politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After tonight the Republican race could be down to just Trump versus Cruz
Tonight’s a massive one in the fight for the Republican nomination. There are five big primarieswith a total of 358 delgates at stake. To put that into context Trump currently leads Cruz by 460 to 370 and 1237 are required for victory.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Says "SAMPLE" on it?
You're correct, it does say SAMPLE. The person complaining probably didn't realize.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Says "SAMPLE" on it?
Also, will all the people who have officially dropped out be on the ballot?
I've heard and read and posted those stories here for a long time.
The consensus among the anti-Trumps is that they break off and nominate Rick Perry as an independent conservative, if they fail to stop Trump winning the GOP nomination. It gives an idea of desperation and stupidity that is prevalent among the GOP establishment.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
I've heard and read and posted those stories here for a long time.
The consensus among the anti-Trumps is that they break off and nominate Rick Perry as an independent conservative, if they fail to stop Trump winning the GOP nomination. It gives an idea of desperation and stupidity that is prevalent among the GOP establishment.
Makes the Labour party's troubles seem quite pedestrian...
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
I've heard and read and posted those stories here for a long time.
The consensus among the anti-Trumps is that they break off and nominate Rick Perry as an independent conservative, if they fail to stop Trump winning the GOP nomination. It gives an idea of desperation and stupidity that is prevalent among the GOP establishment.
Makes the Labour party's troubles seem quite pedestrian...
Indeed, I have never seen a party hate it's own voters so much.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
Australia has a free trade agreement with China and is much closer than the EU to signing one with the US too. Switzerland has one with China.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Says "SAMPLE" on it?
Also, will all the people who have officially dropped out be on the ballot?
If they qualified for that state's ballot then yes they are.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
But he has allowed for the financial crash by also looking at the period pre-2007.
Seeing pictures of Florida ballots with Trump omitted. http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
Says "SAMPLE" on it?
Also, will all the people who have officially dropped out be on the ballot?
If they qualified for that state's ballot then yes they are.
Interesting. So you can waste you vote in a whole load of different ways, not just drawing an enormous penis on the ballot paper :-)
The CSU are arguing hard with Merkel on the migration crisis. One statistic lurking among the analysis from the German regionals was 65-75% of AfD voters said they would consider voting CSU if they were standing in their Land.
I wonder if Seehofer might consider standing in all 18 Lander and not just Bavaria,
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
Australia has a free trade agreement with China and is much closer than the EU to signing one with the US too. Switzerland has one with China.
TIPP is better than TPP for two reasons: 1. ISDS tribunals under TIPP are (according to the last draft I saw) not held in secret; 2. Australia (and other TPP signatories) are treaty bound to keep their intellectual property laws in lock-step with the US.
The Swiss deal is not a great deal. Under its terms, Chinese companies are allowed to own banking licenses in Switzerland, and sell financial services products there. They can also buy Swiss banks, insurance companies and other financial service providers. In return, the Swiss can buy up to 49.9% of Chinese banks. The Swiss government is removing the tariffs on about 85% of Chinese imports to Switzerland. In return, tariffs on Swiss drugs are eliminated, and the tariff on Swiss watches going into China is cut from 12.5% to 7.5%. Over 10 years.
In fact, both the TPP and the China deal are classic examples of big countries bullying little ones in trade negotiations.
By contrast, the EFTA deals are largely excellent. It has established deals with all the same places as the EU, plus Canada, and the GCC.
The CSU are arguing hard with Merkel on the migration crisis. One statistic lurking among the analysis from the German regionals was 65-75% of AfD voters said they would consider voting CSU if they were standing in their Land.
I wonder if Seehofer might consider standing in all 18 Lander and not just Bavaria,
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
It don't need to be deals unavailable to anyone else. We would get substantial benefits even from one sided Iceland-China style treaties. And in reality we have a lot more leverage than Iceland. Against Brazil and India we are the bigger economy.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
But he has allowed for the financial crash by also looking at the period pre-2007.
Because he narcissistically assumed that the most recent crash was the only one.
