The sooner Farage is gone the better. UKIP, to have a future, need to be a party, not a Cult of Nigel.
Is the ambition for UKIP to have a future or to get out of Europe? The two are mutually exclusive.
If LEAVE wins there is no need for UKIP. No wonder Farage is trying hard to lose.
Isnt it incredible how memes set in on here.. repetition maybe?
LEAVE haven't been closer in the polls since the referendum was called, while Farage is way clear in the leader ratings, but people say he is a drag on the cause and is trying to lose! Why let facts get in the way?
Farage's antics within UKIP (e.g. attacks on Evans and Carswell) and feeding a divide with the two main LEAVE camps is clear evidence that he puts his ego before winning the referendum. Is that so hard for you to see?
The net result of what you call "Farage's antics" is that LEAVE are in their strongest position ever and he is the most popular leader.. if LEAVE were in their worst ever position and he was the least popular leader, you and the haters might have a point, but it is straining credulity to say what you do in the face of the facts
iSAM you are unique in being almost the only person advocating LEAVE on here that also believes that Farage is doing great things for LEAVE. Almost a love that dare not speak its name. The current polling is not the result of Farage's antics which have in the case of Evans wasted media time that should have been spent advocating LEAVE. The polling of LEAVE at present is despite Farage not becuase of his recent decisions. It has more to do with voters reactions to the REMAIN campaign and most of the LEAVE messages and people in the media are from the VOTE LEAVE group. Without Farage' antics it is possible that LEAVE could be well ahead in the polls.
I think for myself and speak the truth as I see it without worrying what others think
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
James Kelly is blogging about a new online poll by BMG that puts Leave in front by four points. Does anyone know anything about this? Apparently it came out yesterday.
James Kelly is blogging about a new online poll by BMG that puts Leave in front by four points. Does anyone know anything about this? Apparently it came out yesterday.
I think @ScottP mentioned it and everyone else ignored it
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
That's slightly wrong though, is it? Since the closure of the iron ore extraction industry (which I think were low quality ores, e.g. in the Rutland area) we need to import the ore required to make the steel.
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
A question I must admit I have asked myself a lot as well.
Why was it not broken up and those bits that could be salvaged demerged - NatWest and overseas branches sold off, for a start, and the ABN Amro sale repudiated - and the rest put into liquidation?
If that was too complicated to do, there was something very wrong about the way it was being run (although a £24 billion loss in one financial year suggests that was probably true anyway).
And despite the humungous losses it's STILL too big to fail.
I think it was time pressure - IIRC there were desperate late-night meetings at Downing Street between the BOE, Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown - something had to be done VERY quickly.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
A question I must admit I have asked myself a lot as well.
Why was it not broken up and those bits that could be salvaged demerged - NatWest and overseas branches sold off, for a start, and the ABN Amro sale repudiated - and the rest put into liquidation?
If that was too complicated to do, there was something very wrong about the way it was being run (although a £24 billion loss in one financial year suggests that was probably true anyway).
And despite the humungous losses it's STILL too big to fail.
Which goes to show how badly our economy was being managed at the time. No commercial enterprise should ever be too big to fail. If it is, it ends up holding us to ransom when one of its cretinous risks fails to come off (as of course happened at RBS).
It should be noted however that the banking thing was as much cultural as economic. There was no conceivable justification for rescuing Northern Rock or Bradford and Bingley. Indeed, arguably it might have been better if it was they rather than Lehmann's that had been let go. That would have been a severe but survivable shock to the system.
But because they were banks, and Gordon Brown could not bear to let his totemic industry have a crisis, they were rescued (to make matters worse, in the most cack-handed and expensive way possible). Then he had to do the same for other non-essential banks and building societies - Dunfermline, Derbyshire, Cheshire...and here we are.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
What a sunny outlook on life you have. Are we at risk of being in a similar situation soon?
Certainly, haven't you been following the Remain campaign ?
Certainly we have been following the Leave dream of the future , an ideal Little Island England fortress with no need for dirty manufacturing industries as we can import everything we need paid for by ever devaluing £ sterlings .
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
What a sunny outlook on life you have. Are we at risk of being in a similar situation soon?
Certainly, haven't you been following the Remain campaign ?
Certainly we have been following the Leave dream of the future , an ideal Little Island England fortress with no need for dirty manufacturing industries as we can import everything we need paid for by ever devaluing £ sterlings .
Mark's very own little fantasy world. Bearing absolutely no resemblance to reality. Typically Lib Dem really.
What can the government do to fix this? I guess we need to think of the short and long term.
Basic principle in project management - start with the end in mind. The end has to be "a functioning UK steel industry" so that we can build the infrastructure/vehicles/warships we need today and may need tomorrow without being reliant on currency to send abroad to a foreign importer.
If Tata don't want to take the hit on competing with Chinese state subsidy then it will have to be British state subsidy. A free market is only free when its properly open - subsidy on one side only rigs the market. And when we provide subsidy we would be taking equity - we will give you the money but we want to take a stake in the operation to ensure success and return value for the taxpayer.
