@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
I didn't follow this particular argument but we should have a pb version of Godwin's law for saying someone is "desperate" or "rattled". It might just work in an argument between actual politicians where somebody actually stands to lose their job if they lose an argument, but when you've got a bunch of random people sitting around arguing about politics on the internet it's quite unlikely they are, and if they were you wouldn't be able to tell and are most likely just projecting.
Well there's some sage wisdom and no mistake People disagreeing on the internets? Golly! We are not worthy your high edmondness. Maybe you should get some type of paid work in your capacity as the voice of judgement on PB posters? :innocent face:
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
No worries - tho I do think Pork's insight revealing "leave it all to the campaign and rely on superior leader ratings" explains a lot - and is a touch risky.
I hope you use the charm you display here on the doorstep. It will do no end of damage.
Clues for the hard of thinking:
The doorstep, someone potentially persuadable with a vote.
PB.com, no votes, no influence, almost completely unpersuadable.
Yup. Even dyed in the wool labour voters can take a leaflet or show an interest. Doesn't mean they are all persuadable of course but there's a marked difference to the hostility some would have you believe if you took Lamont and SLAB too seriously.
It's all to play for and SLAB's continual reluctance to publish their membership numbers hardly bodes well for their ground game.
Though I did once come across a bedecked "better together" Ford Focus scooting through the streets with an operative megaphoning the message to somewhat startled pedestrians.
Johann's newly promoted front bench team will make all the difference. That big Beast "Subway" Gray is back, SNP must be quaking in their boots. The only left winger in the cabinet gets the boot as well, has to be bad when Murphy is whinging about it on twatosphere.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
I really quite like the idea of Edmond's law, particularly if it is going to discourage the sort of exchanges we have seen this morning.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
No worries - tho I do think Pork's insight revealing "leave it all to the campaign and rely on superior leader ratings" explains a lot - and is a touch risky.
You're still being reduced to straw man idiocy by putting your own inept tory spin of things into other people's mouths.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
No worries - tho I do think Pork's insight revealing "leave it all to the campaign and rely on superior leader ratings" explains a lot - and is a touch risky.
Well, it's a bit of a long shot, but it's a plausible way they might turn it around. More than just the leadership rating, Salmond is quite a sharp strategist, and presumably he'll have the ability to run the whole campaign while the pro-union side is potentially going to be a bit harder to coordinate.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
I really quite like the idea of Edmond's law, particularly if it is going to discourage the sort of exchanges we have seen this morning.
No worries. As usual the PB tories overlook the fact that it was Carlotta who started the exchange as usual.
Though I did once come across a bedecked "better together" Ford Focus scooting through the streets with an operative megaphoning the message to somewhat startled pedestrians.
Membership figures are obviously related to the potential of a party's ground game but they are not everything. It also depends on enthusiasm of the activists. It's the number of real activists that makes the difference. Because in the whole membership there usually also are -80 year old people who can't spend a whole day under the rain knocking doors -members who mysteriously show up just at the reselection meeeting of the sitting Cllr -left wing people who just like to debate a point of order on the rule book at the CLP meeting on Friday night
@TUD - pity you missed yesterday's discussion on why it appears Scotland has made a decent fist of devolution, while Wales appears to have horlicks it...any thoughts?
Scotland retained many of its institutions (law, education, religion) after the Union, and this preserved our sense of self even when the UK project was going swimmingly; Scottish cringe apart, I think that gave/gives us enough confidence to make a fist of devolution/independence. Of course Wales was also absorbed into the body of Greater England far longer. I'm sometimes surprised that they have preserved so much of their separate identity.
In general (as shown in Mick's link below), Scotland's Westminster contingent are usually irrelevant to forming a government, resulting in benign neglect (at best) from Tory governments or being taken for granted by Labour. Think how much worse it is for Wales.
Of course Wales was also absorbed into the body of Greater England far longer. I'm sometimes surprised that they have preserved so much of their separate identity.
Didn't they essentially recreate, or simply create for the first time, symbols and institutions for that purpose about a hundred years or so ago? As I recall, in most countries a lot of iconic or traditional parts of the national identity are usually far more recent than people think, rather than having been retained. So I too would be surprised at how much of their separate identity was preserved, but I don't know enough to know whether they actually did preserve quite a bit, or whether a significant amount pretty much arose out of little not that long ago, given as you point out Wales was forcibly subsumed, to a higher degree than our Scottish friends, for considerably longer.
This provides the numbers for Charles's rather good scree analogy. The government has made real and consistent progress in deficit reduction but the sad fact is that as a share of GDP it is still very high. Closing that gap is going to be painful.
What Osborne is doing is setting an agenda for the next election. If the question then is not who has the best ideas for spending but who do you trust to cut spending further and keep a grip he will have won. I don't recall that being the question since 1979 but acknowledging the continuing extent of the problem is smart politics (as well as being honest of course).
What Osborne has failed to understand is that you can only cut spending when the state ceases to subsidise low pay and high property costs.Or you get economic growth. And he's flunked all of those tests.
No Tim.
Subsidising low pay is not an ideal but it has kept very large numbers of people in work. When you look at the depth of the recession the increase in unemployment is astonishingly small. More than three times as many people lost their jobs in a much shallower recession in the 1990s. Politicians of all stripes need to think about why.
My suggestion, somewhat tentative, is that the subsidy of marginal employment by inwork benefits, which are now on a completely different scale from the early 1990s, has played a major role. If employers were bearing the full cost of these employees they would not be employed.
The elimination of union power outside the public sector is another possibility but it is less convincing because unions in the car industry, for example, have played a very positive role in maintaining employment with a flexibility that would have been inconceivable 20 years ago. But in the sectors where employment has continued to grow (in a broadly flatlining economy) unions generally play little part.