Did he allow for the sound finances that Brown inherited as opposed to the dreadful ones bequeathed? Did he allow for the terrible state inherited after the winter of discontent and the IMF?
There are fast-approaching deadlines against an "independent" candidacy getting on state ballots. Of course, that equally applies to a conservative anti-Trump candidate or Trump himself if the GOP stitch him up at their convention.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
But he has allowed for the financial crash by also looking at the period pre-2007.
Because he narcissistically assumed that the most recent crash was the only one.
Did he allow for the sound finances that Brown inherited as opposed to the dreadful ones bequeathed? Did he allow for the terrible state inherited after the winter of discontent and the IMF?
And so on and so forth.
The dreadful state bequeathed by Norman Lamont in 1993? Or Anthony Barber in 1974? He will also have taken account of the Budget surplus bequeathed by Roy Jenkins in 1970 and Hugh Gaitskell in 1951.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
Australia has a free trade agreement with China and is much closer than the EU to signing one with the US too. Switzerland has one with China.
TIPP is better than TPP for two reasons: 1. ISDS tribunals under TIPP are (according to the last draft I saw) not held in secret; 2. Australia (and other TPP signatories) are treaty bound to keep their intellectual property laws in lock-step with the US.
The Swiss deal is not a great deal. Under its terms, Chinese companies are allowed to own banking licenses in Switzerland, and sell financial services products there. They can also buy Swiss banks, insurance companies and other financial service providers. In return, the Swiss can buy up to 49.9% of Chinese banks. The Swiss government is removing the tariffs on about 85% of Chinese imports to Switzerland. In return, tariffs on Swiss drugs are eliminated, and the tariff on Swiss watches going into China is cut from 12.5% to 7.5%. Over 10 years.
In fact, both the TPP and the China deal are classic examples of big countries bullying little ones in trade negotiations.
By contrast, the EFTA deals are largely excellent. It has established deals with all the same places as the EU, plus Canada, and the GCC.
We are a significantly bigger player than the Swiss and if we join the EFTA then the EFTA would be considerably bigger. But without having to appeal to the lowest common denominator of French farmers etc
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
It don't need to be deals unavailable to anyone else. We would get substantial benefits even from one sided Iceland-China style treaties. And in reality we have a lot more leverage than Iceland. Against Brazil and India we are the bigger economy.
I was involved with a software company as a major investor about eight years ago. The list price for our software about $800,000, and a tier one US investment bank wanted to buy a site license for $20,000. I was gung-ho about how we should sign the deal, and my rationale was two fold: 1. getting 'validation' from a serious name would be great for the company; and 2. getting $20,000 was still a shit load of money.
Our chairman was an old software hand, and he said: "if you sign a deal at $20,000 with x, you will never get more than $20,000 for our software. by selling it at that price, everyone will know you think it's only worth that."
That's what happens if you sign one lopsided trade deal: they all end up lopsided. It's why negotiations go on and on and on and on.
As it happens, I don't think we'd be any worse off by leaving the EU as far as trade. I think we'd piggy back on to the TIPP and could benefit from the deals EFTA has signed with Canada and others.
But you contention that people would be falling over themselves to open up their strategic (particularly financial services) markets to us is deluded.
Very leaky, but if it sticks then it could be "A Clean Sweep" for Trump, as the old submariners used to say.
Prepare to hang out your broom from the turret.
Well Kasich is not an Outsider, however Insiders get 43% in Ohio, since Rubio gets 0% I think almost all of it is Kasich vote. That means that Kasich has a floor of 35% in Ohio, Trump will win only if he gets more than 80% of the Outsider vote.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
Probably true for those but looking at how bad the EU bureacrats are compared to ours, I do believe that we could move things along quicker. After all our bureacrats would have a lot of time freed up from not gold plating EU directives.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
But he has allowed for the financial crash by also looking at the period pre-2007.
Because he narcissistically assumed that the most recent crash was the only one.
Did he allow for the sound finances that Brown inherited as opposed to the dreadful ones bequeathed? Did he allow for the terrible state inherited after the winter of discontent and the IMF?
And so on and so forth.
