never stand up to the EU and that the establishment will do anything to remain in the EU.

By the time you've elected all your Eurosceptic MPs a lot of damage could have been done.

And getting those Eurosceptic MPs might be easier said than done - IIRC Cameron claimed to be more Eurosceptic than Davis back in 2005, the reality we see now has come as a shock to many (but not to me).

Which is why UKIP has risen, and it's why if the government rolls over post a Remain vote, it will continue to rise.

So why has the UKIP vote collapsed in most council by elections since May and why have around 20 of their councillors resigned from their party since May ?

GIN1138

So this is what it's come to - A British Prime Minister goes to France and get's the French to intimidate and threaten his own citizens...

HYUFD

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

HYUFD

Rasmussen national general election

Clinton 41
Trump 36

Trump has the support of 65% of GOP voters, while Clinton picks up 76% of the vote among Democrats. Twenty-two percent (22%) of Republicans and 13% of Democrats like some other candidate right now. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, it’s Trump 34%, Clinton 32%, with nearly as many (28%) who prefer someone else.

Trump has a slight edge among male voters, but Clinton posts a double-digit lead among women.

Voters 65 and older are the only age group in which the Republican has the advantage. However, Clinton has struggled in the primaries to capture the youth vote, and while she has a 16-point lead over Trump among those under 40, 30% of these voters either like another candidate or are undecided at this time.

Trump has a modest lead among whites; Clinton leads overwhelmingly among blacks and has a 10-point advantage among other minority voters. But roughly one-out-of-four white and other minority voters like someone else or are undecided.

Most conservatives favor Trump, while even more liberals like Clinton. The Democrat leads by nine among self-described political moderates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/clinton_edges_ahead_of_trump_in_presidential_matchup

MarkSenior

Re the Bondfields by election , Labour won this ward in 2012 and are therefore defending it in May . Possibly the Conservative win in 2014 and certainly the high Green vote in that year can be attributed to Labour fielding a lady with an Islamic sounding name .

NorfolkTilIDie

Sajid Javids comments today seem to be saying "I will continue to play the Cameroon game of talking like a eurosceptic to keep party support, while not actually walking the walk". It reminds me of the Labour line about "controlling" immigration while not actually enacting any policies to reduce it. For the electorate, whatever side of the debate you fall on, it just makes you seem untrustworthy.

MarkSenior

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

Alistair

I've blinked and cashed out my Republican Nom market.

chestnut

MarkSenior said:

rcs1000 said:

FPT:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

Wanderer said:

rcs1000 said:

Fellow Leavers.

If we vote to Remain, it does not mean we are destined to join a European superstate, the Euro, etc. It merely means that we will need to wait until either (a) about a decade has passed, or (b) the Eurocrats make too blatant a power grab. The population of today does not decide for the population of tomorrow: if being inside the EU is sufficiently electorally unpopular, then we will leave the EU.

^This

If anyone thinks a Remain result means we agree to anything and everything they will get an unpleasant shock.

And that's exactly what some people said in 1975.

Until now, Richard, there has not been a consensus for leaving. When political parties stood on a "leave the EU platform", such as Labour in 1983, or UKIP in 2010, they did very badly.

Yet joining the Euro was sufficiently politically unpopular that we did not do it, even when ostensibly pro-EU parties were elected.

We are being given an opportunity now because anti-EU parties have made an impact. If we vote to Remain, then we have the opportunity to elect UKIP MPs and Eurosceptics from other parties. That is the nature of democracy.

That's true but if there's two things that's been proved this year is that the establishment will never stand up to the EU and that the establishment will do anything to remain in the EU.

By the time you've elected all your Eurosceptic MPs a lot of damage could have been done.

And getting those Eurosceptic MPs might be easier said than done - IIRC Cameron claimed to be more Eurosceptic than Davis back in 2005, the reality we see now has come as a shock to many (but not to me).

Which is why UKIP has risen, and it's why if the government rolls over post a Remain vote, it will continue to rise.

So why has the UKIP vote collapsed in most council by elections since May and why have around 20 of their councillors resigned from their party since May ?

Referendum.

Pulpstar

Alistair said:

I've blinked and cashed out my Republican Nom market.

I don't even have the button right now.

rcs1000

MarkSenior said:

rcs1000 said:

FPT:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

Wanderer said:

rcs1000 said:

Fellow Leavers.

If we vote to Remain, it does not mean we are destined to join a European superstate, the Euro, etc. It merely means that we will need to wait until either (a) about a decade has passed, or (b) the Eurocrats make too blatant a power grab. The population of today does not decide for the population of tomorrow: if being inside the EU is sufficiently electorally unpopular, then we will leave the EU.

