I expected to switch back when Tony called it a day, but the election of Mrs Rochester, then the wrong pair of trousers, followed by a certified loon put the kybosh on that.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
No, the right's argument is that if you increase people's minimum wage above the level of value they have the potential to create for an employer then you artificially price them out of the labour market (assuming no government subsidies) and trap them in long-term unemployment with all the social, spiritual and economic issues that creates
And I spose that argument can't be used if the wage increase happens from a restricted supply of labour.
Well, if there is a restricted pool of labour then, ceteris paribus, the price of labour will be higher. But I don't think it changes the argument in principle about the EVA of an individual employee although, clearly, the figures will change
I've always said I try to tell the truth and nothing but (as I see it - obviously I'm sometimes wrong), but NOT that I tell all the truth. In a partisan environment it's too much to ask.
On topic, the narrow split among Labour voters contrasts with the big Remain majority in that category, suggesting a possible danger for Remain - the potential Labour support could be undermined by dislike of Cameron or indeed liking for Boris (even though fewer than 60% seem to trust either).
It's more likely than not the trend of a Remain lead amongst Tory voters will widen.The overarching trend of a 7.5% swing back to the status quo is likely to be seen in this group whose conservatism is stronger than their Conservatism and the I'm Alright Jack Tories like things as they are as well.Economic issues are likely to rise up the agenda when voting gets real.Minds get concentrated when the question "how will this affect my/our money?" gets asked and becomes far more important than esoteric concepts like sovereignty.Questions like,which option is more likely to make the dream of a place in the Costas more difficult/expensive?
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
No, the right's argument is that if you increase people's minimum wage above the level of value they have the potential to create for an employer then you artificially price them out of the labour market (assuming no government subsidies) and trap them in long-term unemployment with all the social, spiritual and economic issues that creates
Fair enough. So it's an argument that has been debunked by practical experience.
As ever I'd have more respect for those arguing in favour of an open door immigration policy if they were fully committed to abolishing the welfare state and the NHS. But right now we have the worst of both worlds.
I broadly agree but think abolition of the NHS is a step too far. With radical reform it could match many European systems. The problem is it has cult status in the UK. I'm not sure Brexit will help the move towards a more open view of alternative systems. The UK is a great country but it is not perfect.
Here's what you do. You rename the Department of Health 'The National Health Service' and completely re-brand it as a body that promotes good health. What is currently the NHS would be the National Treatment Service or something. This would sever the emotional dependence and mean reform could take place.
No you don't. You keep the name and change everything else. The only things that people are emotionally committed to are the name, and healthcare free at the point of delivery (though even there, not entirely - prescriptions, dentists, opticians and so on all run counter to the 'free' concept). After that, enough of the public will engage quite rationally on potential reforms to make good ones deliverable. The usual suspects will wail but they've done that so often that it's crying wolf now.
It makes an interesting contrast: while Yes Scotland’s Project Fear was wrong on almost every front, Better Together’s was more or less bang on, yet at the SNP conference delegates comforted themselves by arguing that black is white while falling back on tired old tropes about Scotland sending oil revenue to the Treasury but receiving “nothing” in return (except about the same amount in Barnett consequentials). Speaker after speaker reiterated the usual sanctimonious hype about being “positive” when in fact modern Scottish nationalism relies on deeply negative arguments and sentiments.
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
It's more likely than not the trend of a Remain lead amongst Tory voters will widen.The overarching trend of a 7.5% swing back to the status quo is likely to be seen in this group whose conservatism is stronger than their Conservatism and the I'm Alright Jack Tories like things as they are as well.Economic issues are likely to rise up the agenda when voting gets real.Minds get concentrated when the question "how will this affect my/our money?" gets asked and becomes far more important than esoteric concepts like sovereignty.Questions like,which option is more likely to make the dream of a place in the Costas more difficult/expensive?
Conservative voters aren't monolithic. The outlook of a Conservative voter in Thurrock, say, will be different to that of a Conservative voter in Surrey SW.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
There's nothing left wing about asking people to pay higher prices for goods and services.
But theres something very right wing about prioritising small increases in goods and service prices than larger increases in low income wages.
The median wage is way above the minimum wage, so how many people do you actually think would benefit. Would it be more than would be negatively affected by increases in goods and services?
On topic, I wonder how much the 'trust more' answer is conflated with 'agree with more'. Do UKIP voters really overwhelmingly trust Boris more or is it that his having come out for Leave just means that for the moment they like him more? It's very difficult to disassociate cause and consequence here because there will almost certainly be a feedback effect.
I've always said I try to tell the truth and nothing but (as I see it - obviously I'm sometimes wrong), but NOT that I tell all the truth. In a partisan environment it's too much to ask.
On topic, the narrow split among Labour voters contrasts with the big Remain majority in that category, suggesting a possible danger for Remain - the potential Labour support could be undermined by dislike of Cameron or indeed liking for Boris (even though fewer than 60% seem to trust either).
Speaking of which, it would be interesting to see polling comparing trust for Remain vs Leave Labour politicians. If it can't be done because none of the Leavers has high enough name-recognition, that's a kind of answer.
But at present the opinions of Labour voters are being treated as being about as relevant to the result as the opinions of dogs.
It makes an interesting contrast: while Yes Scotland’s Project Fear was wrong on almost every front, Better Together’s was more or less bang on, yet at the SNP conference delegates comforted themselves by arguing that black is white while falling back on tired old tropes about Scotland sending oil revenue to the Treasury but receiving “nothing” in return (except about the same amount in Barnett consequentials). Speaker after speaker reiterated the usual sanctimonious hype about being “positive” when in fact modern Scottish nationalism relies on deeply negative arguments and sentiments.
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
Did you see Sturgeon's interview with Andrew Neil yesterday ? She essentially argued for the benefits of the Union, it was enlightening.
Basically: if any of us were put under the same microscope politicians suffer, we'd all soon be accused of lying, even if we think - or know - we are telling the truth. It's a sign of the immaturity of political reporting and debate.
That is not excusing the times when politicians tell absolute, knowing porkies. But such occasions are far fewer than some might believe.