The dreadful state bequeathed by Norman Lamont in 1993? Or Anthony Barber in 1974? He will also have taken account of the Budget surplus bequeathed by Roy Jenkins in 1970 and Hugh Gaitskell in 1951.
FPT: If we assume that Remain are actually right and that three million jobs are dependent upon our trade agreement with the EU (1/5th of the world's economy), then if we join the EEA we have the potential to keep those three million jobs and create up to 12 million more by signing new agreements with the remaining 80% of the globe.
The case for leaving the EU rests on sovereignty.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
Australia has a free trade agreement with China and is much closer than the EU to signing one with the US too. Switzerland has one with China.
TIPP is better than TPP for two reasons: 1. ISDS tribunals under TIPP are (according to the last draft I saw) not held in secret; 2. Australia (and other TPP signatories) are treaty bound to keep their intellectual property laws in lock-step with the US.
The Swiss deal is not a great deal. Under its terms, Chinese companies are allowed to own banking licenses in Switzerland, and sell financial services products there. They can also buy Swiss banks, insurance companies and other financial service providers. In return, the Swiss can buy up to 49.9% of Chinese banks. The Swiss government is removing the tariffs on about 85% of Chinese imports to Switzerland. In return, tariffs on Swiss drugs are eliminated, and the tariff on Swiss watches going into China is cut from 12.5% to 7.5%. Over 10 years.
In fact, both the TPP and the China deal are classic examples of big countries bullying little ones in trade negotiations.
By contrast, the EFTA deals are largely excellent. It has established deals with all the same places as the EU, plus Canada, and the GCC.
We are a significantly bigger player than the Swiss and if we join the EFTA then the EFTA would be considerably bigger. But without having to appeal to the lowest common denominator of French farmers etc
Let me know about all the trade deals that the Japanese have that have opened up - for example - the Indian or Chinese financial services markets. And let me know if Japan was able to exempt itself from the secret ISDS tribunals or the treaty requirement to keep its IP laws in lock-step with the US.
No s**t Sherlock. When you inherit an economy that's so screwed up it has an enormous deficit of course you'll end up borrowing. That's the legacy of Labour getting kicked out of office when it wreck things again rather than being trust to fix their mess.
But he has allowed for the financial crash by also looking at the period pre-2007.
Because he narcissistically assumed that the most recent crash was the only one.
Did he allow for the sound finances that Brown inherited as opposed to the dreadful ones bequeathed? Did he allow for the terrible state inherited after the winter of discontent and the IMF?
And so on and so forth.
The dreadful state bequeathed by Norman Lamont in 1993? Or Anthony Barber in 1974? He will also have taken account of the Budget surplus bequeathed by Roy Jenkins in 1970 and Hugh Gaitskell in 1951.
I must have missed Labour taking over in 93.
No -but you also missed the change of Chancellor following the ERM shambles.
There are at least 100 really good reasons for leaving the EU. Three off the top of my head are:
1. No more supremacy of EU law and no ECJ. 2. No need - even in the EEA - to pay benefits to migrants. 3. A massive tax saving.
But the 'the rest of the world is desperate to open up their markets to us' is sadly and simply not true. Neither the Chinese not the Indians are going to let British banks into protected domestic markets. Nor are they going to relax foreign ownership rules. (And, by the way, that is mostly what trade negotiations are about these days. The Chinese know that our modest tariffs do little to stop demand for their consumer electronics, so realistically, our leverage is limited.)
"Across GOP contests to date, 35 percent of voters have said they’re looking chiefly for a candidate who “shares my values,” more than have picked any other attribute. They’ve been a strong group for Cruz – he’s won 42 percent in this group – and a dreadful one for Trump, with just 11 percent. (Trump’s come back, overwhelmingly, among voters looking for someone who “can bring needed change” or who “tells it like it is,” who’ve accounted for half of voters so far, while Rubio’s done his best among those most focused on who can win in November.) In preliminary results, nearly four in 10 voters in today’s states are stressing shared values, consistent across all five states."