^This

If anyone thinks a Remain result means we agree to anything and everything they will get an unpleasant shock.

And that's exactly what some people said in 1975.

Until now, Richard, there has not been a consensus for leaving. When political parties stood on a "leave the EU platform", such as Labour in 1983, or UKIP in 2010, they did very badly.

Yet joining the Euro was sufficiently politically unpopular that we did not do it, even when ostensibly pro-EU parties were elected.

We are being given an opportunity now because anti-EU parties have made an impact. If we vote to Remain, then we have the opportunity to elect UKIP MPs and Eurosceptics from other parties. That is the nature of democracy.

That's true but if there's two things that's been proved this year is that the establishment will never stand up to the EU and that the establishment will do anything to remain in the EU.

By the time you've elected all your Eurosceptic MPs a lot of damage could have been done.

And getting those Eurosceptic MPs might be easier said than done - IIRC Cameron claimed to be more Eurosceptic than Davis back in 2005, the reality we see now has come as a shock to many (but not to me).

Which is why UKIP has risen, and it's why if the government rolls over post a Remain vote, it will continue to rise.

So why has the UKIP vote collapsed in most council by elections since May and why have around 20 of their councillors resigned from their party since May ?

Maybe because UKIP has poor local organisation, zero relevant council policies, and your local councillor is unlikely to have any meaningful impact on whether the UK stays in the EU.

AlastairMeeks

Am I crazy for thinking now is an outstanding time to be backing Donald Trump?

HYUFD

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I crazy for thinking now is an outstanding time to be backing Donald Trump?

If you're crazy, then I don't want to be sane.

I've done a full reverse ferret on both the GOP nom and POTUS for Trump

PeterC

GIN1138 said:

So this is what it's come to - A British Prime Minister goes to France and get's the French to intimidate and threaten his own citizens...

Am I alone in thinking that Cameron's hysterical campaign will not go down well and that he could indeed be riding for a fall?

AlastairMeeks

Hmm, I don't even have the excuse of alcohol-affected betting because I haven't had a drink in 10 days.

Wanderer

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I crazy for thinking now is an outstanding time to be backing Donald Trump?

No. The time is now, the moment is at hand.

rcs1000

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

Well, let's start with turnover being a rubbish way of measuring fines. A pharmaceutical distributor will have billions of pounds of sales, but a few tens of millions of pounds of profit. Why? Because distributing pharmaceuticals is a very low margin business.

To the point: I think what HYUFD is saying is it should be up to the UK government to set the correct levels of fine for negligent behaviour that causes data leaks. That being said, I find myself slightly torn on this. When I use Amazon, I have no idea whether the site is hosted in Luxembourg or in Liverpool, so this is an area where I can see the benefit of cross-country co-operation.

chestnut

Cameron must go.

rcs1000

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

Is a breach ajudged to have happened at the parent or the subsidiary level? If the latter, it is highly likely the maximum fine is almost impossible to be imposed anyway.

rcs1000

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

Where?

OllyT

HYUFD said:

Rasmussen national general election

Clinton 41
Trump 36

Trump has the support of 65% of GOP voters, while Clinton picks up 76% of the vote among Democrats. Twenty-two percent (22%) of Republicans and 13% of Democrats like some other candidate right now. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, it’s Trump 34%, Clinton 32%, with nearly as many (28%) who prefer someone else.

Trump has a slight edge among male voters, but Clinton posts a double-digit lead among women.

Voters 65 and older are the only age group in which the Republican has the advantage. However, Clinton has struggled in the primaries to capture the youth vote, and while she has a 16-point lead over Trump among those under 40, 30% of these voters either like another candidate or are undecided at this time.

Trump has a modest lead among whites; Clinton leads overwhelmingly among blacks and has a 10-point advantage among other minority voters. But roughly one-out-of-four white and other minority voters like someone else or are undecided.

Most conservatives favor Trump, while even more liberals like Clinton. The Democrat leads by nine among self-described political moderates.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/clinton_edges_ahead_of_trump_in_presidential_matchup

Rasmussen is also the most GOP-leaning national pollster in the US.

Scrapheap_as_was

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

TheScreamingEagles

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

On.

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

On.

and on...

ariston cameron.

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

chestnut

Anywhere.

His wimpish performance is inadequate.

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

And then Norwich...

I saw the desperate use of the bench boost had been forced upon you.. but for Milner...

