To be honest, I haven't read it. I'm spending my morning reading about proposed changes to the Italian bankruptcy laws... And what that might mean (or otherwise) for NPLs.
I can't think of a better way of you spending a Spring morning than investigating changes to Italian bankruptcy laws other than of course assisting your father in making up another batch of "Winning Here" placards for the LibDem Bedford mayoralty re-election campaign.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, has admitted 10 per cent of the body’s funding comes from the EU but said the money had no “impact” on its forecasts for what happened after Brexit."
Of course not.
Mr J Iscariot says thirty pieces of silver had no impact on his decision making process.
Good luck to Cameron and Remain in trying to explain why they wouldn't use the best part of £25bn that currently goes on overseas aid and the EU on the British people in their doom laden scenarios.
I like Sunil's "EU isn't working" poster, and Leave could do with running the Miliband in Salmond's pocket one with Cameron and Frau Merkel.
The austerity one of shiny new bridges in Greece while our old folk struggle for care is another corker.
Vote leave should announce a temporary freeze on foreign aid whilst we are negotiating our exit. And I think the idea of a poster with merkel and Cameron in her top pocket would be brilliant.
If Vote Leave are going to assume control of the public finances, as your freeze implies, will they at the same time announce the increase in annual budget for the NHS?
Abraham Wald, a mathematician by trade, knew nothing about aviation or the British Labour party when he fled Austria in 1938. But he did know about numbers and his insights there can posthumously help Her Majesty’s opposition in 2016 – via a problem solved for the US Air Force in the 1940s.
The problem involved defensive armour. Planes needed it, but too much weighed them down. So officers surveyed battle-scarred aircraft returning from European sorties and tallied the bullet holes on different sections. They saw that the fuselage was taking the most flak, more than the engine, and were poised to stick the armour on accordingly – and erroneously.
By this time, Wald was working for the Statistical Research Group, a top-secret military geek squad. He saw the bullet-hole data and offered a life-saving insight: the prevalence of damaged fuselages meant reinforcement should go on the engines. It was obvious really. The planes with a pock-marked fuselage were the ones that made it back to base. The ones that went down testified by their very absence to the greater peril of hits to the engine.
Good story, except e.g. later Spitfires (& many other WWII fighters I expect) had most of their armour round the pilot & the fuel tanks. An aircraft with a bullet riddled or incinerated pilot was just as unlikely to return to base as one with a riddled engine, with the added disadvantage of a probably dead, expensively trained pilot.
It was USAF bombers - bigger fuselage and engines
Hmm, on a cost/benefit/performance analysis, putting heavy engine armour on a 4 engined bomber seems even less effective than on a single engine fighter. The B-17 could certainly fly on 2 engines if necessary.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, has admitted 10 per cent of the body’s funding comes from the EU but said the money had no “impact” on its forecasts for what happened after Brexit."
Of course not.
Well that's all right then.
Perhaps you should listen to Brexiter in Chief Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico: The IFS - for whom I used to work - is not a paid up propaganda arm of the EU. I hope that clears that up.
Very much agree with this Mike. She was the star of the Newsnight debate on Monday. The discussions between her and Chukka were good, amicable and on points of policy rather than the glorified name calling Cameron and his cronies are currently indulging in.
The decision by Leave to go heavy on immigration makes sense to me if they think they are currently headed for defeat. It's very risky but it might turn things round. The risk, though, is not just to the campaign but to the reputations of individual Leave politicians. For which reason I doubt they would do it if they thought they were currently ahead or tied.
As an aside, the IFS was created by my old boss (Nils Taube) to provide a job for Dick Taverne, after he lost the seat of Lincoln. Dick Taverne went on to write a pretty good book about the lack of respect for the scientific method by our politicians (and the media): The March of Unreason.
Robert if you can wrench yourself away from your duties at Finchley Road might you gives us your appreciation of the IFS report?
To be honest, I haven't read it. I'm spending my morning reading about proposed changes to the Italian bankruptcy laws... And what that might mean (or otherwise) for NPLs.