There are at least 100 really good reasons for leaving the EU. Three off the top of my head are:
1. No more supremacy of EU law and no ECJ. 2. No need - even in the EEA - to pay benefits to migrants. 3. A massive tax saving.
But the 'the rest of the world is desperate to open up their markets to us' is sadly and simply not true. Neither the Chinese not the Indians are going to let British banks into protected domestic markets. Nor are they going to relax foreign ownership rules. (And, by the way, that is mostly what trade negotiations are about these days. The Chinese know that our modest tariffs do little to stop demand for their consumer electronics, so realistically, our leverage is limited.)
Are China and India's financial services the sum of the rest of the world?
Inside the EU we don't even have a free trade agreement with Australia FFS!
There are at least 100 really good reasons for leaving the EU. Three off the top of my head are:
1. No more supremacy of EU law and no ECJ. 2. No need - even in the EEA - to pay benefits to migrants. 3. A massive tax saving.
But the 'the rest of the world is desperate to open up their markets to us' is sadly and simply not true. Neither the Chinese not the Indians are going to let British banks into protected domestic markets. Nor are they going to relax foreign ownership rules. (And, by the way, that is mostly what trade negotiations are about these days. The Chinese know that our modest tariffs do little to stop demand for their consumer electronics, so realistically, our leverage is limited.)
Are China and India's financial services the sum of the rest of the world?
Inside the EU we don't even have a free trade agreement with Australia FFS!
Which of our products and services do you think is subject to significant tariffs when exported to Australia?
The Public Accounts report says Government has not acted quickly enough to keep acute hospital trusts in financial balance—also finding "there is not yet a convincing plan in place for closing the £22 billion efficiency gap and avoiding a 'black hole' in the NHS finances".
The Committee concludes the financial performance of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has deteriorated sharply and this trend is not sustainable.
The Committee highlights the "long-term damage" to trusts' finances caused by unrealistic government efficiency targets, and describes the data used to estimate trusts' potential cost savings targets as "seriously flawed".
It concludes the current system for paying providers "is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services
Report summary The financial health of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has significantly worsened in the last three financial years. Trusts had a net deficit of £843 million in 2014–15, which is a severe decline from trusts' £91 million deficit in 2013–14, and £592 million surplus in 2012–13.
Trusts' finances look set to deteriorate further—halfway through 2015–16 three quarters of trusts had a deficit, and their total overspend could rise to around £2.5 billion.
The Department, NHS England and NHS Improvement have not taken action soon enough to keep trusts in financial balance. The target for trusts to make 4% efficiency savings across the board is unrealistic and better data is needed for more informed savings and efficiency targets.
Current system "not fit-for-purpose" Failings in the system for paying providers need to be addressed as a matter of urgency, with NHS Improvement and NHS England acknowledging that the current system is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services.
Spending on agency staff has contributed to trusts' financial distress, and action to tackle this problem is welcome, albeit late. The NHS will not solve the problem of reliance on agency staff until it solves its wider workforce planning issues.
We recognise the immense challenge of achieving financial and service sustainability when demand is rising and budgets are tight, and acknowledge the ongoing efforts of NHS England and NHS Improvement to find solutions. But there is much to do to produce the convincing plan necessary for the NHS to get itself back into financial balance.
Free Trade not popular again tonight, 57% of Democrats are against.
I find it bizarre that people are opposed to free trade. But then go out and buy foreign goods. They can personally simulate life in a world without free trade by going out and only buying American.
Looks like AfD over-performed the polls by around 20% in all three regions that voted on Sunday. If applied to the national polls that would put them on about 15%.
David Shuster @DavidShuster 1h1 hour ago Shock Illinois exit poll: Hispanics voting 65-35 @BernieSanders over @hillaryclinton. If that holds, Clinton will lose IL. #DemPrimary
Ted Cruz will win Missouri, if the CNN report is accurate about late deciders breaking for Cruz there. Bad night for Trump it seems.
If Cruz wins Ohio and Missouri, and Trump Florida, does that make the magic number all but unattainable?
Yep. Trump comes out so much under target that it will be extremely unlikely for him to reach 1237 even if he outperforms in N.Y and California.