We need to copy the rest of Europe - state owned enterprises in key industries of national importance. Its absurd that all my local buses are German my local trains German I can pay the French for electricity and have the French post office deliver the products I bought off the internet on my part-German mobile phone - and then have the Tories insist that state ownership doesn't work.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer.
To me, privatisation and nationalisation are tools in a toolbox. They should be used where they work best. In this case, it might be time to get the nationalisation hammer out of the box. It might be rather rusty by now, though.
I'm very nervous about that, though. Nationalisation hasn't been a success very often.
The sooner Farage is gone the better. UKIP, to have a future, need to be a party, not a Cult of Nigel.
Is the ambition for UKIP to have a future or to get out of Europe? The two are mutually exclusive.
If LEAVE wins there is no need for UKIP. No wonder Farage is trying hard to lose.
Isnt it incredible how memes set in on here.. repetition maybe?
LEAVE haven't been closer in the polls since the referendum was called, while Farage is way clear in the leader ratings, but people say he is a drag on the cause and is trying to lose! Why let facts get in the way?
Farage's antics within UKIP (e.g. attacks on Evans and Carswell) and feeding a divide with the two main LEAVE camps is clear evidence that he puts his ego before winning the referendum. Is that so hard for you to see?
The net result of what you call "Farage's antics" is that LEAVE are in their strongest position ever and he is the most popular leader.. if LEAVE were in their worst ever position and he was the least popular leader, you and the haters might have a point, but it is straining credulity to say what you do in the face of the facts
iSAM you are unique in being almost the only person advocating LEAVE on here that also believes that Farage is doing great things for LEAVE. Almost a love that dare not speak its name. The current polling is not the result of Farage's antics which have in the case of Evans wasted media time that should have been spent advocating LEAVE. The polling of LEAVE at present is despite Farage not becuase of his recent decisions. It has more to do with voters reactions to the REMAIN campaign and most of the LEAVE messages and people in the media are from the VOTE LEAVE group. Without Farage' antics it is possible that LEAVE could be well ahead in the polls.
I think for myself and speak the truth as I see it without worrying what others think
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
iSAM, you need to get out and run a campaign of some sort be it commercial or political.
The tale of RBS is one of grotesque hubris. The was an equal parts fascinating and enraging BBC documentary on Goodwin's folly - used lots of footage from investor-board meetings.
Jaw dropping stuff, including the admission they did no due diligence on either the Natwest or ABN Ambro purchases
A respectable consevative prudent retail banking outfit was taken over by management who were avaristic bufoons who seemingly knew nothing about the very money markets they were tapping up for cash to fund their hubristic delusion.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
What a sunny outlook on life you have. Are we at risk of being in a similar situation soon?
Certainly, haven't you been following the Remain campaign ?
Certainly we have been following the Leave dream of the future , an ideal Little Island England fortress with no need for dirty manufacturing industries as we can import everything we need paid for by ever devaluing £ sterlings .
LOL when you tax the ass of energy, decree arbitary wage increases and refuse to invest in our infrastructure you aren't going to have much of a manufacturing base left. Or did you forget you were in government last year ?
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
That's slightly wrong though, is it? Since the closure of the iron ore extraction industry (which I think were low quality ores, e.g. in the Rutland area) we need to import the ore required to make the steel.
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
You assume that if there is a future war or national crisis , there would be a way of importing the quantities of steel coil needed assuming we were not in dispute with the nations still producing it .
Well looking at the party favourables in the US the contrast with 2012 is amazing.
In 2012 when the GOP primary began they where - 12 net, and the DNC was at 0, as the primaries went on the GOP net favourables actually were going up slightly at -11, while the DNC was still at 0.
By election time the GOP was at -10 and the DNC at +4, Romney lost by 4 points by virtue of republicans having voter turnout advantage but he still lost.
Now in 2016 though the GOP started at -20 and the DNC at -8, we are the middle of the primaries and the GOP has slipped to -29, the DNC on the other hand has risen to +2.
Now taking into account that:
1. Americans hate the Republican party, and more and more as time passes. 2. Hillary though unpopular is still more popular than any republican. 3. The economy is not in recession. 4. It's only 6 months till election day. 5. There is no time for a recession before the election. 6. There is no time for the GOP to salvage themselves. 7. The civil war in the GOP will only get worse, special thanks to NeverTrumps.
The only reasonable outcome is that Hillary will be President, she will win by a margin of around 10 points over any republican. Now which states will Hillary win extra on top of 2012 (N.Carolina is a sure thing) depends on whether Trump bolts out and campaigns against the GOP, if he does then look at Arizona, Georgia, S.Carolina, Kentucky and Indiana.
Someone like Cruz maybe able to keep Texas and the fundamentalist great plains plus the Mormons in line, but with Trump as an independent it will be open season in the south for the democrats.
Mr. Doethur, I believe the brutality of football's medieval reputation is deserved.
Mr. E, welcome to pb.com, and you're correct
Edited extra bit: bare knuckle boxing is safer than modern boxing (and much safer than boxing with cestus, which are classical knuckle-dusters, or even spikes, worn sometimes in the Greco-Roman Ancient World).