If you do business in Italy - especially financial business - my advice to you is to take whatever profits you make from that business and set aside 50% for the fine and the rest for the legal fees needed to sort out the inevitable imbroglio. Whatever the law says remember this saying: "Fatta la legge. Trovato l'inganno."
The whole point of the Italian legal system is to:-
(a) provide lucrative employment for lawyers. (Incidentally, never ask an Italian lawyer for written advice. Not worth the paper it's printed on. What they tell you informally is the only advice worth having.) (b) cause pain to those embroiled in it to teach them a lesson (c) but never finally come to a definitive conclusion thus preserving everyone's honour (as the pain imposed in (b) will be enough).
Never approach matters Italian from an Anglo-Saxon perspective. This is the land of Machiavelli and they are very much better at it than we are.
Smear and insults is all that you Leavers have left isn't it.
I might do a piece this weekend. Leave: Fruitcakes led by donkeys
Look at the second sentence - smear, insult. Dearie me.
You have taken leave of your senses. If someone is on the payroll, their probity is always in doubt and it would be foolish to pretend that exactly the same wouldn't happen if the boot was on the other foot.
£25bn in Overseas Aid/EU contributions.
What kind of government wouldn't use it for it's own people in transition?
As historians of Britain and of Europe, we believe that Britain has had in the past, and will have in the future, an irreplaceable role to play in Europe. On 23 June, we face a choice: to cast ourselves adrift, condemning ourselves to irrelevance and Europe to division and weakness; or to reaffirm our commitment to the EU and stiffen the cohesion of our continent in a dangerous world.
I doubt my history tutor would have rewarded that effort with high marks.
Assertion unsupported by argument, elision of 'Europe' and 'EU'......slogan versus substance 'stiffen cohesion'?
Andrew Lilico unpicks the analysis here with his own forecast for 2030 - basically, the Treasury et al assume the Uk would make economically damaging decisions and reduce openness to trade:
Mr. Royale, sounds like a navigator telling those following he should keep the job because if they replace him the other chap might lead them into a volcano
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
LOL at the IFS bring added to the list of EU stooges!
Are you saying that the IFS isn't funded by the EU?
Don't forget the UK government, the devolved administrations in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, and the Bank of England, as well as the European Commission.
Oh, and the Gatsby foundation, founded by Lord David Sainsbury, who donated £3.75 million to BSE.
On 23 June, we face a choice: to cast ourselves adrift,
we could just sail north a bit and join up with iceland and norway. Failing that, westward Ho! england, meet New England. I suppose the channel tunnel might need some modification
As an aside, the IFS was created by my old boss (Nils Taube) to provide a job for Dick Taverne, after he lost the seat of Lincoln. Dick Taverne went on to write a pretty good book about the lack of respect for the scientific method by our politicians (and the media): The March of Unreason.
Robert if you can wrench yourself away from your duties at Finchley Road might you gives us your appreciation of the IFS report?
To be honest, I haven't read it. I'm spending my morning reading about proposed changes to the Italian bankruptcy laws... And what that might mean (or otherwise) for NPLs.
If you do business in Italy - especially financial business - my advice to you is to take whatever profits you make from that business and set aside 50% for the fine and the rest for the legal fees needed to sort out the inevitable imbroglio. Whatever the law says remember this saying: "Fatta la legge. Trovato l'inganno."
The whole point of the Italian legal system is to:-
(a) provide lucrative employment for lawyers. (Incidentally, never ask an Italian lawyer for written advice. Not worth the paper it's printed on. What they tell you informally is the only advice worth having.) (b) cause pain to those embroiled in it to teach them a lesson (c) but never finally come to a definitive conclusion thus preserving everyone's honour (as the pain imposed in (b) will be enough).
Never approach matters Italian from an Anglo-Saxon perspective. This is the land of Machiavelli and they are very much better at it than we are.
I've only just come to this thread. Should it read ICM not YouGov? There's a neck and neck ICM poll putting both sides on 45%. Or is this another neck and necker?