Another possibility is that the recession looks much worse than it really was because so much of the lost production was froth which didn't generate much employment. That was clearly the case in the City despite the job losses there. There is also the north sea factor which is putting a downward pressure on our apparent productivity and growth but this has been a bigger problem for the recovery than an explanation of the fall in 2007/8.
If we agree that the much higher level of employment is a good thing but the cost of subsidising that employment is not sustainable in the long run how do we get out of this? Maybe easing up the minimum wage to the so called living wage?
The only left winger in the cabinet gets the boot as well,
Do you mean Henry? The new guy at Health is also from the Left. For Left, I mean somebody who bakced John McDonnell for Leader, writes for Morning Star, member of Labour Campaign for Socialism (the ones who campaigned to keep Clause 4 in 1994), republican (he's one of those making a statement before taking the Oath saying Scottish people are citizens not subjects).
Interesting YouGov on Housing - which starts by reminding that "Housing" ranks #10 at 12% on factors deciding how you will vote at the next GE - and those most effective at dealing with housing:
Housing Associations: 39 Local Council: 39 Government: 21
Reasons for shortage of affordable housing: Net Migration: 44 Lack of Social Housing: 39 Economic downturn: 37 Lack of Govt investment: 30
Most support to fix: Reduce Net Migration: 40 Build Council/HA homes: 36 Make Mortgage lenders lend more: 28 Private Sector rent control: 24
There are marked differences between VI on the latter - Con support migration control (56) and making council house tenants move once wages reach certain level (35), while Lab much more in favour of council house building (49) and leaving their tenants alone (13). To UKIP supporters immigration control (73) is more than twice as important as anything else:
Though I did once come across a bedecked "better together" Ford Focus scooting through the streets with an operative megaphoning the message to somewhat startled pedestrians.
Membership figures are obviously related to the potential of a party's ground game but they are not everything. It also depends on enthusiasm of the activists. It's the number of real activists that makes the difference. Because in the whole membership there usually also are -80 year old people who can't spend a whole day under the rain knocking doors -members who mysteriously show up just at the reselection meeeting of the sitting Cllr -left wing people who just like to debate a point of order on the rule book at the CLP meeting on Friday night
It's all to play for and SLAB's continual reluctance to publish their membership numbers hardly bodes well for their ground game.
I don't consider your post particularly off topic Andrea since it is about primarily about politics and not say, some TV and film obsessives stream of consciousness rambling. I'm curious as to why you think mine is more than anyone else's on here.
Membership numbers aren't everything but they are pretty damn important in a campaign like this. Just as a rough guide when no other numbers are usually available.
Enthusiasm is harder to measure but we are talking about something that those in the SNP and the other parties who support it have been fighting to achieve for decades.
I take your point about older members but there are always odd jobs, looking after the footsloggers and things like helping with the materials and general organisation.
The same basic components are utilised by every party to be fair so there will likely be a good few vehicles like that used by Yes as well as we get closer in.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
I really quite like the idea of Edmond's law, particularly if it is going to discourage the sort of exchanges we have seen this morning.
No worries. As usual the PB tories overlook the fact that it was Carlotta who started the exchange as usual.
S I don't consider your post particularly off topic Andrea since it is about primarily about politics and not say, some TV and film obsessives stream of consciousness rambling. I'm curious as to why you think mine is more than anyone else's on here.
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
No worries - tho I do think Pork's insight revealing "leave it all to the campaign and rely on superior leader ratings" explains a lot - and is a touch risky.
Salmond is quite a sharp strategist, and presumably he'll have the ability to run the whole campaign while the pro-union side is potentially going to be a bit harder to coordinate.
Yes, it does look like they've given up the ghost on pretending Yes Scotland is much more than an SNP front - will make their lives easier though....
@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
are most likely just projecting.
Indeed.....
By just agreeing with that bit you're implicitly saying you opponent is desperate or rattled. Edmund's Law states that the first person to say that loses. That would have been Mick, but he snuck in before the law was enacted. So Mick wins the argument and you lose, sorry.
I really quite like the idea of Edmond's law, particularly if it is going to discourage the sort of exchanges we have seen this morning.
No worries. As usual the PB tories overlook the fact that it was Carlotta who started the exchange as usual.
Please Sir! She started it Sir! Did too!
It's simply a fact. Why so touchy?
And if you think I would be relying on any mysterious "Sir!" on here to intervene on behalf of scottish posters then you are much farther gone than you appear. :innocent face:
S I don't consider your post particularly off topic Andrea since it is about primarily about politics and not say, some TV and film obsessives stream of consciousness rambling. I'm curious as to why you think mine is more than anyone else's on here.
You marked my post you replied to as off-topic. Though since I think I may have done so once or twice inadvertently on here myself when I mean to hit reply it's no big deal.
Thank you for an interesting review. In the end it will probably come down to how much the electorate's heart rules head or vice versa.
Polls show that the public believe that the cuts are necessary but there is a bit of nimbyism in some of the follow-ups. However, more people are saying that they have not felt the effect of the cuts - but have the cuts really hit them yet? Young people are feeling the effect of the economic reality and are shown to be have far less empathy with those who are happy to depend on (and even exploit) the benefit system.
EdM's real test will come with his battle with (or surrender to) his union paymasters. He was their placeman in the Labour leadership contest, but does their recent efforts on securing their own loyalists as parliamentary candidates mean that they are losing faith in Ed, as he seemingly retreats on previous Labour policy and perhaps in their eyes becomes a Cameron/Blair II?