Pulpstar

My latest moves: Back Rubio POTUS 17.0
Lay nom 6.0

Wanderer

AlastairMeeks said:

Hmm, I don't even have the excuse of alcohol-affected betting because I haven't had a drink in 10 days.

Would be interested in your thoughts on the US, if you felt inspired to write a thread header on it.

Of course, you'd miss out on your regular masochistic fix.

MarkSenior

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

Surely the issue is that the fines should be large enough to act as a deterrent to frms breaching our data protection . ########now if you were arguing that the act did not go far enough in deterring larger businesses and organisations I would probably agree with you .

HYUFD

rcs1000 said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

Well, let's start with turnover being a rubbish way of measuring fines. A pharmaceutical distributor will have billions of pounds of sales, but a few tens of millions of pounds of profit. Why? Because distributing pharmaceuticals is a very low margin business.

To the point: I think what HYUFD is saying is it should be up to the UK government to set the correct levels of fine for negligent behaviour that causes data leaks. That being said, I find myself slightly torn on this. When I use Amazon, I have no idea whether the site is hosted in Luxembourg or in Liverpool, so this is an area where I can see the benefit of cross-country co-operation.

Even a few tens of millions of profit would still enable a large pharmaceutical distributor to absorb a potential fine rather better than a much smaller enterprise would be able to do. Presently the maximum fine under the DPA is £500,000 if the EU imposes a potential fine up to £14,000,000 or so that could have a hugely catastrophic impact on any organisation that is not a vast multi-national

surbiton

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

To Brussels ? As our next Commissar ?

OllyT

rcs1000 said:

FPT:

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

Wanderer said:

rcs1000 said:

Fellow Leavers.

If we vote to Remain, it does not mean we are destined to join a European superstate, the Euro, etc. It merely means that we will need to wait until either (a) about a decade has passed, or (b) the Eurocrats make too blatant a power grab. The population of today does not decide for the population of tomorrow: if being inside the EU is sufficiently electorally unpopular, then we will leave the EU.

^This

If anyone thinks a Remain result means we agree to anything and everything they will get an unpleasant shock.

And that's exactly what some people said in 1975.

Until now, Richard, there has not been a consensus for leaving. When political parties stood on a "leave the EU platform", such as Labour in 1983, or UKIP in 2010, they did very badly.

Yet joining the Euro was sufficiently politically unpopular that we did not do it, even when ostensibly pro-EU parties were elected.

We are being given an opportunity now because anti-EU parties have made an impact. If we vote to Remain, then we have the opportunity to elect UKIP MPs and Eurosceptics from other parties. That is the nature of democracy.

That's true but if there's two things that's been proved this year is that the establishment will never stand up to the EU and that the establishment will do anything to remain in the EU.

By the time you've elected all your Eurosceptic MPs a lot of damage could have been done.

And getting those Eurosceptic MPs might be easier said than done - IIRC Cameron claimed to be more Eurosceptic than Davis back in 2005, the reality we see now has come as a shock to many (but not to me).

Which is why UKIP has risen, and it's why if the government rolls over post a Remain vote, it will continue to rise.

EU has been a low priority concern for most voters for most of the last 20 years. UKIP have done well recently out of conflating immigration problems with EU membership. I think if it does anything at all this referendum debate will kill off the notion that our immigration problems are over if we leave. I think the UKIP slide we are already seeing in by-elections will continue once that is nailed. There are real pros and cons of EU membership but UKIP thrives on superficially scapegoating the EU for everything.

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

On.

and on...

ariston cameron.

Aristo Cameron more likely

Big_G_NorthWales

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

And then Norwich...

I saw the desperate use of the bench boost had been forced upon you.. but for Milner...

Desperate measures for desperate times, I can't finish behind a Spurs fan.

HYUFD

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

Surely the issue is that the fines should be large enough to act as a deterrent to frms breaching our data protection . ########now if you were arguing that the act did not go far enough in deterring larger businesses and organisations I would probably agree with you .

Surely the issue is that the fines and penalties should be imposed equally regardless of the size of the organisation. This measure does nothing of the kind and strongly favours multinationals over medium and smaller enterprises who would be less able to absorb them.

GIN1138

I wish I'd got into this political betting milarky when I tipped The Donald to have a shot at POTUS 12 months ago and was widely ridiculed on here....

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

chestnut said:

Cameron must go.

On.

and on...

ariston cameron.

Aristo Cameron more likely

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUVs7vXNZiw

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

NorfolkTilIDie

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

AlastairMeeks

Wanderer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Hmm, I don't even have the excuse of alcohol-affected betting because I haven't had a drink in 10 days.