Smear and insults is all that you Leavers have left isn't it.
I might do a piece this weekend. Leave: Fruitcakes led by donkeys
Look at the second sentence - smear, insult. Dearie me.
You have taken leave of your senses. If someone is on the payroll, their probity is always in doubt and it would be foolish to pretend that exactly the same wouldn't happen if the boot was on the other foot.
£25bn in Overseas Aid/EU contributions.
What kind of government wouldn't use it for it's own people in transition?
What twaddle. Everyone is on someone's payroll. That does not mean that every employee in the country is lacking in probity.
Overstating the case like this makes people less inclined to listen when a genuine argument about a possible conflict of interest is made.
As historians of Britain and of Europe, we believe that Britain has had in the past, and will have in the future, an irreplaceable role to play in Europe. On 23 June, we face a choice: to cast ourselves adrift, condemning ourselves to irrelevance and Europe to division and weakness; or to reaffirm our commitment to the EU and stiffen the cohesion of our continent in a dangerous world.
I doubt my history tutor would have rewarded that effort with high marks.
Assertion unsupported by argument, elision of 'Europe' and 'EU'......slogan versus substance 'stiffen cohesion'?
Bears all the hallmarks of a No.10 intern draft, duly signed by a bunch of blind old buggers.
Also, @rcs1000 may have mentioned this already, but Ireland's unemployment rate has fallen to 2008 levels. An amazing turnaround and really goes to show what can be achieved, it should also put to bed any argument about austerity costing jobs and hurting growth. Economists had all assured us in 2011 when Ireland embarked on their mega austerity drive that unemployment would never come back down and they had permanently damaged the economy in cutting spending.
Labour have to learn these lessons and lessons from France, where the opposite has happened.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, has admitted 10 per cent of the body’s funding comes from the EU but said the money had no “impact” on its forecasts for what happened after Brexit."
As historians of Britain and of Europe, we believe that Britain has had in the past, and will have in the future, an irreplaceable role to play in Europe. On 23 June, we face a choice: to cast ourselves adrift, condemning ourselves to irrelevance and Europe to division and weakness; or to reaffirm our commitment to the EU and stiffen the cohesion of our continent in a dangerous world.
I doubt my history tutor would have rewarded that effort with high marks.
Assertion unsupported by argument, elision of 'Europe' and 'EU'......slogan versus substance 'stiffen cohesion'?
It reads like a surrender statement by the 1940 British government to the enemy.
What twaddle. Everyone is on someone's payroll. That does not mean that every employee in the country is lacking in probity.
It means they are open to influence, yes.
We are all open to influence. That is very different from saying that someone who can be influenced is lacking in honesty. Or that their honesty is in doubt - a serious charge. Such a charge should not be made without some evidence.
Leave should be questioning the assumptions and the figures and the methodologies not assuming that because some money was received from the EU (much as Messrs Farage and Hannan get their income from the EU) the person or institution making the analysis is therefore automatically not worth listening to.
It will be the other way round next year as the citizens of Leicester were all on at 5,000/1 to win the Premier League, whereas those in Chelsea are tearing up their betting slips.
Paul Johnson, the IFS director, has admitted 10 per cent of the body’s funding comes from the EU but said the money had no “impact” on its forecasts for what happened after Brexit."
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
It will be the other way round next year as the citizens of Leicester were all on at 5,000/1 to win the Premier League, whereas those in Chelsea are tearing up their betting slips.
Chelsea FC actually play in Hammersmith and Fulham, not Kensington and Chelsea.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
Aww John.
I haven't attacked Scott on a personal front, Ive been enjoying subverting his posts too much. Anyone who can rubbish the Conservatives so comprehensively is an asset to the site.
Abraham Wald, a mathematician by trade, knew nothing about aviation or the British Labour party when he fled Austria in 1938. But he did know about numbers and his insights there can posthumously help Her Majesty’s opposition in 2016 – via a problem solved for the US Air Force in the 1940s.