*slight Godwin alert* Even Karl Dönitz lasted longer.
Mary Jane Grey being a better comparison ?
She was never fully accepted as leader. She was queen of England, France and Ireland in theory, Berwick upon Tweed and King's Lynn in practice.
Sounds exactly like Evans's period of 'leadership' if you substitute Merton and Clacton for Berwick and Kings Lynn.
But why precisely Berwick and Kings Lynn - are they where the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk were based at that time ?
I think it was where there were professional garrisons/naval bases under their control, rather than where they were based. Not sure, because I actually know very little about it beyond that fact of the two towns.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
That's slightly wrong though, is it? Since the closure of the iron ore extraction industry (which I think were low quality ores, e.g. in the Rutland area) we need to import the ore required to make the steel.
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
You assume that if there is a future war or national crisis , there would be a way of importing the quantities of steel coil needed assuming we were not in dispute with the nations still producing it .
And you assume there would be a way of importing the iron ore required to make the steel, or that we would not prefer to use the energy required to smelt it elsewhere. In addition, steelworks make nice, fat targets.
It's only secure for the country if we have everything we need to make the product internally. In the Second World War we had very healthy coal and iron ore extraction industries. We do not know. Fortunately electricity has rendered coal unnecessary in smelting, but you still need the ore.
Mr. Doethur, I believe the brutality of football's medieval reputation is deserved.
Mr. E, welcome to pb.com, and you're correct
Edited extra bit: bare knuckle boxing is safer than modern boxing (and much safer than boxing with cestus, which are classical knuckle-dusters, or even spikes, worn sometimes in the Greco-Roman Ancient World).
Thanks Morris. Returned to lurking for the last 6 years or so, but had much fun reading everyone's contributions.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
That's slightly wrong though, is it? Since the closure of the iron ore extraction industry (which I think were low quality ores, e.g. in the Rutland area) we need to import the ore required to make the steel.
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
You'd hope some of the managers at the plant might be coming up with various scenarios right about a week ago.
Whilst Port Tablot is getting more headlines, Stocksbridge will be hit very hard too (It's an identical distance to Swansea/Sheffield and more or less the same employment (2000 jobs into 18k pop) vs 5k into 40k pop as Port Talbot.
The sooner Farage is gone the better. UKIP, to have a future, need to be a party, not a Cult of Nigel.
Is the ambition for UKIP to have a future or to get out of Europe? The two are mutually exclusive.
If LEAVE wins there is no need for UKIP. No wonder Farage is trying hard to lose.
Isnt it incredible how memes set in.. repetition maybe?
LEAVE haven't been closer in the polls since the referendum was called, while Farage is way clear in the leader ratings, but people say he is a drag on the cause and is trying to lose! Why let facts get in the way?
Is that so hard for you to see?
The net result of what you call "Farage's antics" is that LEAVE are in their strongest position ever and he is the most popular leader.. if LEAVE were in their worst ever position and he was the least popular leader, you and the haters might have a point, but it is straining credulity to say what you do in the face of the facts
iSAM you are unique in being almost the only person advocating LEAVE on here that also believes that Farage is doing great things for LEAVE. Almost a love that dare not speak its name. The current polling is not the result of Farage's antics which have in the case of Evans wasted media time that should have been spent advocating LEAVE. The polling of LEAVE at present is despite Farage not becuase of his recent decisions. It has more to do with voters reactions to the REMAIN campaign and most of the LEAVE messages and people in the media are from the VOTE LEAVE group. Without Farage' antics it is possible that LEAVE could be well ahead in the polls.
I think for myself and speak the truth as I see it without worrying what others think
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
iSAM, you need to get out and run a campaign of some sort be it commercial or political.
I'll take that as a condiment!
I am also probably unique in being the only person here that makes their living as a self employed gambler too
When you bet for a living you have to be clear minded in separating the wheat from the chaff.. that's how I try to think of things in political debate too, and people repeatedly saying the same thing because everyone's saying it, especially if it makes them sound nice/clever, is often a good reason to oppose it, or at least raise an eybrow
Philip, I am in the 'more productive industries' you mention. But I am absolutely dependent on the health of big manufacturing. And, I will never employ more than a few people. To find jobs for 40,000 is the equivalent of 10 x SpaceX. Most startups don't make money for years, and SpaceX may never make any money at all. Think of the capital needed for 40,000 jobs. Port Talbot is being hit by dumping, France and Germany have protection in place. We should protect the jobs.
I'm very nervous about that, though. Nationalisation hasn't been a success very often.
In British practice I take your point. But then again have some of those industries become better after privatisation? Take phones - a monolith where the only provider of infrastructure decides when you get connected and will leave you waiting for years answerable to noone, or the old days when BT was state owned....
State enterprise works. Its how we've ended up with a state run railway again. Its how we can;t afford to build a nuclear power station yet the inferior French state can. I am a socialist but I'm also a professional capitalist - commerce and free markets are good, asset stripping and rigged markets are bad. Yet most of the "capitalism" is really bankism - firms commercialising their operations as bits to sell or raise loans on and their core business becomes a distraction. Or cretins like Starbucks claiming they are a loss-making subsidy of a foreign company - which "loss-making" business keeps opening multiple new outlets in every place they can?