Would be interested in your thoughts on the US, if you felt inspired to write a thread header on it.

Of course, you'd miss out on your regular masochistic fix.

I'm not confident I understand US electoral dynamics at all. I have a good grounding of the facts, but no feel.

On the face of it, I can't see why super-uncharismatic Mitt Romney, the ur-Jeb, would be able to change the course of the race. Clearly everyone else feels differently. Anyway, I've increased my exposure to Donald Trump considerably tonight but I'm horribly concerned I've done something stupid.

Big_G_NorthWales

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

ITV are only quoting what Germany has stated today though their reporter did say it was significant

rcs1000

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Does the South Korean agreement bring it inside the single market for services?

TheScreamingEagles

GIN1138 said:

I wish I'd got into this political betting milarky when I tipped The Donald to have a shot at POTUS 12 months ago and was widely ridiculed on here....

At least you never did a thread header saying Donald Trump will never be POTUS, and laughed at the odds of 150/1

HYUFD

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

Is a breach ajudged to have happened at the parent or the subsidiary level? If the latter, it is highly likely the maximum fine is almost impossible to be imposed anyway.

Highly likely but legally not impossible and most organisations will not be structured as a parent and subsidiary

AlastairMeeks

On pensions reform, I do not expect a flat rate tax relief. It's just too easy for the losers to work out by how much they've been fleeced.

GIN1138

TheScreamingEagles said:

GIN1138 said:

I wish I'd got into this political betting milarky when I tipped The Donald to have a shot at POTUS 12 months ago and was widely ridiculed on here....

At least you never did a thread header saying Donald Trump will never be POTUS, and laughed at the odds of 150/1

You'll be heading for Roger "this silly banking thing will all be over by Monday" Darmus status is your not careful

rcs1000

HYUFD said:

Even a few tens of millions of profit would still enable a large pharmaceutical distributor to absorb a potential fine rather better than a much smaller enterprise would be able to do. Presently the maximum fine under the DPA is £500,000 if the EU imposes a potential fine up to £14,000,000 or so that could have a hugely catastrophic impact on any organisation that is not a vast multi-national

My point was that not all $1bn turnover companies are created equally, and that turnover is a rubbish way to measure business size. So, a company that runs on a 3% net margin (like a distributor or a retailer) would be utterly f*cked by a fine of 4% of turnover, but a software company on a 35% margin would barely notice it.

It would be much more sensible to have fines linked to profitability.

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

Now there is an issue that makes me turn in to a EU outer head-banger form of rage.

Osborne needs to stop buggering about with pensions, it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Speedy

Sworn Trump enemy Senator Lindsey Graham is going soft on Trump:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/03/graham-brokered-convention-would-be-unfair-to-trump-audio/

NorfolkTilIDie

AlastairMeeks said:

Wanderer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Hmm, I don't even have the excuse of alcohol-affected betting because I haven't had a drink in 10 days.

Would be interested in your thoughts on the US, if you felt inspired to write a thread header on it.

Of course, you'd miss out on your regular masochistic fix.

I'm not confident I understand US electoral dynamics at all. I have a good grounding of the facts, but no feel.

On the face of it, I can't see why super-uncharismatic Mitt Romney, the ur-Jeb, would be able to change the course of the race. Clearly everyone else feels differently. Anyway, I've increased my exposure to Donald Trump considerably tonight but I'm horribly concerned I've done something stupid.

I think you are being very smart. Romney may have influence with some high income swing voters but not Republican base or blue collar swing voters. All it will do is hurt Trump in the general.

Big_G_NorthWales

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

I would expect that at every EU meeting or Minister meeings the press will be quizing EU heads at every opportunity and if they agree with Germany's comments tonight it will be a serious blow to leave

dr_spyn

A few eyebrows could be raised. Mirror low blow.

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705517955401064448

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

And then Norwich...

I saw the desperate use of the bench boost had been forced upon you.. but for Milner...

Desperate measures for desperate times, I can't finish behind a Spurs fan.

10 game weeks to go... tick tock as someone once said here a few times...

NorfolkTilIDie

rcs1000 said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Does the South Korean agreement bring it inside the single market for services?

No but I don't think single market in services even removed all trade barriers for member states. South Korea deal does however remove all tariffs on services and remove most non tariff barriers, albeit marginally less than for member state. Not much in it really.

runnymede

'ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem'

Interesting - two things here, I think:

1. An attempt to support the PM's 'there is no alternative' agenda ie. Cameron will claim these options are no better than EU membership (which is a lie, but there we go)

2. Possibly staking out a fall-back position should the vote go for Brexit, which will keep the UK somewhere in the picture and still coughing up.