The problem involved defensive armour. Planes needed it, but too much weighed them down. So officers surveyed battle-scarred aircraft returning from European sorties and tallied the bullet holes on different sections. They saw that the fuselage was taking the most flak, more than the engine, and were poised to stick the armour on accordingly – and erroneously.
By this time, Wald was working for the Statistical Research Group, a top-secret military geek squad. He saw the bullet-hole data and offered a life-saving insight: the prevalence of damaged fuselages meant reinforcement should go on the engines. It was obvious really. The planes with a pock-marked fuselage were the ones that made it back to base. The ones that went down testified by their very absence to the greater peril of hits to the engine.
Good story, except e.g. later Spitfires (& many other WWII fighters I expect) had most of their armour round the pilot & the fuel tanks. An aircraft with a bullet riddled or incinerated pilot was just as unlikely to return to base as one with a riddled engine, with the added disadvantage of a probably dead, expensively trained pilot.
It was USAF bombers - bigger fuselage and engines
Hmm, on a cost/benefit/performance analysis, putting heavy engine armour on a 4 engined bomber seems even less effective than on a single engine fighter. The B-17 could certainly fly on 2 engines if necessary.
Ok, mansplaining it is, then.
It wasn't 'armour bombers or fighters?'
It was 'where to armour bombers'.
Please, more mansplaining. I'd love some links on what armour was added to the engine nacelles of the B-17, B-24 & B-29, to name but three.
Actually, couldn't Leave add the non-payment of British retirees' pensions and MEPs salaries to the net contribution to EU figure for spending on NHS etc.?
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
JohnO - In 2019/20 who is your prefered candidate to succeed Cameron?
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
Aww John.
I haven't attacked Scott on a personal front, Ive been enjoying subverting his posts too much. Anyone who can rubbish the Conservatives so comprehensively is an asset to the site.
I know but you have, sorry to say, been sounding like an effete Oxonian - must be all those letters after your name. And no, you can't borrow the camel.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push,
Link?
I don't recall ever pushing such a line.
I have said IDS is a poster boy for Brexiteers, they long for the heady days of failure under his leadership as they prefer that to winning under Cameron, I have noted when they praised his performance, and when others have been critical of his dreadful delivery, but those are not endorsements...
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
The jury is out on ScottP. Is he an oafish bore or a boring oaf ?
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
Retweeting stuff written by people smarter than him is basically all he does. If anything it just makes him look stupid, every time he tries original content it fails, again, stupid. As I said, SeanT is a dick but he does it in style, with original content.
John, I can't say I disagree with that sentiment, however, on the weekend the PM gave an interview in which he implied that staying in the EU with a Labour government was preferable to being out of it with a Tory government. Going back to the exchange we had just a few days ago about a similar subject, I'm not sure what to think at the moment. You said I was being overly paranoid, I fear that I was just being realistic about our politicians' starry eyed europhillia.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
The jury is out on ScottP. Is he an oafish bore or a boring oaf ?
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
JohnO - In 2019/20 who is your prefered candidate to succeed Cameron?
If Remain wins by, say, the latest ARSE projection, and were he to accept the result as binding for a generation, then my man at present could well be Michael Gove.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum .
I'd say more repetitive, inane, and with a sort of dogged masochistic persistence in the face of mockery.
If he is a CCHQ troll (and I'm cautious about accusing with no proof as I've had to deal with similar here), I wish they'd give him a break or rotate him around different websites or something - I feel sorry for the guy. It's a brutal shift pattern and on a very politically engaged site he's not forming opinions or persuading anyone.
Leave aside what to modern sensibilities may seem a questionable request to find Mrs Thatcher a job in London (at £500 a year, no less. Does anyone else remember a toast, "Oh, for a pretty wife and a thousand pounds a year," which when I heard it was quoted ironically.)
What is interesting is Mrs Thatcher having spoken "every night" during the election. It is this tradecraft the SpAd generation of MPs on both sides typically lacks. They can't speak, they can't persuade, and a lot of them can't see any need to.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push,
Link?