I think that's right - it's partly self-respect and partly the fear of being caught that prevents naked lying, but the willingness of both press and opponents to quote selectively (and the public to believe the misquote without checking) is a major incentive to fudge. A classic example was when Charles Clarke said that he thought the NHS had mostly got better under Labour but some parts hadn't and some had got worse, so we needed to learn from successes and failures. That was routinely quoted for years as "Even a Cabinet Minister admits the NHS has got worse under Labour".
One reason I like all of Blair, Corbyn and Letwin (making me almost unique, I think) is that their instinct when asked if they hold an unpopular view is to say "Yes, and here's why", rather than pretend to something else. Blair in particular positively enjoyed the process of putting an unpopular case (the "masochism strategy") and winning people round.
There's also the unexpected support angle. When several Labour MPs came out for Brexit, I felt they'd stood up to be counted against their Party. That's convinced me they're genuine here.
On topic, I wonder how much the 'trust more' answer is conflated with 'agree with more'. Do UKIP voters really overwhelmingly trust Boris more or is it that his having come out for Leave just means that for the moment they like him more? It's very difficult to disassociate cause and consequence here because there will almost certainly be a feedback effect.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as much of it goes to land costs, energy costs, material costs, skilled labour costs, foreign labour costs etc. So a big increase in UK low skill wages would help poor people's incomes a lot, and only cause a tiny increase in people's spending.
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
Fact 1: The SNP lies are now fully exposed and the actual dependence on Scotland on the rest of the UK is clear. They run an additional £15bn deficit and get about £1,500 per head more in spending (incl uni fees and prescriptions). An independent Scotland would be utterly sunk financially. They have nowhere to go. Fact 2: George Osborne is trying and somewhat failing to balance the budget. He got told to leave Tax Credits well alone. He seems to have been scared off pensions raids. He's getting a lot of grief in today's press about '£4bn isn't much'. (esp when a chunk of it looks destined to come from the disabled).
Erm....may I humbly suggest to Ozzy that he can safely squeeze the Scottish spend back to the UK average.
A wag at my previous employer once joked: Why is it that everything that's great in life is either immoral, illegal or fattening? To which another wag retorted: So the buggers can tax it!
Well, we are thinking of sugar tax. We already chase ladies of the night for their undeclared income / taxes. That just leaves marijuana. The US example is instructive. Weed is largely legal across the US now and there are some major corporations growing up and getting listed on the stock exchange. They're doing very well - and raising a lot of tax. Even forgetting the revenue argument for a moment, I think the war on drugs has been an abject failure and we'd be socially and criminally way better off to legalise, regularise, regulate and tax marijuana. And just think how much tax there is going to waste in the UK's entire ganja / hash market. Go on George!
Mr. Patrick, he could've made a fight of tax credits. Instead, Osborne buckled. As well as the financial implications, that made him appear weak due to ambition.
Mr. Patrick, he could've made a fight of tax credits. Instead, Osborne buckled. As well as the financial implications, that made him appear weak due to ambition.
Ozzy went for the easy spending cuts first. Understandable. The deficit headline number fell quicker. Gives the impression of progress. But he's made painfully few difficult spending or tax decisions since 2010. And now, with the EU referendum and his own need to be loved, he seems to have painted himself into a corner. The pound is going to continue weakening. We're not out of the woods and seem to be losing the will to fight for a balanced budget.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
No, thats a ridiculous strawman. The people's interest and business interest are not always aligned. For example, corporate welfare subsidies help businesses but hurt the people. The same applies to regulating air quality. Etc etc.
On issue we're talking about your argument is completely false. We are talking about wages rising because demand for labour outstrips supply of labour. How can a wage rise from that cause supply of labour to outstrip demand??
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as much of it goes to land costs, energy costs, material costs, skilled labour costs, foreign labour costs etc. So a big increase in UK low skill wages would help poor people's incomes a lot, and only cause a tiny increase in people's spending.
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
There are countries across the political spectrum with high youth unemployment in Europe.
A flagship savings plan proposed by Labour has been scrapped by the new coalition government.
The Saving Gateway, planned to start in July, was aimed at encouraging the poorest to save.
The previous chancellor had pledged to add 50 pence to every £1 saved in the programme, which was designed for up to eight million people on benefits and tax credits.
But in his Budget speech, George Osborne said it was "not affordable".
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Doesn't explain why it's the AfD rather than, say, the SPD which is advancing.
Simple , it is because the SPD are part of the government . The AfD are advancing now as the party of midterm protest just as it was the Pirate party which did so in 2011/2012 .
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Doesn't explain why it's the AfD rather than, say, the SPD which is advancing.
Simple , it is because the SPD are part of the government . The AfD are advancing now as the party of midterm protest just as it was the Pirate party which did so in 2011/2012 .
so that large rise in the German liberals will just disappear then,
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Doesn't explain why it's the AfD rather than, say, the SPD which is advancing.
ARD ( german tv ) on their election programme quoted 53% of Germans saying immigation was a major concern. Among AfD voters it was 91%.
Is their policy to advocate Lebensraum?
No their policy is to control immigration. The AfD vote in Sachsen Anhalt was the most interesting, they took some votes from the CDU but cleaned up from left wing parties.
Meanwhile Return of Super Tuesday, Wrath of Trump approaches. If Trump loses Florida it would dent his momentum badly (and deprive him of a truckload of delegates). But I don't think he will lose Florida. More intriguing is Ohio. Would it be a deathblow not just to Kasich but to the whole (non-Cruz) stop-Trump operation if Trump won there?
Most likely he wins Florida, loses Ohio, and the circus moves on.
Don't forget Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina too !
I think of them often. Especially Missouri, about which there is almost FA polling.
South and Eastern Missouri is part of the Upper South cultural region, settled by the 'Scots-Irish' from their heartland in Appalachia. Of the American nations they are Trump's strongest supporters, West Virginia is his strongest state. Northern Missouri is Midland cultural region but not part of the Kansas, Iowa etc. “Friendly & Conventional” zone where they prefer Cruz's style of religious conservatism and less aggressive, less bombastic style. Expect Trump to sweep southern counties by big margins which will give him a comfortable win in Missouri.