But we should also note at the same time that the Germans have for a while been making noises about Norway, Iceland etc. getting too good a deal and wanting to force them into a closer relationship with the EU. So they might see it as giving the fish a bit of slack before reeling it in again.

But I would agree with the earlier poster that this is an unconvincing stance given FTAs negotiated with Canada, Mexico, Korea etc.

rcs1000

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

MarkSenior said:

HYUFD said:

Further ammunition for the Leave campaign comes in the new General Data Protection Regulation. It imposes a potential fine for breach of 20,000,000 EUR or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, whichever is greater. Given small and medium sized organisations are far more likely to have 4% of their turnover come in at less than 20,000,000 EUR it will have a disproportionate impact on them over large multinationals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

Are you saying that Leave does not want our personal data protecting ?

That is not the issue, the issue is that fines for potential breaches as a result of this legislation could have a disproportionate impact on smaller businesses and organisations, fines should be levied solely as a percentage of turnover, certainly if the alternative is such a large fine

Is a breach ajudged to have happened at the parent or the subsidiary level? If the latter, it is highly likely the maximum fine is almost impossible to be imposed anyway.

Highly likely but legally not impossible and most organisations will not be structured as a parent and subsidiary

It's more common than you'd think. My firm has about 35 employees, and we have about half a dozen corporate entities for one reason or another. Multinationals will almost certainly have many. (When I worked at Goldman Sachs, I was an employee of Goldman Sachs Services Ltd., and was seconded to another department. No, I don't know why.)

My guess is that - and this is to your point, even if the maximum fine was removed - then multinationals would have a data holding company that had minimal sales and was several arms lengths away from the actual profit centres of the business, so that in the event of a breach, their liability would be in the tens of thousands not the tens of millions.

chestnut

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

Now there is an issue that makes me turn in to a EU outer head-banger form of rage.

Osborne needs to stop buggering about with pensions, it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Cameron plus Osborne are done.

It may not seem like that to people from the bubble, but how many times are people going to listen to more cuts, extended pension ages, 'vote in, or Dover gets it'?

Dead men waffling.

Pulpstar

Kasich is an odd one, I think he'll win Ohio though - and if Rubio loses Florida he perhaps gets brokered convention points..

Big_G_NorthWales

AlastairMeeks said:

On pensions reform, I do not expect a flat rate tax relief. It's just too easy for the losers to work out by how much they've been fleeced.

And the winners how much they gain - and their will be a lot more winners than losers

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

And then Norwich...

I saw the desperate use of the bench boost had been forced upon you.. but for Milner...

Desperate measures for desperate times, I can't finish behind a Spurs fan.

10 game weeks to go... tick tock as someone once said here a few times...

My advice, put a lot on Arsenal to win on Saturday.

I did that during our title charge season, kept on backing our opponents, eventually it paid off.

rcs1000

NorfolkTilIDie said:

rcs1000 said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Does the South Korean agreement bring it inside the single market for services?

No but I don't think single market in services even removed all trade barriers for member states. South Korea deal does however remove all tariffs on services and remove most non tariff barriers, albeit marginally less than for member state. Not much in it really.

My firm relies very heavily on the single financial passport to sell our services into the EU. A Norway option is great for us. If passporting is removed it would probably be a death knell to our business. (Or, at the very least, require us to open and man a subsidiary inside the EU.)

EPG

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Why? Korea and the EU are largely but not entirely complementary apart from the heavy manufacturers in Germany; the UK outside the EU is a trade competitor which may not necessarily be allowed to have its cake and eat it

GIN1138

Scrapheap_as_was said:

it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Well that's the point isn't it? Governments don't want people to plan and to save and to be thrifty, etc. They want people to spend, spend, spend. Saving has been discouraged for years and years.

They just want people to spend and to pay their taxes - British people are chased, literally to the grave by HMRC but American supernational tax avoiders like Google and Amazon do whatever the hell they want.

We really need one heck of a shake up in this country,

AlastairMeeks

Big_G_NorthWales said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On pensions reform, I do not expect a flat rate tax relief. It's just too easy for the losers to work out by how much they've been fleeced.

And the winners how much they gain - and their will be a lot more winners than losers

Winners are NEVER grateful. Losers are often vengeful. And this time the losers on this occasion are core Conservative voters and, indeed, party members shortly due to select the next leader.

watford30

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

Now there is an issue that makes me turn in to a EU outer head-banger form of rage.