I don't recall ever pushing such a line.
I have said IDS is a poster boy for Brexiteers, they long for the heady days of failure under his leadership as they prefer that to winning under Cameron, I have noted when they praised his performance, and when others have been critical of his dreadful delivery, but those are not endorsements...
And you know this how? You aren't a member of the party, you aren't in VL? How do you know what the consensus of Eurosceptic Tories is? I am a member and I have been active with VL, there is no appetite for IDS or anyone like him. You like to believe that people like Montie represent mainstream Tories (and leavers are the mainstream, even in London there is a 60/40 split in favour of Leave among the members I speak to) because you want to push this idiotic line that we're going to oust Cameron for IDS or Fox the day after the referendum.
You are a clueless chump who sits on twitter all day and thinks that is what constitutes real life. I don't hate you or even dislike you, I just pity your dreadful existence.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
The jury is out on ScottP. Is he an oafish bore or a boring oaf ?
I think to some extent this is in the eye of the beholder. Scott has been very rude (consistently) to Tory Brexiteers on here: day in, day out.
When he's called out on it, Tory Brexiteers are then accused of personal abuse.
Of course, there's a good argument his provocations should be consistently ignored, lest everyone else is dragged into the mud, but it doesn't surprise me if people occasionally boil over in response to it.
Anyway, enough said on this matter from my PoV. Back to the day job.
To answer my own question, the press release from the IFS mentions funding from the ESRC, but not how it itself is funded. Does anyone have the source for the EU funding claim?
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum .
I'd say more repetitive, inane, and with a sort of dogged masochistic persistence in the face of mockery.
If he is a CCHQ troll (and I'm cautious about accusing with no proof as I've had to deal with similar here), I wish they'd give him a break or rotate him around different websites or something - I feel sorry for the guy. It's a brutal shift pattern and on a very politically engaged site he's not forming opinions or persuading anyone.
Looking forward to Scott's contortions when he tries to enthuse pissed off Con voters to support GO in the forthcoming leadership elections. The ones he's spent the last 3 months mocking. Tough gig that one.
We are all open to influence. That is very different from saying that someone who can be influenced is lacking in honesty. Or that their honesty is in doubt - a serious charge. Such a charge should not be made without some evidence.
Leave should be questioning the assumptions and the figures and the methodologies not assuming that because some money was received from the EU (much as Messrs Farage and Hannan get their income from the EU) the person or institution making the analysis is therefore automatically not worth listening to.
I am largely in agreement with you, but when money changes hands and businesses are reliant on certain funders for contracts, it will always give rise to doubt.
There may be nothing substantive behind it, but the doubt will be there.
If Remain wins by, say, the latest ARSE projection, and were he to accept the result as binding for a generation, then my man at present could well be Michael Gove.
Lord Chancellor to Prime Minister .... actually a step down in the order of precedence but I'm sure Michael could bear the shame ....
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
JohnO - In 2019/20 who is your prefered candidate to succeed Cameron?
If Remain wins by, say, the latest ARSE projection, and were he to accept the result as binding for a generation, then my man at present could well be Michael Gove.
Just the sort of reasoned argument and debate I have come to expect from my fans, who keep boasting about how clever they are.
Oh dear.
You post dickish things, you write dickish things and you behave in a dickish way.
So you are, in short, a bit of a dick.
But that's ok - I'm sure you have some fans.
Somewhere.
Hmm, once upon a time you assured me that you would never engage in personal attacks.
Tbh, it's not easy being told by someone who isn't a member of any party how to proceed with the future of the Conservative party, of which both CR and I are members of and donate money to. Scott is a dick, he's not even funny like SeanT so he doesn't get a free pass for being a dick.
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Scott P is caustic, brutal and unrelenting on the referendum which is why he provokes the likes of Tyndale, Brookie, Casino et al into spluttering apoplexy: he's this site's Corporal Jones and they don't like it up 'em so they simply resort to crude personal abuse.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
Aww John.