Ed Balls could do a u-turn as he would not like to return to the bank benches (and who would employ him?) but this could come as late as early 2015 - on the excuse of keeping his powder dry. This could help shore up Labour's poor showing on "taking hard decisions".
However, the 2013 German election and the 2014 Scotland Referendum could add other many unknowns (events, including Syria and China) that even less than two years out the end game is difficult to see.
However, as long as DC keeps a constant high news profile and gets his PR right, then he stands a good chance of a successful 2015 - if it will be good enough to eliminate those pesky LDs remains to be seen. Of course if the LDs are reduced to about half their current seats, then would they split?
The only left winger in the cabinet gets the boot as well,
Do you mean Henry? The new guy at Health is also from the Left. For Left, I mean somebody who bakced John McDonnell for Leader, writes for Morning Star, member of Labour Campaign for Socialism (the ones who campaigned to keep Clause 4 in 1994), republican (he's one of those making a statement before taking the Oath saying Scottish people are citizens not subjects).
Hmmm, may b e a left leaning YES man , Henry at least had principles and was able to articulate his opinion rather than being a lickspittle. Labour cannot be classed as anywhere near left nowadays, centre right at best despite all the bluster, and donkeys , reshuffling duffers will make little difference.
Another old saying is that it’s better to be respected than to be liked. Indeed, at times the Conservative Party behaves as if the two are mutually exclusive, which they’re not.
Something the Tories will need to really take on board during the next parliament, whether in government or opposition.
Interesting YouGov on Housing - which starts by reminding that "Housing" ranks #10 at 12% on factors deciding how you will vote at the next GE - and those most effective at dealing with housing:
Housing Associations: 39 Local Council: 39 Government: 21
Reasons for shortage of affordable housing: Net Migration: 44 Lack of Social Housing: 39 Economic downturn: 37 Lack of Govt investment: 30
Most support to fix: Reduce Net Migration: 40 Build Council/HA homes: 36 Make Mortgage lenders lend more: 28 Private Sector rent control: 24
There are marked differences between VI on the latter - Con support migration control (56) and making council house tenants move once wages reach certain level (35), while Lab much more in favour of council house building (49) and leaving their tenants alone (13). To UKIP supporters immigration control (73) is more than twice as important as anything else:
Con support making council house tenants move once wages reach certain level
I assume the same people support the right of that person to buy the house at a huge discount before they get moved anywhere. Which makes them idiots.
I think the slightly bigger picture you are missing tim, in your enthusiasm to gloss over an inconvenient poll is that by factors of 2:1, voters think both Housing Associations and Local Councils are better placed to sort out housing than Central Government. And that "setting national targets" is only supported by 12% of the voters.
I know all this is inconvenient for your "Housing will win the election for Labour" meme - so was not surprised at your trivial and facetious reply.
If you'd read the data you'd have seen "right to buy" was not mentioned.
I was puzzled. I told myself "I didn't even talk bad about the Presiding Officer last night, so why does he seem angry with me?!" LOL! But then I thought about a general conspiracy with a mass ban of Nats (& Tim) by Moderator citing Off Topics motivation with the surviving souls inquiring in search of support.
Didn't they essentially recreate, or simply create for the first time, symbols and institutions for that purpose about a hundred years or so ago?
You could say that many of the trappings of the UK aren't that much older. Nations need symbols and institutions, and they'll invent them if necessary.
@tim - pity YouGov did not ask the question about "right to buy" then. Do you think it would have been seen as a major contributor to the lack of affordable housing? Should Labour campaign against it as a social evil?
Be interesting to see if Ed will take the fight to Unite.
No chance.
Are Labour and Unite going to dissolve their intricate mutual funding schemes?
No
Is the slate of Labour candidates at the next election going to be denuded of Unite influence?
No
All this guff about Ed knifing his brother is priceless. He merely stood aside while the unions machine gunned his brother, which shows him to be opportunist, but at every opportunity to demonstrate ruthlessness he has run away
@TUD - pity you missed yesterday's discussion on why it appears Scotland has made a decent fist of devolution, while Wales appears to have horlicks it...any thoughts?
Scotland retained many of its institutions (law, education, religion) after the Union, and this preserved our sense of self even when the UK project was going swimmingly; Scottish cringe apart, I think that gave/gives us enough confidence to make a fist of devolution/independence. Of course Wales was also absorbed into the body of Greater England far longer. I'm sometimes surprised that they have preserved so much of their separate identity.
Yes - Scotland never ceased being a different country - while Wales was subjugated by force of arms. Another difference identified by those who know Wales was "poverty of aspiration" - something the Scots, who disproportionately ran the Empire could never be accused of. With that advantage of the Union long gone, the formerly overwhelming economic argument is now a lot more finely balanced.
Be interesting to see if Ed will take the fight to Unite.
No chance.
Are Labour and Unite going to dissolve their intricate mutual funding schemes?
No
Is the slate of Labour candidates at the next election going to be denuded of Unite influence?
No
All this guff about Ed knifing his brother is priceless. He merely stood aside while the unions machine gunned his brother, which shows him to be opportunist, but at every opportunity to demonstrate ruthlessness he has run away
He merely stood aside while David, Murphy and Dougie didn't understand how the electoral system worked and what kind of campaign you needed to run to win with that electoral system.
Be interesting to see if Ed will take the fight to Unite.
All this guff about Ed knifing his brother is priceless. He merely stood aside while the unions machine gunned his brother, which shows him to be opportunist, but at every opportunity to demonstrate ruthlessness he has run away
I'm far from convinced that the polling on the attributes of public figures is necessarily particularly helpful, not least because different things matter more to different people. One voter might regard it as essential to have a Prime Minister who is in touch with public opinion, another might regard it as essential to have a Prime Minister who can take tough decisions. A third might vote by party rather than by leader. All might agree about which leader had which attributes, but they might all vote differently.