Osborne needs to stop buggering about with pensions, it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Smirking Osborne thinks that he can get away with anything whilst the bearded idiot is running Labour. He's in for a nasty but well deserved surprise come leadership election time.

rcs1000

GIN1138 said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Well that's the point isn't it? Governments don't want people to plan and to save and to be thrifty, etc. They want people to spend, spend, spend. Saving has been discouraged for years and years.

They just want people to spend and to pay their taxes - British people are chased, literally to the grave by HMRC but American supernational tax avoiders like Google and Amazon do whatever the hell they want.

We really need one heck of a shake up in this country,

According to the great Melissa Kidd of Redburn, savings rates in the UK are at 50 year lows. (Her point, I think, is that we are using the Brexit discussion to avoid talking about the essential structural reforms we need to make.)

HYUFD

Trump on Romney "He was begging for my endorsement, I could have said 'Mitt get on your knees' he would have done so"

Wanderer

AlastairMeeks said:

Wanderer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Hmm, I don't even have the excuse of alcohol-affected betting because I haven't had a drink in 10 days.

Would be interested in your thoughts on the US, if you felt inspired to write a thread header on it.

Of course, you'd miss out on your regular masochistic fix.

I'm not confident I understand US electoral dynamics at all. I have a good grounding of the facts, but no feel.

On the face of it, I can't see why super-uncharismatic Mitt Romney, the ur-Jeb, would be able to change the course of the race. Clearly everyone else feels differently. Anyway, I've increased my exposure to Donald Trump considerably tonight but I'm horribly concerned I've done something stupid.

Same here. I don't really "get" US politics the way a native would. I don't see how Trump is not value at current odds though, for all the reasons we keep rehearsing.

I feel some unease about it. The arithmetic says the GOP establishment does still have a window in which to stop Trump, just, if they can figure out how to do it. On the other hand they are not themselves united and using Mitt Romney as a spearhead can't be good.

Big_G_NorthWales

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On pensions reform, I do not expect a flat rate tax relief. It's just too easy for the losers to work out by how much they've been fleeced.

And the winners how much they gain - and their will be a lot more winners than losers

Winners are NEVER grateful. Losers are often vengeful. And this time the losers on this occasion are core Conservative voters and, indeed, party members shortly due to select the next leader.

I don't see Osborne or Boris as Prime Minsters

watford30

PeterC said:

GIN1138 said:

So this is what it's come to - A British Prime Minister goes to France and get's the French to intimidate and threaten his own citizens...

Am I alone in thinking that Cameron's hysterical campaign will not go down well and that he could indeed be riding for a fall?

No.

GIN1138

chestnut said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

Now there is an issue that makes me turn in to a EU outer head-banger form of rage.

Osborne needs to stop buggering about with pensions, it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Cameron plus Osborne are done.

It may not seem like that to people from the bubble, but how many times are people going to listen to more cuts, extended pension ages, 'vote in, or Dover gets it'?

Dead men waffling.

If Labour hadn't thrown themselves off the cliff with Corbyn and had someone even half decent I'd be Lab right now for no other reason than to get Cameron and Osborne out.

peter_from_putney

Off Topic

***** BETTING POST *****

Something for the weekend Sir?
I've been taking a look at the state of the Premier League's Manager "Sack Race" market.
Favourite to win the current round is Utd's LVG with best decimal odds of 4.33. After leading his side to four consecutive wins, his early departure appears decidedly unlikely.
Next in line comes Villa's Remi Garde who only seems to have been at the club 5 minutes, on offer at 4.5. He is followed by Norwich's Alex Neil priced at 8.0.
Surprisingly generously priced, in my view anyway, is fourth-placed Toon's boss Boss Steve McClaren who both Hills and Betfair Sportsbook have available at 9 (i.e. 8/1).
On Saturday, Newcastle are at home against Bournemouth who are also struggling somewhat, but nevertheless are on offer at fairly skinny best odds of only 2.88 to win this game.
I wonder whether McClaren could possibly survive a defeat by the Cherries?
Of course, one is second-guessing how the Chairmen of several football clubs might react to their various problems, but it seems to me that that the 2.88 price against Bournemouth winning is very different when compared with the 9.0 odds against Steve being given his early marching orders.
This falls decidedly into the "fun" category of betting and stakes should certainly be limited to a maximum of just a few quid.
DYOR.