I haven't attacked Scott on a personal front, Ive been enjoying subverting his posts too much. Anyone who can rubbish the Conservatives so comprehensively is an asset to the site.
I know but you have, sorry to say, been sounding like an effete Oxonian - must be all those letters after your name. And no, you can't borrow the camel.
Nah John it's Tory cage fight time - it's a wonder to behold. The more you point it out the stronger the denials get.
If Remain wins by, say, the latest ARSE projection, and were he to accept the result as binding for a generation, then my man at present could well be Michael Gove.
Lord Chancellor to Prime Minister .... actually a step down in the order of precedence but I'm sure Michael could bear the shame ....
Gove for COTE would be a better move. For my betfair account in particular.
I doubt it. If the result by then looks like it's done and dusted which appears quite likely, this is likely to depress turnout on both sides, on a why bother basis.
We are all open to influence. That is very different from saying that someone who can be influenced is lacking in honesty. Or that their honesty is in doubt - a serious charge. Such a charge should not be made without some evidence.
Leave should be questioning the assumptions and the figures and the methodologies not assuming that because some money was received from the EU (much as Messrs Farage and Hannan get their income from the EU) the person or institution making the analysis is therefore automatically not worth listening to.
I am largely in agreement with you, but when money changes hands and businesses are reliant on certain funders for contracts, it will always give rise to doubt.
There may be nothing substantive behind it, but the doubt will be there.
I'm more concerned that the ESRC are a quango funded by BIS. They're not looking for a neutral answer for their money. Wiki.
The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is one of the seven Research Councils in the United Kingdom. It receives most of its funding from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and provides funding and support for research and training work in social and economic issues, such as postgraduate degrees.
Comments
Vote to leave EU would 'condemn Britain to irrelevance', say historians
Letter signed by more than 300 prominent historians says voters can ‘stiffen cohesion of our continent in a dangerous world’
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/25/vote-to-leave-eu-will-condemn-britain-to-irrelevance-say-historians
I've called MalcolmG a bit of a dick before. He took it as a compliment.
If people are consistently rude, patronising and disrespectful to those on here who they disagree with, eventually I call them out on it.
I actually quite like MalcolmG. ScottP's worst crime is that he's just not very funny.
It wasn't 'armour bombers or fighters?'
It was 'where to armour bombers'.
I might do a piece this weekend. Leave: Fruitcakes led by donkeys
It's a problem with cast iron, too. Being rigid is great, but the moment the tipping point is reached, cast iron breaks apart almost without warning.
The whole point of the Italian legal system is to:-
(a) provide lucrative employment for lawyers. (Incidentally, never ask an Italian lawyer for written advice. Not worth the paper it's printed on. What they tell you informally is the only advice worth having.)
(b) cause pain to those embroiled in it to teach them a lesson
(c) but never finally come to a definitive conclusion thus preserving everyone's honour (as the pain imposed in (b) will be enough).
Never approach matters Italian from an Anglo-Saxon perspective. This is the land of Machiavelli and they are very much better at it than we are.
I speak from experience.
You have taken leave of your senses. If someone is on the payroll, their probity is always in doubt and it would be foolish to pretend that exactly the same wouldn't happen if the boot was on the other foot.
£25bn in Overseas Aid/EU contributions.
What kind of government wouldn't use it for it's own people in transition?
I doubt my history tutor would have rewarded that effort with high marks.
Assertion unsupported by argument, elision of 'Europe' and 'EU'......slogan versus substance 'stiffen cohesion'?
http://www.andrewlilico.com/2016/05/22/what-is-it-reasonable-to-believe-might-be-the-economic-impact-of-brexit/
The idea that all Leavers want to bring back IDS is something Scott continues to push, yet I have seen no evidence of that at any local meeting or at any VL event I've been to. However, I'm constantly being told that Eurosceptic Tories are in favour of bringing back IDS by someone who's not in the party. You know this as well as I do, there is no appetite from any side to bring in anyone like IDS, there may be a few die hard fools like Montie, but they are no where near the majority, or even any kind of minority.