Just for fun...these 4 MPs ranked David Miliband 5th...2 of them have Diane Abbott as their top choice, so it makes sense...the other 2 had Diane 4th (Morris is kind leftish, so he must not like Diane very much anyway. Not that we can't give him any faults for this)
Katy Clark Kelvin Hopkins Grahem Morris Dave Watts (now PLP Chair)
On the other hand, there's Paul Flynn who placed EdM 5th
Tessa Jowell, Sheila Gilmore and Tom Clarke ranked Ed Balls 5th behind Diane.
Cruddas, Gemma Doyle, Kaith Vaz, Austin Mitchell, Jon Trickett, David Lammy and Khalid Mahmmod took the troubles to rank Burnham 5th.
The rest didn't rank all of them or they had Diane at the bottom.
The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that Ed, for lack of a better word, is good. Ed is right, Ed works. Ed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Ed, in all of his forms; Ed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And Ed, you mark my words, will not only save the Labour Party, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the UK. Thank you very much.
1 prefs David's worst unions were UCATT and ASLEF with 17%. Leaving aside the 74% he got among BAME Labour, his top union was USDAW with 64%.
EdM got 66% from UCATT. Unite follows with 49.7%. BAME Labour is his worst affiliated followed by USDAW and CWU all below 15%.
Balls did better among CWU members with 45% of first preferences. BFAWU and Labour Housing Group follow with 12%. He got 0 votes in the The Jewish Labour Movement. Second worst are Black Asian Minority Ethnic Labour and LGBT Labour followed by a 5% among UCATT members.
Burnham got 14% among Scientists for Labour as his top in the Affiliated Section with 0.7% in BAME Labour as the forst.
Shows the influence of the nominations (whether photos were used or not). USDAW nominated Dave (no surprise!), CWU nominated Balls and ASLEF nominated Diane.
This provides the numbers for Charles's rather good scree analogy. The government has made real and consistent progress in deficit reduction but the sad fact is that as a share of GDP it is still very high. Closing that gap is going to be painful.
What Osborne is doing is setting an agenda for the next election. If the question then is not who has the best ideas for spending but who do you trust to cut spending further and keep a grip he will have won. I don't recall that being the question since 1979 but acknowledging the continuing extent of the problem is smart politics (as well as being honest of course).
What Osborne has failed to understand is that you can only cut spending when the state ceases to subsidise low pay and high property costs.Or you get economic growth. And he's flunked all of those tests.
No Tim.
Subsidising low pay is not an ideal but it has kept very large numbers of people in work. When you look at the depth of the recession the increase in unemployment is astonishingly small. More than three times as many people lost their jobs in a much shallower recession in the 1990s. Politicians of all stripes need to think about why.
My suggestion, somewhat tentative, is that the subsidy of marginal employment by inwork benefits, which are now on a completely different scale from the early 1990s, has played a major role. If employers were bearing the full cost of these employees they would not be employed.
The elimination of union power outside the public sector is another possibility but it is less convincing because unions in the car industry, for example, have played a very positive role in maintaining employment with a flexibility that would have been inconceivable 20 years ago. But in the sectors where employment has continued to grow (in a broadly flatlining economy) unions generally play little part.
Another possibility is that the recession looks much worse than it really was because so much of the lost production was froth which didn't generate much employment. That was clearly the case in the City despite the job losses there. There is also the north sea factor which is putting a downward pressure on our apparent productivity and growth but this has been a bigger problem for the recovery than an explanation of the fall in 2007/8.
If we agree that the much higher level of employment is a good thing but the cost of subsidising that employment is not sustainable in the long run how do we get out of this? Maybe easing up the minimum wage to the so called living wage?
The good unemployment figures are one thing to be praised in how this recession (now single Brownian dip) has been managed. There has been both wage restraint and reductions in hours, but crucially employment has stayed good. These people will find it much easier to get better paid work or increase their hours when things get better, than the long term unemployed of previous downturns. It will be a long slog though, and while creating employment in the private sector has been a success, we do need a strategy to create well paid private sector jobs. I think Almonds policy to make Scotland a low corporation tax area is the right way to go.
The other way to reduce the in work benefit bill, other than increased wages, is to cut the cost of living. Low mortgage interest rates help some, but hurt others by raising house prices, and thereby rents. A cautious deflation of the housing bubble by slowly getting interest rates up to historical norms, as will some housebuilding.
The issue Tim does not address is location, location, location.
Building new towns in areas of high unemployment would just be creating new sink estates of the future. The new towns would have to be in areas of economic growth, and have good road and rail links. The Welsh valleys or Merseyside are not the place, though Cardiff or Cheshire may well be. In practice most will need to be in the tory shires, and may undo a lot of FPTP benefits that Labour currently has.
The other way to reduce the cost of living is to cut green taxes, which fall disproportionally on the working poor. I can afford green electricity because I earn a ton, but others cannot.
New Galaxy poll in Australia just out - A Galaxy poll conducted on Thursday and Friday evenings has the Coalition’s lead at 51-49, with Kevin Rudd holding a 51-34 lead as preferred prime minister. https://twitter.com/penbo/status/350924126497681408/photo/1
Yes. David also polled 59% with Community, the other union he got the nomination from. As her second best, Diane had a 30% with TSSA and Musicians Union. IIRC TSSA nominated her. Even if she didn't win it (David got 31%), she still did better than in the majority of other affiliated. I can't recall who ther Musicians nominated
Wish I'd been there - what a hoot! I once attended a wedding where the organist was as talented as Les Dawson, it was impossible not to giggle whenever she started up, the Wedding March was priceless.