Why hand the things we need as a state over to these scumbag asset stripping cowboys?
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
Because it has more potential and is more strategically important with more critical failures down the chain if it failed than a single commodity supplier. Though if the government decided to asset strip and close RBS I'd be perfectly OK with that too. I see no reason why RBS shouldn't be allowed to fail so you're possibly going down the wrong path with that for me.
1997 seems to be the turning point in so many cases.
Urghhhh!!! Sorry you are off message. It was Maggie and the Tories that destroyed industry don't you know.... Please re read your blackberry and desist from posting inconvenient facts.
I'm very nervous about that, though. Nationalisation hasn't been a success very often.
In British practice I take your point. But then again have some of those industries become better after privatisation? Take phones - a monolith where the only provider of infrastructure decides when you get connected and will leave you waiting for years answerable to noone, or the old days when BT was state owned....
State enterprise works. Its how we've ended up with a state run railway again. Its how we can;t afford to build a nuclear power station yet the inferior French state can. I am a socialist but I'm also a professional capitalist - commerce and free markets are good, asset stripping and rigged markets are bad. Yet most of the "capitalism" is really bankism - firms commercialising their operations as bits to sell or raise loans on and their core business becomes a distraction. Or cretins like Starbucks claiming they are a loss-making subsidy of a foreign company - which "loss-making" business keeps opening multiple new outlets in every place they can?
Why hand the things we need as a state over to these scumbag asset stripping cowboys?
In the case of phones, I think the market is much better post-privatisation. Yes, BT Openreach varies in quality to say the least, but BT wasn't exactly timely, and choice limited. But I was young then, and others with more experience may differ. I also wonder how well BT would have coped with the mobile and Internet revolutions if it was still nationalised. Certainly the privatised BT was rather poor wrt T1 in the early days of t'Internet.
The railways are an interesting case. Firstly, only the infrastructure is nationalised in the form of Network Rail, and their recent performance has hardly been stellar. Since privatisation, passenger numbers have doubled, reversing fifty years of decline. But the privatised franchises are more controlled by DfT than BR ever was ...
Generally I think the power privatisations have been good for the country. The one I cannot understand is water and sewage privatisation: it seems nonsensical to me.
LOL....the MoM has just been awarded what the interviewer called a HUM-BLOT watch...is one of those watches you see the lucky lucky men selling?
I am guessing it was a Hublot watch. Definately one to sell on. They are tacky, overpriced, make use of disgusting advertisements and are oversized. Basically a watch I could see Chuka Umunna wearing.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
LOL....the MoM has just been awarded what the interviewer called a HUM-BLOT watch...is one of those watches you see the lucky lucky men selling?
I am guessing it was a Hublot watch. Definately one to sell on. They are tacky, overpriced, make use of disgusting advertisements and are oversized. Basically a watch I could see Chuka Umunna wearing.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
That's slightly wrong though, is it? Since the closure of the iron ore extraction industry (which I think were low quality ores, e.g. in the Rutland area) we need to import the ore required to make the steel.
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
You'd hope some of the managers at the plant might be coming up with various scenarios right about a week ago.
Whilst Port Tablot is getting more headlines, Stocksbridge will be hit very hard too (It's an identical distance to Swansea/Sheffield and more or less the same employment (2000 jobs into 18k pop) vs 5k into 40k pop as Port Talbot.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
Because it has more potential and is more strategically important with more critical failures down the chain if it failed than a single commodity supplier. Though if the government decided to asset strip and close RBS I'd be perfectly OK with that too. I see no reason why RBS shouldn't be allowed to fail so you're possibly going down the wrong path with that for me.
We have one steel manufacturer and umpteen banks. Hows RBS strategic ?
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
Because it has more potential and is more strategically important with more critical failures down the chain if it failed than a single commodity supplier. Though if the government decided to asset strip and close RBS I'd be perfectly OK with that too. I see no reason why RBS shouldn't be allowed to fail so you're possibly going down the wrong path with that for me.
We have one steel manufacturer and umpteen banks. Hows RBS strategic ?
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Ffs, I push my field neutral position into the red on the basis if the National F'ing Enquirer as I am a moron, with the intention to trade neutral when Trump shortened Cruz lengthened but nothing happened.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
No country can consider itself a major industrial nation without a steel industry of its own . How long would Britain have lasted in WW2 with no steel industry ?
Why does it need a steel industry? The history of manufacturing has been to move away from basic commodities and towards more complex manufacturing. Just like we don't need our own coal or iron industry, we don't need our own steel industry.
As or WWII that's moot. We're not in WWII and we have other weapons like Trident now that we didn't in WWII. That's like suggesting we should still have a thriving English Longbow industry still because how long would we have lasted in the Hundred Years War if we didn't have one?
The weapons and supply chain in WWII was different to that at the time of Crécy and Agincourt, just as now our weaponry and supply chain are different again.
If Javid's line is nothing can be done, then he should resign as he obviously has no job.