Nah, he can still make it with strong performances in North Carolina and Illinois tonight. Although it would depend on Rubio dropping out (we're at the official denial stage of that one).
The Public Accounts report says Government has not acted quickly enough to keep acute hospital trusts in financial balance—also finding "there is not yet a convincing plan in place for closing the £22 billion efficiency gap and avoiding a 'black hole' in the NHS finances".
The Committee concludes the financial performance of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has deteriorated sharply and this trend is not sustainable.
The Committee highlights the "long-term damage" to trusts' finances caused by unrealistic government efficiency targets, and describes the data used to estimate trusts' potential cost savings targets as "seriously flawed".
It concludes the current system for paying providers "is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services
Report summary The financial health of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has significantly worsened in the last three financial years. Trusts had a net deficit of £843 million in 2014–15, which is a severe decline from trusts' £91 million deficit in 2013–14, and £592 million surplus in 2012–13.
Trusts' finances look set to deteriorate further—halfway through 2015–16 three quarters of trusts had a deficit, and their total overspend could rise to around £2.5 billion.
The Department, NHS England and NHS Improvement have not taken action soon enough to keep trusts in financial balance. The target for trusts to make 4% efficiency savings across the board is unrealistic and better data is needed for more informed savings and efficiency targets.
Current system "not fit-for-purpose" Failings in the system for paying providers need to be addressed as a matter of urgency, with NHS Improvement and NHS England acknowledging that the current system is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services.
Spending on agency staff has contributed to trusts' financial distress, and action to tackle this problem is welcome, albeit late. The NHS will not solve the problem of reliance on agency staff until it solves its wider workforce planning issues.
We recognise the immense challenge of achieving financial and service sustainability when demand is rising and budgets are tight, and acknowledge the ongoing efforts of NHS England and NHS Improvement to find solutions. But there is much to do to produce the convincing plan necessary for the NHS to get itself back into financial balance.
So, in spite of a record budget the "Envy of the World" is still crap , and "one of the worst healthcare systems in the advanced world" ((c) OECD)?
Free Trade not popular again tonight, 57% of Democrats are against.
I find it bizarre that people are opposed to free trade. But then go out and buy foreign goods. They can personally simulate life in a world without free trade by going out and only buying American.
But they don't.
How can they when the American brands use predominantly offshore manufacturing?
The case against free trade isn't that it is bad in itself and is not the end goal of world economic development, but that until the behemoths of the developing world have caught up, the disruption caused by wage arbitrage has too great a human cost in the already industrialised societies. It may yet prove to have a geostrategic cost at some point as well.
Scrapping bursary saves £880mn but it reduces nurse supply & increases NHS reliance on agencies. Last years agency spend was £4bn in 2010 it was £0.4bn
The Public Accounts report says Government has not acted quickly enough to keep acute hospital trusts in financial balance—also finding "there is not yet a convincing plan in place for closing the £22 billion efficiency gap and avoiding a 'black hole' in the NHS finances".
The Committee concludes the financial performance of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has deteriorated sharply and this trend is not sustainable.
The Committee highlights the "long-term damage" to trusts' finances caused by unrealistic government efficiency targets, and describes the data used to estimate trusts' potential cost savings targets as "seriously flawed".
It concludes the current system for paying providers "is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services
Report summary The financial health of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has significantly worsened in the last three financial years. Trusts had a net deficit of £843 million in 2014–15, which is a severe decline from trusts' £91 million deficit in 2013–14, and £592 million surplus in 2012–13.
Trusts' finances look set to deteriorate further—halfway through 2015–16 three quarters of trusts had a deficit, and their total overspend could rise to around £2.5 billion.
The Department, NHS England and NHS Improvement have not taken action soon enough to keep trusts in financial balance. The target for trusts to make 4% efficiency savings across the board is unrealistic and better data is needed for more informed savings and efficiency targets.
Current system "not fit-for-purpose" Failings in the system for paying providers need to be addressed as a matter of urgency, with NHS Improvement and NHS England acknowledging that the current system is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services.