"A drunken vicar had to be locked in the vestry after he fell over on his way into a church to conduct a wedding.
A replacement had to take the ceremony after Reverend Brian Taylor allegedly fell over in front of nearly 100 wedding guests,while it was believed he was drunk, and had to be ushered into the sideroom.
He could then apparently be heard shouting 'In the name of the Lord, I'm not drunk' from behind the door, while Chris John and Lori Collins were getting married at St George’s Church, in Cwmparc, South Wales.
"If we agree that the much higher level of employment is a good thing but the cost of subsidising that employment is not sustainable in the long run how do we get out of this? Maybe easing up the minimum wage to the so called living wage?"
Isn't the obvious way to reduce unemployment to make retirement compulsory at somewhere between 65 and 70? Glastonbury would lose their headline act and Charles would be forced to take on a proper job but otherwise i can't see much of a downside.
That's pretty warm - I was in LVegas a couple of years ago and it was about the same, Death Valley is up for some too. It was 119F at midnight one evening crossing the Mohavi Desert - and got to 125F/51C another day. How early settlers/miners at the Rhodium sites survived is remarkable. If you've never been, Death Valley is stunning.
Furnace Creek is very pretty in a very odd way - it also has its own golf course which is just deliberately weird.
" PHOENIX (June 28, 2013)—The temperature Friday in Death Valley in California is expected to rise to 129 [54C] degrees, not far off the world-record high of 134 logged there in 1913.
The culprit is a strong high-pressure system settling over the region Friday and through the weekend that will bring extreme temperatures even to the typically blazing Southwest."
Tigers at the Phoenix Zoo are getting frozen fish snacks, temporary cooling stations are opening, and airlines are monitoring the soaring temperatures as the western U.S. falls into the grips of a dangerous heat wave.
Temperatures are expected to soar even as far north as Reno, Nev., across Utah and into parts of Wyoming and Idaho, where forecasters are calling for triple-digit heat in the Boise area through the weekend.
Fraser Nelson's article is interesting - but I'm not sure the data on his graph supports him. Generation Y have always been less keen on home buying than the older generations - even well before the crunch. Since the crunch - when home buying enthusiasm fell across the board - the gap between Generation Y and others has narrowed - still less enthusiastic, but not as markedly as before:
If Fraser Nelson was not living and working in London - where central property prices are influenced by foreign buyers with the consequent knock on effect, he might have a different view.
Speaking of Death Valley - if you've never seen it - here's some pix - there's Disney dunes in the middle, mini-sandstorms wipped up every few minute, huge mica deposits that are brilliantly colourful, massive volcanic craters that blow your mind, high winds that can knock you sideways, salt flats into the distance and the oddest rocks that supposedly race over them all on their own.
I drove/hiked all over the place and it really should be a Wonder of the World, if only in Boy's Own books.
Fraser Nelson's article is interesting - but I'm not sure the data on his graph supports him. Generation Y have always been less keen on home buying than the older generations - even well before the crunch. Since the crunch - when home buying enthusiasm fell across the board - the gap between Generation Y and others has narrowed - still less enthusiastic, but not as markedly as before:
If Fraser Nelson was not living and working in London - where central property prices are influenced by foreign buyers with the consequent knock on effect, he might have a different view.
in £600k houses who want to remortgage.
Have the details of how it will work been published?
Tim given you thought sub prime meant any house bought under a Con govt we wont be holding out for much from you on the subtleties of bank capitalisation.
'During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal. He claimed it would create the ‘first ever super-mutual’ providing a better deal for customers ‘rather than the banking elite’.
@JananGanesh Matthew Parris different class today on spending cuts
Forget scissors and axes. There’s so much public sector fat George Osborne just needs a liposuction machine
Clearly we need police, soldiers, judges, dustmen, teachers and fire brigades. But what’s remarkable is how hard it now seems you can prune without cutting into the core. So I’ll be brutal again: we are learning that there was much, much more fat than we thought. The cuts so far have been mostly liposuction. The fat just keeps on coming, and still we’re nowhere near the bone.
Ask most businesses or ordinary householders to remove £4 from every £10 they spend and the impact would be devastating — or you’d have to ask where that £4 in every £10 had been going until now. I’m one of those rather wet Tories who tended to take with a pinch of salt the Daily Mail stories about council profligacy and waste. I’m beginning to think it really was as bad as people said.
My ex wife thinks it is called Death Valley because I taught her to drive an automatic car there
Ha! When I was a little kid, my dad had a nightmare that his car broke down in DV and he had to survive by drinking the radiator water...he'd actually fallen asleep with the electric blanket on...
TBH, I have no idea how the early settlers managed to cope - its a beautiful place but to get stranded for even a short while in any part of that area wouldn't be pretty. I love the canyons, but the heat is just epic.
I didn't think the Sahara was anything like as brutal even when it was 50C there.
'During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal. He claimed it would create the ‘first ever super-mutual’ providing a better deal for customers ‘rather than the banking elite’.
Balls & banks ,you couldn't make it up.
Cue a statement saying he was far too busy being schools secretary and couldn't possibly have been involved in any deals. No sirree.
Cue a statement saying he was far too busy being schools secretary and couldn't possibly have been involved in any deals. No sirree.
You seriously think he had an active role in a commercial transaction between two independently owned and managed institutions? Exactly how far do you think the state should intrude into everyday life?!