Richard_Tyndall

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

NorfolkTilIDie

EPG said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Why? Korea and the EU are largely but not entirely complementary apart from the heavy manufacturers in Germany; the UK outside the EU is a trade competitor which may not necessarily be allowed to have its cake and eat it

Germany and South Korea are far more similar economies than UK and Germany. Benefit from free trade between EU and UK are worth far more than freedom of movement is to Western Europe. Benefit from good relations and stronger security guarantee is worth far more than freedom of movement is to Eastern Europe.

Pulpstar

peter_from_putney said:

Off Topic

***** BETTING POST *****

Something for the weekend Sir?
I've been taking a look at the state of the Premier League's Manager "Sack Race" market.
Favourite to win the current round is Utd's LVG with best decimal odds of 4.33. After leading his side to four consecutive wins, his early departure appears decidedly unlikely.
Next in line comes Villa's Remi Garde who only seems to have been at the club 5 minutes, on offer at 4.5. He is followed by Norwich's Alex Neil priced at 8.0.
Surprisingly generously priced, in my view anyway, is fourth-placed Toon's boss Boss Steve McClaren who both Hills and Betfair Sportsbook have available at 9 (i.e. 8/1).
On Saturday, Newcastle are at home against Bournemouth who are also struggling somewhat, but nevertheless are on offer at fairly skinny best odds of only 2.88 to win this game.
I wonder whether McClaren could possibly survive a defeat by the Cherries?
Of course, one is second-guessing how the Chairmen of several football clubs might react to their various problems, but it seems to me that that the 2.88 price against Bournemouth winning is very different when compared with the 9.0 odds against Steve being given his early marching orders.
This falls decidedly into the "fun" category of betting and stakes should certainly be limited to a maximum of just a few quid.
DYOR.

Back with Paddy Power.

They often pay out early on markets like this.

Big_G_NorthWales

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

Why when it is coming from Germany

Wanderer

Speedy said:

Sworn Trump enemy Senator Lindsey Graham is going soft on Trump:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/03/graham-brokered-convention-would-be-unfair-to-trump-audio/

Good God. He was entertainingly putting the boot in just a couple of days ago.

AndreaParma_82

Cllr Jill Furniss selected by Labour for Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough by-election.

She's the widow of the deceased MP. She stood in Hallam in 2001. She's a Cllr in Sheffield since 1999.

rcs1000

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

Everything is open for negotiation post invocation of Article 50. Which is both a good thing... and a bad thing...

SimonStClare

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

Mr Tyndall, what is the Norway or Iceland option in brief? - TIA.

foxinsoxuk

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Greater fan loyalty knows no more than a man who drops all his spurs players from his fantasy team in the certain hope that by doing so will ensure they score bundles as a result in the next game... selling Kane should also ensure a hat trick too.

Just one place behind you, you know what's going to happen this weekend.

I'm going to play Augero as triple captain this weekend, and they play Villa

And then Norwich...

I saw the desperate use of the bench boost had been forced upon you.. but for Milner...

Desperate measures for desperate times, I can't finish behind a Spurs fan.

10 game weeks to go... tick tock as someone once said here a few times...

My advice, put a lot on Arsenal to win on Saturday.

I did that during our title charge season, kept on backing our opponents, eventually it paid off.

Consider what the best outcome for Leicester is, and bet on it.

Would have made a fortune on Wednesday doing that!

TheScreamingEagles

Just been told, Gillian Furniss has been selected as the Labour candidate for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough by election.

Decent local councillor

Tykejohnno

Saqib Bhatti: EU’s too small for a proud and free Britain

Saqib Bhatti is joint secretary-general of Muslims for Britain.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/saqib-bhatti-eu-s-too-small-for-a-proud-and-free-britain-1-7767146

chestnut

For footballing betting this weekend Romelu Lukaku, if fit, has scored in seven consecutive games v West Ham.

West Ham may well have to play a 17 year old at centre back due to injuries. Lukaku is still available at better than evens. Teamsheets available at 2PM.

HYUFD

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

Even a few tens of millions of profit would still enable a large pharmaceutical distributor to absorb a potential fine rather better than a much smaller enterprise would be able to do. Presently the maximum fine under the DPA is £500,000 if the EU imposes a potential fine up to £14,000,000 or so that could have a hugely catastrophic impact on any organisation that is not a vast multi-national

My point was that not all $1bn turnover companies are created equally, and that turnover is a rubbish way to measure business size. So, a company that runs on a 3% net margin (like a distributor or a retailer) would be utterly f*cked by a fine of 4% of turnover, but a software company on a 35% margin would barely notice it.

It would be much more sensible to have fines linked to profitability.