Maybe his job is about encouraging more productive industries that aren't flooding the market at rock-bottom prices.
Earlier today we were discussing whether a risk to a potential 2% change in GDP is a "price worth paying". I believe from memory the steel industry as a whole is currently worth 0.1% of GDP.
Since 2008 RBS has lost on average £19.5 million per day. Why's it still there ?
Because it has more potential and is more strategically important with more critical failures down the chain if it failed than a single commodity supplier. Though if the government decided to asset strip and close RBS I'd be perfectly OK with that too. I see no reason why RBS shouldn't be allowed to fail so you're possibly going down the wrong path with that for me.
We have one steel manufacturer and umpteen banks. Hows RBS strategic ?
It err isn't..
Its strategic only in the sense that if it fails were screwed again.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Ffs, I push my field neutral position into the red on the basis if the National F'ing Enquirer as I am a moron, with the intention to trade neutral when Trump shortened Cruz lengthened but nothing happened.
Furious with myself now.
FUMING !!!
I'll remember my +2k Cruz green well, only +1k and change now
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
What earthly reason is there to sell off the Land Registry? It is pretty much an essential function of government is it not? The foundation of property rights in this country?
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Ffs, I push my field neutral position into the red on the basis if the National F'ing Enquirer as I am a moron, with the intention to trade neutral when Trump shortened Cruz lengthened but nothing happened.
Furious with myself now.
FUMING !!!
I'll remember my +2k Cruz green well, only +1k and change now
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
What earthly reason is there to sell off the Land Registry? It is pretty much an essential function of government is it not? The foundation of property rights in this country?
It may be that the idea is that they get mortgage providers/buyers to run it and pay for it, rather than taxpayers as at present. In which case, it would be a small but nevertheless noticeable saving from general taxation.
Something similar was mooted as long ago as the 1970s, although it's never come to anything.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Party time for the DNC/the Establishment/Wall Street. The Republic convention ends in Trump either assassinated or running as an independent. The Democrats gather, appoint Shillary (who has the delegates won't matter - its not a democracy), and then she puts her feet up as the GOP and Trump escalate from guerilla war to theatre-wide tactical war to thermo-nuclear war.
Wall Street/Big Capital/Private Healthcare/Prisons/Hedgies/the industrial-military complex get their candidate and after a scary 2016 get right back to business. People go on abut Trump. Its HRC that scares me.
O/T Longleat safari park, the first of its kind outside Africa and one that gave rise to all other such safari parks celebrates its 50th anniversary this year having opened in April 1966.
What earthly reason is there to sell off the Land Registry? It is pretty much an essential function of government is it not? The foundation of property rights in this country?
It may be that the idea is that they get mortgage providers/buyers to run it and pay for it, rather than taxpayers as at present. In which case, it would be a small but nevertheless noticeable saving from general taxation.
Something similar was mooted as long ago as the 1970s, although it's never come to anything.
Except, as I understand, the Land Registry records a profit.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Cut down on the speed, bro. It's in the bag for Trump. Hilary? Not so much.
Thinking back to 1997, could we possibly have managed to elect a more inept and unsuitable government for dealing with the industrial rise of China, the fallout from the Fall of the Wall and the USSR, EU expansion, the rapid rise in modern global trading in the banking system and the rise of Islamism?
Mr. Urquhart, enormo-watches are ridiculous (unlike enormo-haddock, of course).
The Citizen on my wrist is 44mm - about as big as I can comfortably wear or fit under a sleeve. I tried on different sizes of Omega Seamaster all the way up to 46mm which was huuuge in diameter and too tall (in the end the spending committee revoked planing permission on my new watch and re-appropriated the funds on bathrooms) - so I bought a nice subtle Jap market Seiko of 38mm. Classy and reserved.
I've only seen one Hublot Big Bang in the metal. And that was a fake.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
The sooner Farage is gone the better. UKIP, to have a future, need to be a party, not a Cult...
Is the ambition for UKIP to have a future or to get out of Europe? The two are mutually exclusive.
If LEAVE wins there is no need for UKIP...
Isnt it incredible how memes set in.. repetition maybe?
LEAVE haven't been closer in the polls since the referendum was called, while Farage is way clear in the leader ratings...
Is that so hard for you to see?
The net result of what you call "Farage's antics" is that LEAVE are in their strongest position ever and he is the most popular leader.....
iSAM you are unique in being almost the only person advocating LEAVE on here that also believes that Farage is doing great things for LEAVE. Almost a love that dare not speak its name. The current polling is not the result of Farage's antics which have in the case of Evans wasted media time that should have been spent advocating LEAVE. The polling of LEAVE at present is despite Farage not becuase of his recent decisions. It has more to do with voters reactions to the REMAIN campaign and most of the LEAVE messages and people in the media are from the VOTE LEAVE group. Without Farage' antics it is possible that LEAVE could be well ahead in the polls.
I think for myself and speak the truth as I see it without worrying what others think
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
iSAM, you need to get out and run a campaign of some sort be it commercial or political.
I'll take that as a condiment!