You seriously think he had an active role in a commercial transaction between two independently owned and managed institutions? Exactly how far do you think the state should intrude into everyday life?!
He seems to think so
"During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal."
OT TV review - just coming to the end of The Sopranos and I'm having mixed feelings re where this series lost its way. I'd still give it a solid 8/10, but I found myself considering flicking through bits of certain episodes where it was wandering about/yet another dream sequence.
Like many series - should have stopped at S5 and squeezed the same story into less time. To have 21 episodes in the final run was almost double the others showed. The actors are mostly superb and completely convincing - I could happily believe they were really them - it was the plotting that let it down rather too often.
Speaking of Death Valley - if you've never seen it - here's some pix - there's Disney dunes in the middle, mini-sandstorms wipped up every few minute, huge mica deposits that are brilliantly colourful, massive volcanic craters that blow your mind, high winds that can knock you sideways, salt flats into the distance and the oddest rocks that supposedly race over them all on their own.
I drove/hiked all over the place and it really should be a Wonder of the World, if only in Boy's Own books.
I bet he didnt actually use the words "I helped grease the wheels of the deal".
True
In that role I was also able to give the Treasury’s support for a new Private Members Bill that led to the creation of the first ever ‘super-mutual’ bringing Britannia Building Society and the Co-op Bank toget her in the interests of customers, rather than the banking elite.
As a member of Generation Y, I don't consider buying a home because they are preposterously expensive I cannot conceive of ever having enough to buy one. House prices are absurd - I don't know enough to spot a bubble or forthcoming crash in prices, but from a purely personal perspective I certainly hope there is a significant one.
After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
They - as in the collective political class - won't touch the banks. Everything else follows from that.
As a member of Generation Y, I don't consider buying a home because they are preposterously expensive I cannot conceive of ever having enough to buy one. House prices are absurd - I don't know enough to spot a bubble or forthcoming crash in prices, but from a purely personal perspective I certainly hope there is a significant one.
A drop in house prices destroys the banks so the political class will do anything to prevent that happening. They won't succeed in the long-run but who knows how long that is.
Comments
No worries. As usual the PB tories overlook the fact that it was Carlotta who started the exchange as usual.
Because in the whole membership there usually also are
-80 year old people who can't spend a whole day under the rain knocking doors
-members who mysteriously show up just at the reselection meeeting of the sitting Cllr
-left wing people who just like to debate a point of order on the rule book at the CLP meeting on Friday night
In general (as shown in Mick's link below), Scotland's Westminster contingent are usually irrelevant to forming a government, resulting in benign neglect (at best) from Tory governments or being taken for granted by Labour. Think how much worse it is for Wales.
Didn't they essentially recreate, or simply create for the first time, symbols and institutions for that purpose about a hundred years or so ago? As I recall, in most countries a lot of iconic or traditional parts of the national identity are usually far more recent than people think, rather than having been retained. So I too would be surprised at how much of their separate identity was preserved, but I don't know enough to know whether they actually did preserve quite a bit, or whether a significant amount pretty much arose out of little not that long ago, given as you point out Wales was forcibly subsumed, to a higher degree than our Scottish friends, for considerably longer.
•Chris Christie (R) 45%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 40%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 45%
•Jeb Bush (R) 45%
•Brian Schweitzer (D) 42%
•Chris Christie (R) 41%
•Brian Schweitzer (D) 48%
•Jeb Bush (R) 41%
Subsidising low pay is not an ideal but it has kept very large numbers of people in work. When you look at the depth of the recession the increase in unemployment is astonishingly small. More than three times as many people lost their jobs in a much shallower recession in the 1990s. Politicians of all stripes need to think about why.
My suggestion, somewhat tentative, is that the subsidy of marginal employment by inwork benefits, which are now on a completely different scale from the early 1990s, has played a major role. If employers were bearing the full cost of these employees they would not be employed.
The elimination of union power outside the public sector is another possibility but it is less convincing because unions in the car industry, for example, have played a very positive role in maintaining employment with a flexibility that would have been inconceivable 20 years ago. But in the sectors where employment has continued to grow (in a broadly flatlining economy) unions generally play little part.
Another possibility is that the recession looks much worse than it really was because so much of the lost production was froth which didn't generate much employment. That was clearly the case in the City despite the job losses there. There is also the north sea factor which is putting a downward pressure on our apparent productivity and growth but this has been a bigger problem for the recovery than an explanation of the fall in 2007/8.
If we agree that the much higher level of employment is a good thing but the cost of subsidising that employment is not sustainable in the long run how do we get out of this? Maybe easing up the minimum wage to the so called living wage?
The new guy at Health is also from the Left. For Left, I mean somebody who bakced John McDonnell for Leader, writes for Morning Star, member of Labour Campaign for Socialism (the ones who campaigned to keep Clause 4 in 1994), republican (he's one of those making a statement before taking the Oath saying Scottish people are citizens not subjects).
Housing Associations: 39
Local Council: 39
Government: 21
Reasons for shortage of affordable housing:
Net Migration: 44
Lack of Social Housing: 39
Economic downturn: 37
Lack of Govt investment: 30
Most support to fix:
Reduce Net Migration: 40
Build Council/HA homes: 36
Make Mortgage lenders lend more: 28
Private Sector rent control: 24
There are marked differences between VI on the latter - Con support migration control (56) and making council house tenants move once wages reach certain level (35), while Lab much more in favour of council house building (49) and leaving their tenants alone (13). To UKIP supporters immigration control (73) is more than twice as important as anything else:
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/spvk3deces/YouGov-Survey-results-housing-130620.pdf
I'm curious as to why you think mine is more than anyone else's on here.