I would agree profitability would be the best measure of all but the worst measure of all is the EU's potential imposition of a blanket fine potentially totalling millions which will have a hugely disproportionate impact on smaller businesses

perdix

GIN1138 said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Well that's the point isn't it? Governments don't want people to plan and to save and to be thrifty, etc. They want people to spend, spend, spend. Saving has been discouraged for years and years.

They just want people to spend and to pay their taxes - British people are chased, literally to the grave by HMRC but American supernational tax avoiders like Google and Amazon do whatever the hell they want.

We really need one heck of a shake up in this country,

The Brits have historically been poor savers. The Germans were once described as having the most interest in reading their bank records. And look at the Japanese, even when interest rates are very low they still save a high percentage of their incomes.

rcs1000

SimonStClare said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

Mr Tyndall, what is the Norway or Iceland option in brief? - TIA.

EFTA/EEA

TCPoliticalBetting

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

Why don't they also insist on free blow jobs for all EU visitors and the right to enslave all our first born. FFS, they have lost two wars against us do they not know what we are like when ANGRY!

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On pensions reform, I do not expect a flat rate tax relief. It's just too easy for the losers to work out by how much they've been fleeced.

And the winners how much they gain - and their will be a lot more winners than losers

Winners are NEVER grateful. Losers are often vengeful. And this time the losers on this occasion are core Conservative voters and, indeed, party members shortly due to select the next leader.

Actually I'm quite grateful to George for the NPV of future IHT; personal allowance being raised and the fact he stopped the fuel escalator.

He should have sold off Lloyds though, grr !

NorfolkTilIDie

rcs1000 said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

rcs1000 said:

NorfolkTilIDie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

I actually think psychological effects of perceived attempts at bullying would favour leave.

However it is ridiculous to claim they would offer an option to South Korea that isn't available to the UK.

Does the South Korean agreement bring it inside the single market for services?

No but I don't think single market in services even removed all trade barriers for member states. South Korea deal does however remove all tariffs on services and remove most non tariff barriers, albeit marginally less than for member state. Not much in it really.

My firm relies very heavily on the single financial passport to sell our services into the EU. A Norway option is great for us. If passporting is removed it would probably be a death knell to our business. (Or, at the very least, require us to open and man a subsidiary inside the EU.)

I imagine you would be one of small handful of losers there and would be dwarfed by all the extra business that could be done by free trade deals elsewhere and better regulation (especially if Eurozone gets trigger happy on single rulebook). And as you say you can always make a subsidiary for that bit of your business.

foxinsoxuk

Attractive little village is Whissendine. No idea how they vote, but should be core Kipper/Tory area. Halfway between Oakham and Melton Mowbray, which has a large and well integrated Polish community.

Wanderer

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

Why don't they also insist on free blow jobs for all EU visitors and the right to enslave all our first born. FFS, they have lost two wars against us do they not know what we are like when ANGRY!

As a second-born I see merit in that proposal.

watford30

chestnut said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/705514801997467649

Now there is an issue that makes me turn in to a EU outer head-banger form of rage.

Osborne needs to stop buggering about with pensions, it's ridiculous trying to do long term planning when the rules are continually being changed. 'A' day is a long time ago now.

Cameron plus Osborne are done.

It may not seem like that to people from the bubble, but how many times are people going to listen to more cuts, extended pension ages, 'vote in, or Dover gets it'?

Dead men waffling.

What cuts? Osborne's been on a spend-a-thon.

Smirkers problem now is that the public won't accept any real cuts, so he's going to have to steal from pensions or shove up taxes.

rcs1000

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

Why don't they also insist on free blow jobs for all EU visitors and the right to enslave all our first born. FFS, they have lost two wars against us do they not know what we are like when ANGRY!

They're allowed their view, and we're allowed our view.

At the end of the day, post the invocation of Article 50, everything is open for negotiation.

Richard_Tyndall

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

ITV reporting that Germany has said that in the event of Brexit the Norway or Iceland options would be the only ones on offer and would require contributions and accept free movement of labour. No doubt Germany will be accused of scaremongering but if that becomes the EU position leave will have a problem

For all that I would be very happy with the Norway or Iceland option, this really is so much bollocks.

Why when it is coming from Germany

Because if they won't negotiate under the Article 50 terms then the UK leaves anyway before the two years is up and negotiates a trade deal from outside - which will be decided by QMV where Germany has no veto.

Personally I want the Norway option. But Germany claiming that is the only deal on the table is simply rubbish as they do not know until the negotiations actually take place if they have the support amongst the rest of the EU to push that through.

It is yet another case of scare mongering hoping to influence those who don't know any better..