Spending on agency staff has contributed to trusts' financial distress, and action to tackle this problem is welcome, albeit late. The NHS will not solve the problem of reliance on agency staff until it solves its wider workforce planning issues.
We recognise the immense challenge of achieving financial and service sustainability when demand is rising and budgets are tight, and acknowledge the ongoing efforts of NHS England and NHS Improvement to find solutions. But there is much to do to produce the convincing plan necessary for the NHS to get itself back into financial balance.
So, in spite of a record budget the "Envy of the World" is still crap , and "one of the worst healthcare systems in the advanced world" ((c) OECD)?
Comments
https://twitter.com/wintrthur/status/709839816607850498
http://i.imgur.com/sllN7bJ.jpg
The official explanation is that if you are not a registered republican then you can vote for any other republican but Trump.
https://next.ft.com/content/f311157e-ead6-11e5-888e-2eadd5fbc4a4#ixzz430RzZJBm …
The person complaining probably didn't realize.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/top-conservatives-gather-to-plot-third-party-run-against-trump-220786
https://twitter.com/DavidShuster/status/709844940713553920
The consensus among the anti-Trumps is that they break off and nominate Rick Perry as an independent conservative, if they fail to stop Trump winning the GOP nomination.
It gives an idea of desperation and stupidity that is prevalent among the GOP establishment.
The idea that China or the US is suddenly going to give us trade deals unavailable to anyone else in the world is fantasy.
You won't last long in the EU debate :-)
* TM T Blair
Germany taking the piss out of Britain? Never!
Could the CSU be tempted ?
The CSU are arguing hard with Merkel on the migration crisis. One statistic lurking among the analysis from the German regionals was 65-75% of AfD voters said they would consider voting CSU if they were standing in their Land.
I wonder if Seehofer might consider standing in all 18 Lander and not just Bavaria,
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/fluechtlingskrise/gabriel-seehofer-faellt-merkel-bei-tuerkei-verhandlung-in-den-ruecken-14126961.html
The Swiss deal is not a great deal. Under its terms, Chinese companies are allowed to own banking licenses in Switzerland, and sell financial services products there. They can also buy Swiss banks, insurance companies and other financial service providers. In return, the Swiss can buy up to 49.9% of Chinese banks. The Swiss government is removing the tariffs on about 85% of Chinese imports to Switzerland. In return, tariffs on Swiss drugs are eliminated, and the tariff on Swiss watches going into China is cut from 12.5% to 7.5%. Over 10 years.
In fact, both the TPP and the China deal are classic examples of big countries bullying little ones in trade negotiations.
By contrast, the EFTA deals are largely excellent. It has established deals with all the same places as the EU, plus Canada, and the GCC.
Betrayed by party leadership.
N.C 56%
OHIO 57%
Outsider
N.C 54
OHIO 50
Seems good for Trump.
Looks like a 33% floor for him in Ohio, slightly higher for Trump in N.C.
Did he allow for the sound finances that Brown inherited as opposed to the dreadful ones bequeathed?
Did he allow for the terrible state inherited after the winter of discontent and the IMF?
And so on and so forth.
Of course, that equally applies to a conservative anti-Trump candidate or Trump himself if the GOP stitch him up at their convention.
Prepare to hang out your broom from the turret.
Someone has sent white flour to Rubio's HQ.
People running in panic.
Our chairman was an old software hand, and he said: "if you sign a deal at $20,000 with x, you will never get more than $20,000 for our software. by selling it at that price, everyone will know you think it's only worth that."
That's what happens if you sign one lopsided trade deal: they all end up lopsided. It's why negotiations go on and on and on and on.
As it happens, I don't think we'd be any worse off by leaving the EU as far as trade. I think we'd piggy back on to the TIPP and could benefit from the deals EFTA has signed with Canada and others.
But you contention that people would be falling over themselves to open up their strategic (particularly financial services) markets to us is deluded.
That means that Kasich has a floor of 35% in Ohio, Trump will win only if he gets more than 80% of the Outsider vote.
https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/709854084916838400
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/709852427013464064
It doesn't allow much room for his opponents.