I am also probably unique in being the only person here that makes their living as a self employed gambler too
When you bet for a living you have to be clear minded in separating the wheat from the chaff.. that's how I try to think of things in political debate too, and people repeatedly saying the same thing because everyone's saying it, especially if it makes them sound nice/clever, is often a good reason to oppose it, or at least raise an eybrow
Of interest have you spent much time reading the threads on this website during your absence?
First he does a volte face on EU and gets riduculed Then he gets caught out with interesting bonus arrangements while a banker And now he presides over the butchery of the steel industry while representing a consitituency with lots of people dependent on manufacturing.
What earthly reason is there to sell off the Land Registry? It is pretty much an essential function of government is it not? The foundation of property rights in this country?
It may be that the idea is that they get mortgage providers/buyers to run it and pay for it, rather than taxpayers as at present. In which case, it would be a small but nevertheless noticeable saving from general taxation.
Something similar was mooted as long ago as the 1970s, although it's never come to anything.
Except, as I understand, the Land Registry records a profit.
It didn't when I worked for it, but that was rather a long time ago and that may have changed.
Don't forget though that it's mostly in rather elderly office buildings (including some truly horrible examples of 1960s concrete brutalism) that must be getting close to life-expired. So there is a looming expenditure there.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Party time for the DNC/the Establishment/Wall Street. The Republic convention ends in Trump either assassinated or running as an independent. The Democrats gather, appoint Shillary (who has the delegates won't matter - its not a democracy), and then she puts her feet up as the GOP and Trump escalate from guerilla war to theatre-wide tactical war to thermo-nuclear war.
Wall Street/Big Capital/Private Healthcare/Prisons/Hedgies/the industrial-military complex get their candidate and after a scary 2016 get right back to business. People go on abut Trump. Its HRC that scares me.
If Sanders has most elected delegates and is not nominee there will be riots at the Democratic convention too
The sooner Farage is gone the better. UKIP, to have a future, need to be a party, not a Cult...
Is the ambition for UKIP to have a future or to get out of Europe? The two are mutually exclusive.
If LEAVE wins there is no need for UKIP...
Isnt it incredible how memes set in.. repetition maybe?
LEAVE haven't been closer in the polls since the referendum was called, while Farage is way clear in the leader ratings...
Is that so hard for you to see?
The net result of what you call "Farage's antics" is that LEAVE are in their strongest position ever and he is the most popular leader.....
iSAM you are unique in being almost the only person advocating LEAVE on here that also believes that Farage is doing great things for LEAVE. Almost a love that dare not speak its name. The current polling is not the result of Farage's antics which have in the case of Evans wasted media time that should have been spent advocating LEAVE. The polling of LEAVE at present is despite Farage not becuase of his recent decisions. It has more to do with voters reactions to the REMAIN campaign and most of the LEAVE messages and people in the media are from the VOTE LEAVE group. Without Farage' antics it is possible that LEAVE could be well ahead in the polls.
I think for myself and speak the truth as I see it without worrying what others think
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
iSAM, you need to get out and run a campaign of some sort be it commercial or political.
I'll take that as a condiment!
I am also probably unique in being the only person here that makes their living as a self employed gambler too
When you bet for a living you have to be clear minded in separating the wheat from the chaff.. that's how I try to think of things in political debate too, and people repeatedly saying the same thing because everyone's saying it, especially if it makes them sound nice/clever, is often a good reason to oppose it, or at least raise an eybrow
Of interest have you spent much time reading the threads on this website during your absence?
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
No, if Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and California he has the delegates to be nominee even before the Convention. Cruz and Sanders will stretch it out but the odds still favour Trump v Clinton
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Cut down on the speed, bro. It's in the bag for Trump. Hilary? Not so much.
Right now Trump has 752, he will get 0 from Wisconsin, N.Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska, S.Dakota, Montana, and if his under-performance continues 0 from Indiana, Oregon, Washington and N.Mexico.
Even if he wins all delegates from all the other states (a mathematical impossibility) he ends up at 1222, 15 short.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
No, if Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and California he has the delegates to be nominee even before the Convention. Cruz and Sanders will stretch it out but the odds still favour Trump v Clinton
Is it even remotely possible that Sanders can win? I really, really hope so - he's a breath of fresh air. Last time I looked at the delegate count he was well down.
First he does a volte face on EU and gets riduculed Then he gets caught out with interesting bonus arrangements while a banker And now he presides over the butchery of the steel industry while representing a consitituency with lots of people dependent on manufacturing.
SJWNBPM
Not sure about the manufacturing point. Bromsgrove? Pretty rural and edge of urban areas. Commuter belt for Brum these days I'd say.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
No, if Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and California he has the delegates to be nominee even before the Convention. Cruz and Sanders will stretch it out but the odds still favour Trump v Clinton
Is it even remotely possible that Sanders can win? I really, really hope so - he's a breath of fresh air. Last time I looked at the delegate count he was well down.
He would need to win California and probably New York too
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
No, if Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and California he has the delegates to be nominee even before the Convention. Cruz and Sanders will stretch it out but the odds still favour Trump v Clinton
Snag is that only 17 delegates of the 71 from Pennsylvania are pledged to the victor, the rest can do whatever they like.