Both Illinois and Missouri effectively become WTA for a candidate that wins by double figures. Need to see a slight up tick in Trump's numbers for him take Ohio I think.
I had a call from Populus the other day and told them to mind their own business, makes you wonder who responds to pollsters.
Its good to see you employ your charm offensive indiscriminately.
Yep, strangers asking me my age group, name and address, only weirdos would respond.
You left the country you were so tired of it, now you're busy telling us what to do.
Oh dear - I am a UK citizen paying full UK [and Spanish] taxes and have the protection of a British passport. It's sad to hear such bitterness so early in the morning but fortunately the clear blue sky outside and the balmy temperatures beckon and sweeten the pill immeasurably.
Endless monotonous days of sunny mind-bending ennui tempered by gin and PB. We get the picture.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
No, thats a ridiculous strawman. The people's interest and business interest are not always aligned. For example, corporate welfare subsidies help businesses but hurt the people. The same applies to regulating air quality. Etc etc.
On issue we're talking about your argument is completely false. We are talking about wages rising because demand for labour outstrips supply of labour. How can a wage rise from that cause supply of labour to outstrip demand??
Although I oppose restrictions to freedom of movement and would in fact like MORE reciprocal freedom of movement (with eg Australia, Canada, USA, New Zealand etc ideally) on the bases that wage rises happen naturally within the free market because demand for labour outstrips supply then of course that is sustainable.
If however we're just talking about the general principle of raising wages through any artificial means (eg a dramatic increase in the Minimum Wage with no mitigation) then that can cause supply to exceed demand and would lead to mass unemployment with no ability for the legal market to correct by offering lower wages (though the black market might which is worst of all worlds).
It makes an interesting contrast: while Yes Scotland’s Project Fear was wrong on almost every front, Better Together’s was more or less bang on, yet at the SNP conference delegates comforted themselves by arguing that black is white while falling back on tired old tropes about Scotland sending oil revenue to the Treasury but receiving “nothing” in return (except about the same amount in Barnett consequentials). Speaker after speaker reiterated the usual sanctimonious hype about being “positive” when in fact modern Scottish nationalism relies on deeply negative arguments and sentiments.
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
Did you see Sturgeon's interview with Andrew Neil yesterday ? She essentially argued for the benefits of the Union, it was enlightening.
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
I had a call from Populus the other day and told them to mind their own business, makes you wonder who responds to pollsters.
Its good to see you employ your charm offensive indiscriminately.
Yep, strangers asking me my age group, name and address, only weirdos would respond.
You left the country you were so tired of it, now you're busy telling us what to do.
Oh dear - I am a UK citizen paying full UK [and Spanish] taxes and have the protection of a British passport. It's sad to hear such bitterness so early in the morning but fortunately the clear blue sky outside and the balmy temperatures beckon and sweeten the pill immeasurably.
Endless monotonous days of sunny mind-bending ennui tempered by gin and PB. We get the picture.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
While when a protest party rises in midterms as has happened ad nauseum people try to extrapolate from an initial rise into the future and put their own projections onto why it is happening.
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Somebody who can't read German.
German press saying she took a kicking over immigration. As does broadcast media.
The German press is actually a bit more mixed than that. There's no question that the AfD did well and in Saxony markedly better than expected. At the same time, Merkel's policy on refugees continues to have majority support both among politicians and (little reported here) in polls of the public. Her problem (and also a problem of the Left Party) is that the minority who oppose it is increasingly unwilling to support parties who back it, so by focusing on the single issue the AfD is making real progress at their expense.
I had a call from Populus the other day and told them to mind their own business, makes you wonder who responds to pollsters.
Its good to see you employ your charm offensive indiscriminately.
Yep, strangers asking me my age group, name and address, only weirdos would respond.
You left the country you were so tired of it, now you're busy telling us what to do.
Oh dear - I am a UK citizen paying full UK [and Spanish] taxes and have the protection of a British passport. It's sad to hear such bitterness so early in the morning but fortunately the clear blue sky outside and the balmy temperatures beckon and sweeten the pill immeasurably.
Endless monotonous days of sunny mind-bending ennui tempered by gin and PB. We get the picture.
And hookers. Don't forget the hookers.
Oh, sorry, thought you were talking about ME.
How's your book doing in the EU?
Well enough to turn you into an ardent Remainer?
Are you now in the Remain camp TSE?
I'm genuinely unsure at the moment. Probably closer to Remain than Leave.
I think I've already changed my mind six times this year.
"Who do you trust" – respondents appear to have read that as: who most supports your view?
LOL.
EDIT: Though probably not for the Tories (who I believe are split down the middle for Remain/Leave) but maybe for everyone else. Had I answered I'd say Cameron for trust more, but currently leaning towards voting Leave (not 100% yet).
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as much of it goes to land costs, energy costs, material costs, skilled labour costs, foreign labour costs etc. So a big increase in UK low skill wages would help poor people's incomes a lot, and only cause a tiny increase in people's spending.
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
There are countries across the political spectrum with high youth unemployment in Europe.
Yep and that has as much to do with their employment laws (and the inability to reduce workforce numbers if required) as it does to the state of their economy....
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
The Pirate party flourished in Germany in 2011/2012 , peaking in April 2012 at 12% in the German polls , By the 2013 German GE it was back to 2.2% . AfD are currently at 11/12% in the national German polls . It would be interesting to know how many of the current AfD supporters were Pirate supporters back in 2011/12
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
"I saw it and Yes, Nicola had a terrible interview and the SNP hopes and dreams are dead and buried Andrew Neil is fat..."
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Preposterous analysis.
A populist anti-immigrant German right wing party has risen to serious prominence for the first time since 1945, a few months after the Chancellor allowed 1m migrants into the country, and said Let Them All Come. And three months after 1000 of these migrants went on a rape spree in central Cologne.
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Preposterous analysis.
A populist anti-immigrant German right wing party has risen to serious prominence for the first time since 1945, a few months after the Chancellor allowed 1m migrants into the country, and said Let Them All Come. And three months after 1000 of these migrants went on a rape spree in central Cologne.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Its amazing how the Lefts embrace of high levels of migration has caused them to adopt Tory Right beliefs to defend it: you need to keep wages low for good of economy, the unemployed are to blame for their own laziness...