1. No more supremacy of EU law and no ECJ.
2. No need - even in the EEA - to pay benefits to migrants.
3. A massive tax saving.
But the 'the rest of the world is desperate to open up their markets to us' is sadly and simply not true. Neither the Chinese not the Indians are going to let British banks into protected domestic markets. Nor are they going to relax foreign ownership rules. (And, by the way, that is mostly what trade negotiations are about these days. The Chinese know that our modest tariffs do little to stop demand for their consumer electronics, so realistically, our leverage is limited.)
"Across GOP contests to date, 35 percent of voters have said they’re looking chiefly for a candidate who “shares my values,” more than have picked any other attribute. They’ve been a strong group for Cruz – he’s won 42 percent in this group – and a dreadful one for Trump, with just 11 percent. (Trump’s come back, overwhelmingly, among voters looking for someone who “can bring needed change” or who “tells it like it is,” who’ve accounted for half of voters so far, while Rubio’s done his best among those most focused on who can win in November.) In preliminary results, nearly four in 10 voters in today’s states are stressing shared values, consistent across all five states."
Now that is unexpected.
That's bad for Trump.
Inside the EU we don't even have a free trade agreement with Australia FFS!
Bad night for Trump it seems.
The Committee concludes the financial performance of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has deteriorated sharply and this trend is not sustainable.
The Committee highlights the "long-term damage" to trusts' finances caused by unrealistic government efficiency targets, and describes the data used to estimate trusts' potential cost savings targets as "seriously flawed".
It concludes the current system for paying providers "is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services
Report summary
The financial health of NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts has significantly worsened in the last three financial years. Trusts had a net deficit of £843 million in 2014–15, which is a severe decline from trusts' £91 million deficit in 2013–14, and £592 million surplus in 2012–13.
Trusts' finances look set to deteriorate further—halfway through 2015–16 three quarters of trusts had a deficit, and their total overspend could rise to around £2.5 billion.
The Department, NHS England and NHS Improvement have not taken action soon enough to keep trusts in financial balance. The target for trusts to make 4% efficiency savings across the board is unrealistic and better data is needed for more informed savings and efficiency targets.
Current system "not fit-for-purpose"
Failings in the system for paying providers need to be addressed as a matter of urgency, with NHS Improvement and NHS England acknowledging that the current system is not fit-for-purpose as it does not incentivise the right behaviours needed for joined-up healthcare services.
Spending on agency staff has contributed to trusts' financial distress, and action to tackle this problem is welcome, albeit late. The NHS will not solve the problem of reliance on agency staff until it solves its wider workforce planning issues.
We recognise the immense challenge of achieving financial and service sustainability when demand is rising and budgets are tight, and acknowledge the ongoing efforts of NHS England and NHS Improvement to find solutions. But there is much to do to produce the convincing plan necessary for the NHS to get itself back into financial balance.
Let me guess: with Trump finished for good, and his candidature definitely dead?
Trump comes out so much under target that it will be extremely unlikely for him to reach 1237 even if he outperforms in N.Y and California.
https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/709860379590041606
I didn't, wondering if it is worth it. I presume it was a lovely soft soap jobbie.
Ohio GOP late deciders 33%
Florida late deciders 28%
Missouri late deciders 38%.
Remember the higher it is the worse for Trump.
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/15/11225216/bernie-sanders-super-tuesday-two
But they don't.
Shock Illinois exit poll: Hispanics voting 65-35 @BernieSanders over @hillaryclinton. If that holds, Clinton will lose IL. #DemPrimary
Ohio Angry 39
N.C. Angry 40
According to CNN, anger has dropped by 2 points from the average.
Kasich 54
Trump 28
Kasich won Ohio.
The case against free trade isn't that it is bad in itself and is not the end goal of world economic development, but that until the behemoths of the developing world have caught up, the disruption caused by wage arbitrage has too great a human cost in the already industrialised societies. It may yet prove to have a geostrategic cost at some point as well.
"How angry are the people?
"They're very angry chris"
"HOW ANGRY?"
"Two more than average, chris"