There are not enough delegates in N.Y and California to overcome that accumulated deficit.
Trump should win the north and west in Wisconsin, as well as the city of Milwaukee, he will pick up delegates. Whether he will win the state overall I am unsure, will be close.
Washington, Oregon and NM are all proportional and I would expect Trump to take the lion's share there.
First he does a volte face on EU and gets riduculed Then he gets caught out with interesting bonus arrangements while a banker And now he presides over the butchery of the steel industry while representing a consitituency with lots of people dependent on manufacturing.
SJWNBPM
There is likely to be a government rescue of some form
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
If Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and New Jersey this month he will almost certainly have the delegates to be nominee despite losing Wisconsin even if he has to wait until California in June to confirm it
I doubt it.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent. Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
No, if Trump wins New York and Pennsylvania and California he has the delegates to be nominee even before the Convention. Cruz and Sanders will stretch it out but the odds still favour Trump v Clinton
Is it even remotely possible that Sanders can win? I really, really hope so - he's a breath of fresh air. Last time I looked at the delegate count he was well down.
0 chance.
It's practically impossible for him to catch up to Hillary since March 15th. His voters were busy voting for Kasich on that day to stop Trump, so Sanders ended up losing all states on the day.
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237. So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Cut down on the speed, bro. It's in the bag for Trump. Hilary? Not so much.
Right now Trump has 752, he will get 0 from Wisconsin, N.Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska, S.Dakota, Montana, and if his under-performance continues 0 from Indiana, Oregon, Washington and N.Mexico.
Even if he wins all delegates from all the other states (a mathematical impossibility) he ends up at 1222, 15 short.
Trump will probably win Oregon and Washington and New Mexico let alone get no delegates
Comments
Farage has seen a surge in personal popularity at the same time as Cameron has nosedived, while LEAVE has become more likely. I am sorry but that's the truth
The way things are, something needs to be imported so we can make steel for end products. If there was a war or national crisis we'd be just as well off importing steel coil than iron ore, and using the energy and manpower from the foundries elsewhere.
But that's not a reason to let the industry go to the wall. I'm for saving it, *if* it can be saved in any sane way. That's the difficult question: how to save it?
I suspect not.
Mandelson?
It should be noted however that the banking thing was as much cultural as economic. There was no conceivable justification for rescuing Northern Rock or Bradford and Bingley. Indeed, arguably it might have been better if it was they rather than Lehmann's that had been let go. That would have been a severe but survivable shock to the system.
But because they were banks, and Gordon Brown could not bear to let his totemic industry have a crisis, they were rescued (to make matters worse, in the most cack-handed and expensive way possible). Then he had to do the same for other non-essential banks and building societies - Dunfermline, Derbyshire, Cheshire...and here we are.
Apparently they do, they are slightly differently shaped, and they women call them 'Manhole covers'
what sport was safer in the 14th century than it is today?
To me, privatisation and nationalisation are tools in a toolbox. They should be used where they work best. In this case, it might be time to get the nationalisation hammer out of the box. It might be rather rusty by now, though.
I'm very nervous about that, though. Nationalisation hasn't been a success very often.
Jaw dropping stuff, including the admission they did no due diligence on either the Natwest or ABN Ambro purchases
A respectable consevative prudent retail banking outfit was taken over by management who were avaristic bufoons who seemingly knew nothing about the very money markets they were tapping up for cash to fund their hubristic delusion.
But why precisely Berwick and Kings Lynn - are they where the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk were based at that time ?
In 2012 when the GOP primary began they where - 12 net, and the DNC was at 0, as the primaries went on the GOP net favourables actually were going up slightly at -11, while the DNC was still at 0.
By election time the GOP was at -10 and the DNC at +4, Romney lost by 4 points by virtue of republicans having voter turnout advantage but he still lost.
Now in 2016 though the GOP started at -20 and the DNC at -8, we are the middle of the primaries and the GOP has slipped to -29, the DNC on the other hand has risen to +2.
Now taking into account that:
1. Americans hate the Republican party, and more and more as time passes.
2. Hillary though unpopular is still more popular than any republican.
3. The economy is not in recession.
4. It's only 6 months till election day.
5. There is no time for a recession before the election.
6. There is no time for the GOP to salvage themselves.
7. The civil war in the GOP will only get worse, special thanks to NeverTrumps.
The only reasonable outcome is that Hillary will be President, she will win by a margin of around 10 points over any republican.
Now which states will Hillary win extra on top of 2012 (N.Carolina is a sure thing) depends on whether Trump bolts out and campaigns against the GOP, if he does then look at Arizona, Georgia, S.Carolina, Kentucky and Indiana.
Someone like Cruz maybe able to keep Texas and the fundamentalist great plains plus the Mormons in line, but with Trump as an independent it will be open season in the south for the democrats.
Mr. E, welcome to pb.com, and you're correct
Edited extra bit: bare knuckle boxing is safer than modern boxing (and much safer than boxing with cestus, which are classical knuckle-dusters, or even spikes, worn sometimes in the Greco-Roman Ancient World).