Membership numbers aren't everything but they are pretty damn important in a campaign like this. Just as a rough guide when no other numbers are usually available.
Enthusiasm is harder to measure but we are talking about something that those in the SNP and the other parties who support it have been fighting to achieve for decades.
I take your point about older members but there are always odd jobs, looking after the footsloggers and things like helping with the materials and general organisation.
The same basic components are utilised by every party to be fair so there will likely be a good few vehicles like that used by Yes as well as we get closer in.
I just tuned in to P3 and apparently Perez's tye suffered the same massive delamination problem Pirelli have attempted to resolve.
And if you think I would be relying on any mysterious "Sir!" on here to intervene on behalf of scottish posters then you are much farther gone than you appear. :innocent face:
Thank you for an interesting review. In the end it will probably come down to how much the electorate's heart rules head or vice versa.
Polls show that the public believe that the cuts are necessary but there is a bit of nimbyism in some of the follow-ups. However, more people are saying that they have not felt the effect of the cuts - but have the cuts really hit them yet? Young people are feeling the effect of the economic reality and are shown to be have far less empathy with those who are happy to depend on (and even exploit) the benefit system.
EdM's real test will come with his battle with (or surrender to) his union paymasters. He was their placeman in the Labour leadership contest, but does their recent efforts on securing their own loyalists as parliamentary candidates mean that they are losing faith in Ed, as he seemingly retreats on previous Labour policy and perhaps in their eyes becomes a Cameron/Blair II?
Ed Balls could do a u-turn as he would not like to return to the bank benches (and who would employ him?) but this could come as late as early 2015 - on the excuse of keeping his powder dry. This could help shore up Labour's poor showing on "taking hard decisions".
However, the 2013 German election and the 2014 Scotland Referendum could add other many unknowns (events, including Syria and China) that even less than two years out the end game is difficult to see.
However, as long as DC keeps a constant high news profile and gets his PR right, then he stands a good chance of a successful 2015 - if it will be good enough to eliminate those pesky LDs remains to be seen. Of course if the LDs are reduced to about half their current seats, then would they split?
I know all this is inconvenient for your "Housing will win the election for Labour" meme - so was not surprised at your trivial and facetious reply.
If you'd read the data you'd have seen "right to buy" was not mentioned.
You are cranky this morning!
Mourning the passing of burgergate?
But then I thought about a general conspiracy with a mass ban of Nats (& Tim) by Moderator citing Off Topics motivation with the surviving souls inquiring in search of support.
Can't touch the rest of that post but thanks all the same.
Are Labour and Unite going to dissolve their intricate mutual funding schemes?
No
Is the slate of Labour candidates at the next election going to be denuded of Unite influence?
No
All this guff about Ed knifing his brother is priceless. He merely stood aside while the unions machine gunned his brother, which shows him to be opportunist, but at every opportunity to demonstrate ruthlessness he has run away
I'm far from convinced that the polling on the attributes of public figures is necessarily particularly helpful, not least because different things matter more to different people. One voter might regard it as essential to have a Prime Minister who is in touch with public opinion, another might regard it as essential to have a Prime Minister who can take tough decisions. A third might vote by party rather than by leader. All might agree about which leader had which attributes, but they might all vote differently.
Katy Clark
Kelvin Hopkins
Grahem Morris
Dave Watts (now PLP Chair)
On the other hand, there's Paul Flynn who placed EdM 5th
Tessa Jowell, Sheila Gilmore and Tom Clarke ranked Ed Balls 5th behind Diane.
Cruddas, Gemma Doyle, Kaith Vaz, Austin Mitchell, Jon Trickett, David Lammy and Khalid Mahmmod took the troubles to rank Burnham 5th.
The rest didn't rank all of them or they had Diane at the bottom.
Betting PostBacked the qualifying winning margin to be 0.001-0.15s with Ladbrokes at 2.2 (no hedge, of course).
Pre-qualifying (and Webber replacement) piece is up here: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/britain-pre-qualifying.html
NB: Vanilla's arithmetic may be on a base 10, but could be on base 20 or base 50 as four threads ago Tim's count was 4,945.
Leading PB posters > 1,000
June 17 June 29
tim 4,521 4,948
TSE 1,925 1,948
Socrates 1,712 refused
CarlottaV 1,745 2,147
Plato 1,671 1,855
MickPork 1,620 1,936
AveryLP 1,544 1,689
TGOHF 1,435 1,607
MorrisD 1,262 1,371
Alanbr/ke 1,164 1,359
SunilP 1,153 1,327
JamesK 1,096 stewards enquiry
SObserver 1,034 1,169
Charles 993 1,152
Neil 1,096
Andrea P 1,000
RichardN 978
SeanT 934 967
Mike K 948
March 21st to June 17th = 90 days,
Thus 1000 posts = 11.1 per day average, every day.
I give you this stat as a gift
1 prefs
David's worst unions were UCATT and ASLEF with 17%. Leaving aside the 74% he got among BAME Labour, his top union was USDAW with 64%.
EdM got 66% from UCATT. Unite follows with 49.7%. BAME Labour is his worst affiliated followed by USDAW and CWU all below 15%.
Balls did better among CWU members with 45% of first preferences. BFAWU and Labour Housing Group follow with 12%. He got 0 votes in the The Jewish Labour Movement. Second worst are Black Asian Minority Ethnic Labour and LGBT Labour followed by a 5% among UCATT members.
Burnham got 14% among Scientists for Labour as his top in the Affiliated Section with 0.7% in BAME Labour as the forst.
Diane went from 50% in ASLEF to 4.7% in UCATT
Shows the influence of the nominations (whether photos were used or not). USDAW nominated Dave (no surprise!), CWU nominated Balls and ASLEF nominated Diane.