Oh, and the Gatsby foundation, founded by Lord David Sainsbury, who donated £3.75 million to BSE.
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/735388081709326336
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/735387926440333312
As a Tory, do you or TSE think Labour MPs aren't influenced by unions?
.@David_Cameron appoints Alan Sugar as his enterprise tsar https://t.co/e9w8khr97f
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/fbcf81e4dd2761d48aba0b6da/files/23_May_2016_v2.pdf
Overstating the case like this makes people less inclined to listen when a genuine argument about a possible conflict of interest is made.
Labour have to learn these lessons and lessons from France, where the opposite has happened.
David Cameron on his new enterprise tsar Alan Sugar : "I can't bear him"
https://t.co/yxyd5Mpgt4
Be a Hoopy Frood not an old Slartibartfast.
http://towelday.org/
Or did Brexiteers have to dig this up for themselves?
Leave should be questioning the assumptions and the figures and the methodologies not assuming that because some money was received from the EU (much as Messrs Farage and Hannan get their income from the EU) the person or institution making the analysis is therefore automatically not worth listening to.
1. You clearly regard estate agents much more highly that I.
2. I am not a Tory.
3. The IFS isn't a political party and doesn't have MP's lobbying for it by association.
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/735391184093388800
The IFS is campaigning to keep their funding from EU like so many others.
I certainly do not agree with the proposition that all Tory Leavers want IDS back as leader: the figure is probably less than 1%, but the antics of some Tory backbench members (e.g. on the T-TIP NHS amendmenr last week) give worrying credence to the view that ousting Cameron is a higer priority than supporting a Conservative government.
I haven't attacked Scott on a personal front, Ive been enjoying subverting his posts too much. Anyone who can rubbish the Conservatives so comprehensively is an asset to the site.
I'd love some links on what armour was added to the engine nacelles of the B-17, B-24 & B-29, to name but three.
I don't recall ever pushing such a line.
I have said IDS is a poster boy for Brexiteers, they long for the heady days of failure under his leadership as they prefer that to winning under Cameron, I have noted when they praised his performance, and when others have been critical of his dreadful delivery, but those are not endorsements...
John, I can't say I disagree with that sentiment, however, on the weekend the PM gave an interview in which he implied that staying in the EU with a Labour government was preferable to being out of it with a Tory government. Going back to the exchange we had just a few days ago about a similar subject, I'm not sure what to think at the moment. You said I was being overly paranoid, I fear that I was just being realistic about our politicians' starry eyed europhillia.
Maybe if you were just a bit smarter or funnier people would like your posts more?
Not looking hopeful...
If he is a CCHQ troll (and I'm cautious about accusing with no proof as I've had to deal with similar here), I wish they'd give him a break or rotate him around different websites or something - I feel sorry for the guy. It's a brutal shift pattern and on a very politically engaged site he's not forming opinions or persuading anyone.
This thread is about YouGov, the previous thread was about ICM online.
What is interesting is Mrs Thatcher having spoken "every night" during the election. It is this tradecraft the SpAd generation of MPs on both sides typically lacks. They can't speak, they can't persuade, and a lot of them can't see any need to.
You are a clueless chump who sits on twitter all day and thinks that is what constitutes real life. I don't hate you or even dislike you, I just pity your dreadful existence.
When he's called out on it, Tory Brexiteers are then accused of personal abuse.
Of course, there's a good argument his provocations should be consistently ignored, lest everyone else is dragged into the mud, but it doesn't surprise me if people occasionally boil over in response to it.
Anyway, enough said on this matter from my PoV. Back to the day job.
I claim no credit for it
I can see why you want to pretend it didn't happen
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8297
There may be nothing substantive behind it, but the doubt will be there.
Official: Brexiteers like it quick, but Remainers take their time
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/25/official-brexiteers-like-it-quick-but-remainers-take-their-time/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is one of the seven Research Councils in the United Kingdom. It receives most of its funding from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and provides funding and support for research and training work in social and economic issues, such as postgraduate degrees.