Though he's no leftist, I thought that Lord Rose was refreshingly honest in his view that rising wages would be a bad consequence of Brexit.
Artificially rising wages through restriction of immigration would be a bad thing. The fact is the country's benefit structure still needs considerable reform to ensure that work always pays. Skilled immigrants are a boon to the economy.
Depends whether you do it at top end or bottom end. Increasing unskilled wages would definitely be a good thing.
It depends, doesn't it? Increasing the wages of unskilled workers is clearly very good for unskilled workers, but the subsequent price rises will affect everyone. Isn't that the right's argument against a living wage?
Right but domestic unskilled labour costs are only a small chunk of the cost base in the stuff you buy as much of it goes to land costs, energy costs, material costs, skilled labour costs, foreign labour costs etc. So a big increase in UK low skill wages would help poor people's incomes a lot, and only cause a tiny increase in people's spending.
The Tory Right use the argument because they are representing business interest.
The business interest is indivisible from the peoples interest. If the business goes bust due to rising Labour costs then you'll find everyone who was employed loses their jobs and becomes unemployed. If there is a too high cost for any other business to hire them then they can stay unemployed.
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
There are countries across the political spectrum with high youth unemployment in Europe.
Because Europe is not across the political spectrum, Europe is way to the left economically of Thatcherism or the USA for example. Name a right wing nation with free labour laws with 50% youth unemployment.
Revealed: the secret report into Labour's 2015 defeat
The report - published in full for the first time - encouraged Harriet Harman to lead Labour in abstaining on the Welfare Bill.
Labour are seen as a party for the “down and outs” and people on benefits by voters, while in Scotland, the party is seen as “just the same as the Tories but less good at it”, according to a damning inquest into the party’s 2015 defeat.
The report – obtained by the New Statesman and published for the first time in full – was presented to Harriet Harman, then the party’s interim leader, on 1 July 2015, and contributed to Harman’s decision to lead the party to abstain on the Welfare Bill twelve days later. It was that decision that some credit with handing the party leadership to Jeremy Corbyn.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
The Pirate party flourished in Germany in 2011/2012 , peaking in April 2012 at 12% in the German polls , By the 2013 German GE it was back to 2.2% . AfD are currently at 11/12% in the national German polls . It would be interesting to know how many of the current AfD supporters were Pirate supporters back in 2011/12
very few.
The biggest segment of AfD support came from non-voters. In the East they are taking from Linke and SPD, in the West CDU.
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Preposterous analysis.
A populist anti-immigrant German right wing party has risen to serious prominence for the first time since 1945, a few months after the Chancellor allowed 1m migrants into the country, and said Let Them All Come. And three months after 1000 of these migrants went on a rape spree in central Cologne.
What's the German for Look, squirrel?
Laughable bollocks.
Depends upon your definition of "serious prominence" I suppose. If the AfD can rise beyond the dizzying heights set by the Pirate Party it might be serious prominence. If they can look to get first place and lead a majority in the Bundestag it certainly would be.
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
"I saw it and Yes, Nicola had a terrible interview and the SNP hopes and dreams are dead and buried Andrew Neil is fat..."
I'm sure your non-response to this yesterday was an oversight, but I'll helpfully repost it.
Meanwhile Return of Super Tuesday, Wrath of Trump approaches. If Trump loses Florida it would dent his momentum badly (and deprive him of a truckload of delegates). But I don't think he will lose Florida. More intriguing is Ohio. Would it be a deathblow not just to Kasich but to the whole (non-Cruz) stop-Trump operation if Trump won there?
Most likely he wins Florida, loses Ohio, and the circus moves on.
Don't forget Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina too !
I think of them often. Especially Missouri, about which there is almost FA polling.
South and Eastern Missouri is part of the Upper South cultural region, settled by the 'Scots-Irish' from their heartland in Appalachia. Of the American nations they are Trump's strongest supporters, West Virginia is his strongest state. Northern Missouri is Midland cultural region but not part of the Kansas, Iowa etc. “Friendly & Conventional” zone where they prefer Cruz's style of religious conservatism and less aggressive, less bombastic style. Expect Trump to sweep southern counties by big margins which will give him a comfortable win in Missouri.
Both Illinois and Missouri effectively become WTA for a candidate that wins by double figures. Need to see a slight up tick in Trump's numbers for him take Ohio I think.
Thanks for that summary. I know about MO's Civil War history but very little about the modern state. Common sense says this is between Trump and Cruz though.
I also think Trump is looking like falling short in Ohio.
The Tory research office once again in wishful thinking. I saw the interview and I couldn't care less if Neil is fat or thin. He is the BBC's top interviewer and destroyer of politicians. In recent weeks he has take apart both sides of the European referendum. Cameron avoids him, Corbyn ducks him while Boris can't even handle Andrew Marr!
Sturgeon performed well and stood up to his hectoring style. She is an increasingly accomplished front rank politician and light years ahead of the vastly overated Davidson, the inconsequential Dugdale and the Liberal guy.
Mr. Brooke, it's also worth noting just how rancidly politicised the police and media are in Germany, given the initial censorship/silence over the Cologne sexual assaults, and how Germany still has a moral hangover from WWII.
It makes an interesting contrast: while Yes Scotland’s Project Fear was wrong on almost every front, Better Together’s was more or less bang on, yet at the SNP conference delegates comforted themselves by arguing that black is white while falling back on tired old tropes about Scotland sending oil revenue to the Treasury but receiving “nothing” in return (except about the same amount in Barnett consequentials). Speaker after speaker reiterated the usual sanctimonious hype about being “positive” when in fact modern Scottish nationalism relies on deeply negative arguments and sentiments.
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
Did you see Sturgeon's interview with Andrew Neil yesterday ? She essentially argued for the benefits of the Union, it was enlightening.
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
You must miss fat, jowly, arteriopath Eck, he'd have put up a better show than Sturgeon. She was hopeless.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
This behaviour = protest votes in midterm?
Or something else. Matt Singh has hit the nail on the head, that's why he's said what he has. AfD = utterly meaningless.