The other way to reduce the in work benefit bill, other than increased wages, is to cut the cost of living. Low mortgage interest rates help some, but hurt others by raising house prices, and thereby rents. A cautious deflation of the housing bubble by slowly getting interest rates up to historical norms, as will some housebuilding.
The issue Tim does not address is location, location, location.
Building new towns in areas of high unemployment would just be creating new sink estates of the future. The new towns would have to be in areas of economic growth, and have good road and rail links. The Welsh valleys or Merseyside are not the place, though Cardiff or Cheshire may well be. In practice most will need to be in the tory shires, and may undo a lot of FPTP benefits that Labour currently has.
The other way to reduce the cost of living is to cut green taxes, which fall disproportionally on the working poor. I can afford green electricity because I earn a ton, but others cannot.
https://twitter.com/penbo/status/350924126497681408/photo/1
Yes. David also polled 59% with Community, the other union he got the nomination from.
As her second best, Diane had a 30% with TSSA and Musicians Union. IIRC TSSA nominated her. Even if she didn't win it (David got 31%), she still did better than in the majority of other affiliated. I can't recall who ther Musicians nominated
"A drunken vicar had to be locked in the vestry after he fell over on his way into a church to conduct a wedding.
A replacement had to take the ceremony after Reverend Brian Taylor allegedly fell over in front of nearly 100 wedding guests,while it was believed he was drunk, and had to be ushered into the sideroom.
He could then apparently be heard shouting 'In the name of the Lord, I'm not drunk' from behind the door, while Chris John and Lori Collins were getting married at St George’s Church, in Cwmparc, South Wales.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2351481/Drunk-vicar-fell-aisle-wedding-locked-VESTRY-heard-shouting-In-the-Lord-Im-drunk-.html#ixzz2XbKGALPi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The temperature today in Phoenix, Arizona is forecast to be 48 degrees:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5308655
I've some more reselections for you
Chris Skidmore in Kingswood
Hammond in Wimbledon
Jason McCartney in Colne Valley
Mike Gapes in Ilford South
Stella Creasy in Walthamstow
Hywell Williams in Arfon
"If we agree that the much higher level of employment is a good thing but the cost of subsidising that employment is not sustainable in the long run how do we get out of this? Maybe easing up the minimum wage to the so called living wage?"
Isn't the obvious way to reduce unemployment to make retirement compulsory at somewhere between 65 and 70? Glastonbury would lose their headline act and Charles would be forced to take on a proper job but otherwise i can't see much of a downside.
http://www.kwtx.com/weather/headlines/Death-Valley-Forecast--Searing-213527461.html
Furnace Creek is very pretty in a very odd way - it also has its own golf course which is just deliberately weird.
" PHOENIX (June 28, 2013)—The temperature Friday in Death Valley in California is expected to rise to 129 [54C] degrees, not far off the world-record high of 134 logged there in 1913.
The culprit is a strong high-pressure system settling over the region Friday and through the weekend that will bring extreme temperatures even to the typically blazing Southwest."
Tigers at the Phoenix Zoo are getting frozen fish snacks, temporary cooling stations are opening, and airlines are monitoring the soaring temperatures as the western U.S. falls into the grips of a dangerous heat wave.
Temperatures are expected to soar even as far north as Reno, Nev., across Utah and into parts of Wyoming and Idaho, where forecasters are calling for triple-digit heat in the Boise area through the weekend.
http://cdn2.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/blogs.dir/11/files/2013/06/ipsos-mori-generations-immediately-buy-couple.png
If Fraser Nelson was not living and working in London - where central property prices are influenced by foreign buyers with the consequent knock on effect, he might have a different view.
I drove/hiked all over the place and it really should be a Wonder of the World, if only in Boy's Own books.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=death+valley&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=Ofu&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=tcLOUfflOajo4QTGzoGIAg&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1247&bih=633
Co op savers blast Balls.
Surely only the Mail can try to make a controversy out of the Co-op group donating to the Co-op party? The hidden scandal that needs to be exposed!
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/06/28/us-gay-man-adopts-73-year-old-partner-to-avoid-inheritance-tax/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Pinknews+(Pink+News)
Norman's brother better watch out!
'During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal. He claimed it would create the ‘first ever super-mutual’ providing a better deal for customers ‘rather than the banking elite’.
Balls & banks ,you couldn't make it up.
Matthew Parris different class today on spending cuts
TBH, I have no idea how the early settlers managed to cope - its a beautiful place but to get stranded for even a short while in any part of that area wouldn't be pretty. I love the canyons, but the heat is just epic.
I didn't think the Sahara was anything like as brutal even when it was 50C there.
"During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal."
Like many series - should have stopped at S5 and squeezed the same story into less time. To have 21 episodes in the final run was almost double the others showed. The actors are mostly superb and completely convincing - I could happily believe they were really them - it was the plotting that let it down rather too often.
The Tudors is next on my list...
Finally - even you can see that he claimed no active role in the deal itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxTPEd_Skfc
Golly. What a hoot! ;^ )
"I was also able to give the Treasury’s support for a new Private Members Bill that led to the creation"
Without the Bill, no deal. Without Balls, no Bill.
Which part of that is confusing you?
'"During a speech in 2010, Mr Balls told how he helped grease the wheels of the 2009 deal."
Just in case anyone needed reminding of the New Labour's banking disaster,up pops Balls.
If Balls had not done his part, there would have been no deal.
It seems you are using a definition of "involved" that is unfamiliar to native English speakers.
How long before you realise that the Act in question was introduced by a Tory?