Coz it wasn't invented
It's only secure for the country if we have everything we need to make the product internally. In the Second World War we had very healthy coal and iron ore extraction industries. We do not know. Fortunately electricity has rendered coal unnecessary in smelting, but you still need the ore.
Stories from happier times in South Wales: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-23941086.
Whilst Port Tablot is getting more headlines, Stocksbridge will be hit very hard too (It's an identical distance to Swansea/Sheffield and more or less the same employment (2000 jobs into 18k pop) vs 5k into 40k pop as Port Talbot.
I am also probably unique in being the only person here that makes their living as a self employed gambler too
When you bet for a living you have to be clear minded in separating the wheat from the chaff.. that's how I try to think of things in political debate too, and people repeatedly saying the same thing because everyone's saying it, especially if it makes them sound nice/clever, is often a good reason to oppose it, or at least raise an eybrow
35 years ago today, Pres Reagan shot by a lunatic out to impress Jodie Foster
1st report:Reagan has not been hit https://t.co/u5mwBXcCoI
1997 seems to be the turning point in so many cases.
State enterprise works. Its how we've ended up with a state run railway again. Its how we can;t afford to build a nuclear power station yet the inferior French state can. I am a socialist but I'm also a professional capitalist - commerce and free markets are good, asset stripping and rigged markets are bad. Yet most of the "capitalism" is really bankism - firms commercialising their operations as bits to sell or raise loans on and their core business becomes a distraction. Or cretins like Starbucks claiming they are a loss-making subsidy of a foreign company - which "loss-making" business keeps opening multiple new outlets in every place they can?
Why hand the things we need as a state over to these scumbag asset stripping cowboys?
The railways are an interesting case. Firstly, only the infrastructure is nationalised in the form of Network Rail, and their recent performance has hardly been stellar. Since privatisation, passenger numbers have doubled, reversing fifty years of decline. But the privatised franchises are more controlled by DfT than BR ever was ...
Generally I think the power privatisations have been good for the country. The one I cannot understand is water and sewage privatisation: it seems nonsensical to me.
https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/status/715213165529661440
Without any delegates from Wisconsin he will never get to 1237.
So now the base scenario is that Cruz is the nominee in the chaotic convention and Trump bolts out as an independent taking his voters with him.
Basically worst case scenario for the Republican party.
Yes he meant a "ew-blo". Just made me chuckle and if you listened hard probably hear the marketing people groan...
http://www.ws.vintagecarriagestrust.org/ws/WagonInfo.asp?Ref=8055
Furious with myself now.
As or WWII that's moot. We're not in WWII and we have other weapons like Trident now that we didn't in WWII. That's like suggesting we should still have a thriving English Longbow industry still because how long would we have lasted in the Hundred Years War if we didn't have one?
The weapons and supply chain in WWII was different to that at the time of Crécy and Agincourt, just as now our weaponry and supply chain are different again.
I'll remember my +2k Cruz green well, only +1k and change now
Sanders 49
Clinton 45
Something similar was mooted as long ago as the 1970s, although it's never come to anything.
Wall Street/Big Capital/Private Healthcare/Prisons/Hedgies/the industrial-military complex get their candidate and after a scary 2016 get right back to business. People go on abut Trump. Its HRC that scares me.
Longleat safari park, the first of its kind outside Africa and one that gave rise to all other such safari parks celebrates its 50th anniversary this year having opened in April 1966.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longleat_Safari_Park
http://www.longleat.co.uk/
I've only seen one Hublot Big Bang in the metal. And that was a fake.
Trump has to start collecting signatures for his 3rd party run and fast, since he wont be the GOP nominee and he will bolt as an independent anyway it's better for him to start right away. The damage he can do to the GOP is enormous, this is one of the last polls that asked for a third party Trump run:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/263933-poll-clinton-has-best-chance-if-trump-runs-as-independent
Hillary 42
Cruz 26
Trump 23
Knowing Trump's strength is east of the Mississippi river, there is a chance that the GOP will lose every state east of that river if Trump runs as an independent.
Not to mention that Trump will probably campaign against every GOP elected official as payback.
First he does a volte face on EU and gets riduculed
Then he gets caught out with interesting bonus arrangements while a banker
And now he presides over the butchery of the steel industry while representing a consitituency with lots of people dependent on manufacturing.
SJWNBPM
Don't forget though that it's mostly in rather elderly office buildings (including some truly horrible examples of 1960s concrete brutalism) that must be getting close to life-expired. So there is a looming expenditure there.
Even if he wins all delegates from all the other states (a mathematical impossibility) he ends up at 1222, 15 short.
There are not enough delegates in N.Y and California to overcome that accumulated deficit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/why-didnt-the-government-save-tata-steel-when-it-rescued-rbs-there-is-a-simple-answer-a6960146.html
Washington, Oregon and NM are all proportional and I would expect Trump to take the lion's share there.
It's practically impossible for him to catch up to Hillary since March 15th.
His voters were busy voting for Kasich on that day to stop Trump, so Sanders ended up losing all states on the day.