I already know you are quite stupid from previous arguments. But maybe we can gauge the actual depth of your dimness.
Do you actually, seriously believe the sudden astonishing rise of an anti-immigration party, in Germany, has nothing to do with a sudden, astonishing influx of immigrants into Germany?
Is that what you really think?
Take your time. Take all the time you like. You may need a day. Two days. I understand it's difficult for you.
I'll respond in seconds not days. Yes I think it's related, I also think its so far pretty irrelevant and being over-examined and over-exaggerated because of Germany history, because it's interesting, because its new and because of people's related biases.
If you look in the general context of protest parties rather than what they're protesting over specifically 11-12% for a protest party in midterm in a PR nation is not that shocking or unusual. I'll be surprised if they achieve that in an actual Bundestag election and I'll be very surprised if they achieve considerably more than that.
Especially when you need to take into account of the fact that the German PR system needs a protest party to rise up now as soon as night follows day. The FDP in Germany has died and both main parties are in the Grand Coalition. So the field was wide open for a protest party to hoover up the midterm malcontents and given that the news is all about immigration yes an anti-immigration party has done it. And reached the shocking heights of what the Pirate Party previously did BEFORE the Grand Coalition, when protest voters could actually join the opposition party.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
This behaviour = protest votes in midterm?
Or something else. Matt Singh has hit the nail on the head, that's why he's said what he has. AfD = utterly meaningless.
You haven;t grapsed how PR works.
Of course I understand it, it makes it very easy to claim to support any party during midterms and very fluid leading to high shares for protest parties in midterm. Have you grasped that?
But a bit like Better Together, the majority is split while the minority is largely united.
The larger point, entirely missed by our thicker friends downthread, is that - hitherto - it has been absolutely taboo to vote for a hard right, or anti-immigrant party in Germany. It was the province of a few skinheads and drunken Ossies.
Merkel's madness has made German anti-immigrant sentiment mainstream. That's her singular achievement. Well done, Angela, well done.
And as Mr Meeks plants charts in his lawyerly way he forgets to tell us what the trend is. What were the approval ratings for Angie back in the happy clappy days of summer 2015 ? Higher or lower than now ?
On topic, I wonder how much the 'trust more' answer is conflated with 'agree with more'. Do UKIP voters really overwhelmingly trust Boris more or is it that his having come out for Leave just means that for the moment they like him more? It's very difficult to disassociate cause and consequence here because there will almost certainly be a feedback effect.
I'm sure you're right with UKIP who are EU obsessed but how does your theory explain the Tory numbers? 54/27 trust Cameron most but that's nothing like the numbers for the Pro EUers
It makes an interesting contrast: while Yes Scotland’s Project Fear was wrong on almost every front, Better Together’s was more or less bang on, yet at the SNP conference delegates comforted themselves by arguing that black is white while falling back on tired old tropes about Scotland sending oil revenue to the Treasury but receiving “nothing” in return (except about the same amount in Barnett consequentials). Speaker after speaker reiterated the usual sanctimonious hype about being “positive” when in fact modern Scottish nationalism relies on deeply negative arguments and sentiments.
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
Did you see Sturgeon's interview with Andrew Neil yesterday ? She essentially argued for the benefits of the Union, it was enlightening.
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
You must miss fat, jowly, arteriopath Eck, he'd have put up a better show than Sturgeon. She was hopeless.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
This behaviour = protest votes in midterm?
Or something else. Matt Singh has hit the nail on the head, that's why he's said what he has. AfD = utterly meaningless.
You haven;t grapsed how PR works.
Of course I understand it, it makes it very easy to claim to support any party during midterms and very fluid leading to high shares for protest parties in midterm. Have you grasped that?
More than you have.
I'm basing my view on the political analysts in german newspapers and media which I'm reading and watching in the orginal. You're basing yours on a tweet from some english bloke who can't read German.
Owen Paterson idea of pensioners being compelled to picking fruit for their daily bread offers huge savings and deserves a pilot in the House of Lords.They would need to have evidence they had picked 4 punnets before they could claim for their £300 day allowance.That's how to treat these feckless scrounging pensioners.
Curious that the UK's mainstream media (i.e. the BBC) is just reporting that it's Merkel that's taking a hammering. That might be because her party has done badly but it's far from the overall picture. See what you make of the average vote shares and changes on the previous elections across the three länder:
Now, I'd say that that represented a bad night for both government parties but a worse one for the SPD, albeit that it held on to first in Rheinland Palatinate with an increase in share there (but a loss of seats). It was also a bad night for the left-of-centre, with the SPD, Greens and Linke down by a collective 11.4%.
Obviously, it's always easy to read too much into local elections in any country and the unusually high profile of the Greens in BW might distort things but I'd still be inclined to read the top line here as meaningful: this was, by German standards, a pretty revolutionary set of elections. The victory of the Greens in BW of itself was extraordinary: the CDU had previously won every regional election in that state since (and including) the first post-war elections in 1952.
I already know you are quite stupid from previous arguments. But maybe we can gauge the actual depth of your dimness.
Do you actually, seriously believe the sudden astonishing rise of an anti-immigration party, in Germany, has nothing to do with a sudden, astonishing influx of immigrants into Germany?
Is that what you really think?
Take your time. Take all the time you like. You may need a day. Two days. I understand it's difficult for you.
I'll respond in seconds not days. Yes I think it's related, I also think its so far pretty irrelevant and being over-examined and over-exaggerated because of Germany history, because it's interesting, because its new and because of people's related biases.
If you look in the general context of protest parties rather than what they're protesting over specifically 11-12% for a protest party in midterm in a PR nation is not that shocking or unusual. I'll be surprised if they achieve that in an actual Bundestag election and I'll be very surprised if they achieve considerably more than that.
Especially when you need to take into account of the fact that the German PR system needs a protest party to rise up now as soon as night follows day. The FDP in Germany has died and both main parties are in the Grand Coalition. So the field was wide open for a protest party to hoover up the midterm malcontents and given that the news is all about immigration yes an anti-immigration party has done it. And reached the shocking heights of what the Pirate Party previously did BEFORE the Grand Coalition, when protest voters could actually join the opposition party.
It's shocking because the protest party gaining power is specifically anti-immigrant, previously impossible in German politics.
Merkel has broken the mould, in a really really bad way. German is finally going the way of every other European country - from Denmark to France, Finland to Holland.
The populist right rises. So far there is little sign of it stopping.
Time moves on, its 71 years since the end of WWII this year, many Germans don't care about the same things as previous generations did. The rise of anti-immigrant party to less than 15% during a perfect storm for it is not the end of the world and life will go on afterwards.
Don't take this for me defending Merkel, I'm on the record for saying what Merkel has done is stupid, selfish and dangerous - and not remotely "generous" as portrayed here* because she refuses to offer safe passage to Germany and so its survival of the fittest/most aggressive/best able to pay people smugglers.
I think the fact it's midterm currently is why it has little sign of stopping. How much do you think AfD will poll at the Bundestag election?
* EDIT: By the left-wing media in this country, not here on this site.
I had a call from Populus the other day and told them to mind their own business, makes you wonder who responds to pollsters.
Its good to see you employ your charm offensive indiscriminately.
Yep, strangers asking me my age group, name and address, only weirdos would respond.
You left the country you were so tired of it, now you're busy telling us what to do.
Oh dear - I am a UK citizen paying full UK [and Spanish] taxes and have the protection of a British passport. It's sad to hear such bitterness so early in the morning but fortunately the clear blue sky outside and the balmy temperatures beckon and sweeten the pill immeasurably.
Endless monotonous days of sunny mind-bending ennui tempered by gin and PB. We get the picture.
And hookers. Don't forget the hookers.
Oh, sorry, thought you were talking about ME.
How's your book doing in the EU?
Well enough to turn you into an ardent Remainer?
Are you now in the Remain camp TSE?
I'm genuinely unsure at the moment. Probably closer to Remain than Leave.
I think I've already changed my mind six times this year.
When a party lie AfD starts to flourish, some people initially try to deny that it is happening, then they try to deny why it is happening.
This behaviour = protest votes in midterm?
Or something else. Matt Singh has hit the nail on the head, that's why he's said what he has. AfD = utterly meaningless.
I already know you are quite stupid from previous arguments. But maybe we can gauge the actual depth of your dimness.
Do you actually, seriously believe the sudden astonishing rise of an anti-immigration party, in Germany, has nothing to do with a sudden, astonishing influx of immigrants into Germany?
Is that what you really think?
Take your time. Take all the time you like. You may need a day. Two days. I understand it's difficult for you.
I'll respond in seconds not days. Yes I think it's related, I also think its so far pretty irrelevant and being over-examined and over-exaggerated because of Germany history, because it's interesting, because its new and because of people's related biases.
If you look in the general context of protest parties rather than what they're protesting over specificers could actually join the opposition party.
It's shocking because the protest party gaining power is specifically anti-immigrant, previously impossible in German politics.
Merkel has broken the mould, in a really really bad way. German is finally going the way of every other European country - from Denmark to France, Finland to Holland.
The populist right rises. So far there is little sign of it stopping.
It also sort of gets harder for Merkel. Increasingly she is being forced back on grand coalitions with parties who on paper are diametrically opposed to conservatism - SPD and Greens . How that plays out who knows, but one of the coalition parties is going to get crapped on by their own exasperated supporters.
Migration is only an issue in the UK because too many lazy sods won't borrow the money to get educated and if you disagree with that you're prejudiced / racist.
Blair together with his assorted Blairite acolytes are assuredly the most one eyed EU advocates in British politics. Apart from the fact one might like our national politicians to actually look after the interests of our citizens rather than those from other countries what he says here is a distorted half truth. Perhaps he might explain how having more skills would persuade, just to take one recent example, Sports Direct in Shirebrook,Derbys not to employ so many migrants to take up their unskilled jobs in their warehouse that they cannot be find enough accommodation for them in the area.
Only SeanT doing his Chicken Lickin imitation can turn a mid term German local election protest result into the most significant event in politics in the last 100 years or more .
I had a call from Populus the other day and told them to mind their own business, makes you wonder who responds to pollsters.
Its good to see you employ your charm offensive indiscriminately.
Yep, strangers asking me my age group, name and address, only weirdos would respond.
You left the country you were so tired of it, now you're busy telling us what to do.
Oh dear - I am a UK citizen paying full UK [and Spanish] taxes and have the protection of a British passport. It's sad to hear such bitterness so early in the morning but fortunately the clear blue sky outside and the balmy temperatures beckon and sweeten the pill immeasurably.
Endless monotonous days of sunny mind-bending ennui tempered by gin and PB. We get the picture.
And hookers. Don't forget the hookers.
Oh, sorry, thought you were talking about ME.
How's your book doing in the EU?
Well enough to turn you into an ardent Remainer?
Are you now in the Remain camp TSE?
I'm genuinely unsure at the moment. Probably closer to Remain than Leave.
I think I've already changed my mind six times this year.
You're giving Boris a run for his money.
It wouldn't be the first time I've been compared to Boris.
Only SeanT doing his Chicken Lickin imitation can turn a mid term German local election protest result into the most significant event in politics in the last 100 years or more .
.. and only you can turn a LD victory in some meaningless local election into signs of the LD's revival turning into world domination.
Only SeanT doing his Chicken Lickin imitation can turn a mid term German local election protest result into the most significant event in politics in the last 100 years or more .
.. and only you can turn a LD victory in some meaningless local election into signs of the LD's revival turning into world domination.
ONtopic I had an amazing lucid dream last night, two hours long, which basically convinced me there is some attenuated form of afterlife.
I've only had a dream like this once before, in my entire existence, and that dream got me off a 15 year heroin addiction.
I should point out that I am in Bangkok, drinking a lot of gin, having just come back from Bhutan, the Kingdom of the Thunder Dragon, so make of this what you will.
Are you sure it was two hours long. I thought dreams last only a few seconds but seem longer.. bit like a download of several megs that takes a few secs?
Curious that the UK's mainstream media (i.e. the BBC) is just reporting that it's Merkel that's taking a hammering. That might be because her party has done badly but it's far from the overall picture. See what you make of the average vote shares and changes on the previous elections across the three länder:
Now, I'd say that that represented a bad night for both government parties but a worse one for the SPD, albeit that it held on to first in Rheinland Palatinate with an increase in share there (but a loss of seats). It was also a bad night for the left-of-centre, with the SPD, Greens and Linke down by a collective 11.4%.
Obviously, it's always easy to read too much into local elections in any country and the unusually high profile of the Greens in BW might distort things but I'd still be inclined to read the top line here as meaningful: this was, by German standards, a pretty revolutionary set of elections. The victory of the Greens in BW of itself was extraordinary: the CDU had previously won every regional election in that state since (and including) the first post-war elections in 1952.
The SPD certainly have had a tough night only in RP have they anything to salvage and that was largely on the basis on a popular candidate.
However the CDU thought they could take back RP with an even more popular candidate in Julia Kloeckner and failed miserably. The polls were well out; what was being reported as neck and neck ended up with a reasonable SPD lead. This in an area which voted CDU in every election up to the 2010s.
It's BW really where the earthquake is for Merkel. This is Surrey and Sussex rolled in to one an area where evreyone said the last the regional election was a fluke based on a one off issue. But the Greens grew their vote by 6% and the CDUs fell by 12 %. Whatever way you cut it that;s bad and the spinners are just look for face saving formulae.
A Labour parliamentary candidate who was suspended for suggesting ISIS should attack Israel has been readmitted to the party. In 2014 Vicki Kirby, then Labour’s candidate in Woking, was exposed by the Sunday Times for writing that Hitler was the “Zionist God” in a string of insane tweets, even asking why ISIS isn’t attacking Israel, who she described as “the real oppressors”
Matt Singh No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Preposterous analysis.
A populist anti-immigrant German right wing party has risen to serious prominence for the first time since 1945, a few months after the Chancellor allowed 1m migrants into the country, and said Let Them All Come. And three months after 1000 of these migrants went on a rape spree in central Cologne.
What's the German for Look, squirrel?
Laughable bollocks.
Depends upon your definition of "serious prominence" I suppose. If the AfD can rise beyond the dizzying heights set by the Pirate Party it might be serious prominence. If they can look to get first place and lead a majority in the Bundestag it certainly would be.
In the three elections yesterday, they came from nowhere to finish third in Baden-Wurttemburg, ahead of the SPD and FDP; third in Rhineland-Palatinate, ahead of the FDP and Greens; and second in Saxony Anhalt, ahead of Die Linke (ex-E Germany remember), SPD, FDP and Greens.
They hold the balance of power short of a grand coalition in RP, and will be in government in SA unless the CDU can reach an agreement with either the Greens or Linke (!).
Do you not think that those outcomes represent a fairly prominent position?
Comments
On topic, the narrow split among Labour voters contrasts with the big Remain majority in that category, suggesting a possible danger for Remain - the potential Labour support could be undermined by dislike of Cameron or indeed liking for Boris (even though fewer than 60% seem to trust either).
Matt Singh
No, Merkel is not being "punished" over refugees. Governing parties do badly in midterms. It's not rocket Wißenschaft...
Poor old Torrance, trying to compete among an ever expanding number of Unionist hacks within a shrinking marketplace of readers. He'll always have the 'Yoonier than thou' migrant readership to fall back on though.
German press saying she took a kicking over immigration. As does broadcast media.
But at present the opinions of Labour voters are being treated as being about as relevant to the result as the opinions of dogs.
Did you see Sturgeon's interview with Andrew Neil yesterday ? She essentially argued for the benefits of the Union, it was enlightening.
One reason I like all of Blair, Corbyn and Letwin (making me almost unique, I think) is that their instinct when asked if they hold an unpopular view is to say "Yes, and here's why", rather than pretend to something else. Blair in particular positively enjoyed the process of putting an unpopular case (the "masochism strategy") and winning people round.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35787511
This is why we have socialist nations across Europe with 50% youth unemployment, is that your ambition?
2/2 @YouGov panel for @CapX: US voters say no to EU-style arrangements for their own nation https://t.co/e3rTppQes9 https://t.co/j9xIR8KgKi
Fact 2: George Osborne is trying and somewhat failing to balance the budget. He got told to leave Tax Credits well alone. He seems to have been scared off pensions raids. He's getting a lot of grief in today's press about '£4bn isn't much'. (esp when a chunk of it looks destined to come from the disabled).
Erm....may I humbly suggest to Ozzy that he can safely squeeze the Scottish spend back to the UK average.
Well, we are thinking of sugar tax. We already chase ladies of the night for their undeclared income / taxes. That just leaves marijuana. The US example is instructive. Weed is largely legal across the US now and there are some major corporations growing up and getting listed on the stock exchange. They're doing very well - and raising a lot of tax. Even forgetting the revenue argument for a moment, I think the war on drugs has been an abject failure and we'd be socially and criminally way better off to legalise, regularise, regulate and tax marijuana. And just think how much tax there is going to waste in the UK's entire ganja / hash market. Go on George!
On issue we're talking about your argument is completely false. We are talking about wages rising because demand for labour outstrips supply of labour. How can a wage rise from that cause supply of labour to outstrip demand??
Who knew so many people trusted Ted Heath.
Huzzah for Ted Heath.
Austerity.
Twice as much as the UK.
And how the Zoomers cheered. Can't imagine why anyone thinks they are economically illiterate...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10376543
"Who do you trust" – respondents appear to have read that as: who most supports your view?
More rocket action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P42i05PEGM8
Both Illinois and Missouri effectively become WTA for a candidate that wins by double figures. Need to see a slight up tick in Trump's numbers for him take Ohio I think.
https://youtu.be/rpEIdJPz-c0
Missouri won't forget its Confederate past.
Since 2011 UK sold more goods&services to Commonwealth than bought https://t.co/pGQiGcf0aa #CommonwealthDay https://t.co/MvnNXfOeb1
Well enough to turn you into an ardent Remainer?
If however we're just talking about the general principle of raising wages through any artificial means (eg a dramatic increase in the Minimum Wage with no mitigation) then that can cause supply to exceed demand and would lead to mass unemployment with no ability for the legal market to correct by offering lower wages (though the black market might which is worst of all worlds).
Andra's jowls were certainly more empurpled than usual. A Paisley boy with added arterial plaque from a sybaritic lifestyle should regulate his blood pressure a bit more carefully.
I think I've already changed my mind six times this year.
EDIT: Though probably not for the Tories (who I believe are split down the middle for Remain/Leave) but maybe for everyone else. Had I answered I'd say Cameron for trust more, but currently leaning towards voting Leave (not 100% yet).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXeY-To-t98
'Marco Rubio stole my girlfriend' - transparent attempt to scotch the gay rumours and also get some publicitiy in front of the Trump juggernaut.
Yes, Nicola had a terrible interview and the SNP hopes and dreams are dead and buriedAndrew Neil is fat..."Or something else. Matt Singh has hit the nail on the head, that's why he's said what he has. AfD = utterly meaningless.
The report - published in full for the first time - encouraged Harriet Harman to lead Labour in abstaining on the Welfare Bill.
Labour are seen as a party for the “down and outs” and people on benefits by voters, while in Scotland, the party is seen as “just the same as the Tories but less good at it”, according to a damning inquest into the party’s 2015 defeat.
The report – obtained by the New Statesman and published for the first time in full – was presented to Harriet Harman, then the party’s interim leader, on 1 July 2015, and contributed to Harman’s decision to lead the party to abstain on the Welfare Bill twelve days later. It was that decision that some credit with handing the party leadership to Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/03/revealed-secret-report-labours-2015-defeat
The biggest segment of AfD support came from non-voters. In the East they are taking from Linke and SPD, in the West CDU.
https://twitter.com/MartinSelmayr/status/709123877968998400
But a bit like Better Together, the majority is split while the minority is largely united.
I also think Trump is looking like falling short in Ohio.
The Tory research office once again in wishful thinking. I saw the interview and I couldn't care less if Neil is fat or thin. He is the BBC's top interviewer and destroyer of politicians. In recent weeks he has take apart both sides of the European referendum. Cameron avoids him, Corbyn ducks him while Boris can't even handle Andrew Marr!
Sturgeon performed well and stood up to his hectoring style. She is an increasingly accomplished front rank politician and light years ahead of the vastly overated Davidson, the inconsequential Dugdale and the Liberal guy.
except the " eher schlecht " is coming from her own suppoerters so she's losing votes running up to a GE in about 12 months.
https://twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/709158812712890369
Is it as bad as when Sky News claimed a terrorist attack was the first time in history a beheading had happened in France?
You must miss fat, jowly, arteriopath Eck, he'd have put up a better show than Sturgeon. She was hopeless.
If you look in the general context of protest parties rather than what they're protesting over specifically 11-12% for a protest party in midterm in a PR nation is not that shocking or unusual. I'll be surprised if they achieve that in an actual Bundestag election and I'll be very surprised if they achieve considerably more than that.
Especially when you need to take into account of the fact that the German PR system needs a protest party to rise up now as soon as night follows day. The FDP in Germany has died and both main parties are in the Grand Coalition. So the field was wide open for a protest party to hoover up the midterm malcontents and given that the news is all about immigration yes an anti-immigration party has done it. And reached the shocking heights of what the Pirate Party previously did BEFORE the Grand Coalition, when protest voters could actually join the opposition party.
Her blink rate was through the roof........
I'm basing my view on the political analysts in german newspapers and media which I'm reading and watching in the orginal. You're basing yours on a tweet from some english bloke who can't read German.
CDU: 29.5 (-6.1)
SPD: 19.8 (-6.9)
AfD: 17.3 (DNPC)
Grn: 13.6 (-2.0)
Lnk: 7.3 (-2.5)
FPD: 6.5 (+2.0)
Now, I'd say that that represented a bad night for both government parties but a worse one for the SPD, albeit that it held on to first in Rheinland Palatinate with an increase in share there (but a loss of seats). It was also a bad night for the left-of-centre, with the SPD, Greens and Linke down by a collective 11.4%.
Obviously, it's always easy to read too much into local elections in any country and the unusually high profile of the Greens in BW might distort things but I'd still be inclined to read the top line here as meaningful: this was, by German standards, a pretty revolutionary set of elections. The victory of the Greens in BW of itself was extraordinary: the CDU had previously won every regional election in that state since (and including) the first post-war elections in 1952.
He's getting the hang of this Top Gear thing
Don't take this for me defending Merkel, I'm on the record for saying what Merkel has done is stupid, selfish and dangerous - and not remotely "generous" as portrayed here* because she refuses to offer safe passage to Germany and so its survival of the fittest/most aggressive/best able to pay people smugglers.
I think the fact it's midterm currently is why it has little sign of stopping. How much do you think AfD will poll at the Bundestag election?
* EDIT: By the left-wing media in this country, not here on this site.
However the CDU thought they could take back RP with an even more popular candidate in Julia Kloeckner and failed miserably. The polls were well out; what was being reported as neck and neck ended up with a reasonable SPD lead. This in an area which voted CDU in every election up to the 2010s.
It's BW really where the earthquake is for Merkel. This is Surrey and Sussex rolled in to one an area where evreyone said the last the regional election was a fluke based on a one off issue. But the Greens grew their vote by 6% and the CDUs fell by 12 %. Whatever way you cut it that;s bad and the spinners are just look for face saving formulae.
Will she get a mention at PMQs?
A Labour parliamentary candidate who was suspended for suggesting ISIS should attack Israel has been readmitted to the party. In 2014 Vicki Kirby, then Labour’s candidate in Woking, was exposed by the Sunday Times for writing that Hitler was the “Zionist God” in a string of insane tweets, even asking why ISIS isn’t attacking Israel, who she described as “the real oppressors”
http://order-order.com/2016/03/14/candidate-who-suggested-isis-should-attack-israel-readmitted-to-labour/
They hold the balance of power short of a grand coalition in RP, and will be in government in SA unless the CDU can reach an agreement with either the Greens or Linke (!).
Do you not think that those outcomes represent a fairly prominent position?