Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
Not sure - there was an article penned a few days about this on the Huffingdon Post that was pulled, IIRC.
The linked story is about the HuffPo story, then it's turtles all the way down. It is hard to believe that Hillary would be indicted but Bill would not if the charge is that the Clinton Foundation is a racket.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Well here we are, right here, millions of us, sick and tired of the establishment and the obsequious sycophants that hang around on here parroting whatever they're told to parrot.
The referendum is actually little to do with the EU and everything to do with people having a voice.
I've little doubt that leaving the EU will be the wost decision this country has made in my lifetime. This is not voting on who should leave the big brother household. This will adversely affect everyone but particularly those under 40 who will miss out on so much that we've all taken for granted for decades.
It's time for everyone who has thought this through to go out and sell.
And fast.
The lunatics are taking over the asylum
In order for us to leave there needs to be about 15 million Lunatics, nice that you have such a high opinion of your fellow citizens, most of whom to be fair would not have dreamed of voting for leave if Blairite idiots had not opened the floodgates in the first place.
We are largely a tolerant live-and-let-live sort of people, had there been a steady flow of immigrants into the country of 100-150k per year, and more than proforma attempts to help them integrate, along with adequate increases in health and school provisions to support that increase I doubt we would be where we are now.
My big hope is that enough of those 15 million won't be able to drag themselves away from Jeremy Kyle long enough to vote
No wonder you moved to France, you have such a low opinion of your countrymen. We should feel honoured you're prepared to grace us with your presence.
If we do vote to Brexit I will in all probability be joining the retiree exodus whilst it's still an option.
Sorry mate, you'll be conscripted to round up everyone without blue eyes and herd them onto ferries. You ain't going nowhere.
A week after those ONS immigration stats, immigration has been the top EU matter in the media on (I guess) 6 of those 7 days. The question is, how many of the next 20 campaigning days will immigration still be the top EU matter?
What has Remain got left to replace it? As some of us pointed out at the time, they started their campaign like an Oban fireworks display...
"Rural depopulation has taken place though, with former low value cottages now occupied by weekenders "
Lincolnshire is different to the twee places in the South. Boston has seen a massive population rise. Lincolnshire is an industrial county, but the industry is agriculture.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
The genius of basing a campaign on GO's sage wisdom and popularity
The linked story is about the HuffPo story, then it's turtles all the way down. It is hard to believe that Hillary would be indicted but Bill would not if the charge is that the Clinton Foundation is a racket.
That foundation was funded in the 2000s by a billionaire casino owner who from 2001 to 2009 supported the Democratic Party and was friends with its leading figures including the Clintons. His name? Donald Trump.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
yes, you should, so proving the very real physical reality of probability, in goats and cars.
The proof is that you have a 1/3 chance of picking the car. In that case, the host can choose either other door to reveal a goat and if you switch you'll pick the other goat. Result: lose. probability 1/3.
if you don't pick the car, then the host must choose the other goat meaning that the third door must have the car behind it. The probability of not picking the car is 2/3.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
Would the [electronic] media be allowed to report on a run on the pound if it happened on the 23rd?
They could certainly report it but I imagine that comment about why it was happening would be pretty limited.
Agreed. But people just have to key in "GBP USD" at Google. They won't be able to hide it.
What they would try to avoid reporting or commenting about would be when people go en masse to bank branches and draw lots of money out, fearing a bank crash: a run on the banks, not just a run on the pound.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
I got through the first hour or so of the film 21 at the weekend, which includes that question (aka the Monty Hall problem). Then I gave up waiting for anything interesting to happen.
The interesting thing about that problem is that you get different answers in Britain and America, because the answer depends on hidden assumptions about the behaviour of the host (and Americans know how it works on the telly). Americans tend to say it is 1/3 vs 2/3 so swap. Britons tend to say it is 50/50 so it makes no difference. The difference is whether the host can open a door with the car behind it.
Well here we are, right here, millions of us, sick and tired of the establishment and the obsequious sycophants that hang around on here parroting whatever they're told to parrot.
The referendum is actually little to do with the EU and everything to do with people having a voice.
So let's burn the house down...
Awesome plan.
Remain has a better plan? Fill the house until it crashes down under the weight of its occupiers?
It's not very exciting - the bits that were trailed are the only remotely eyebrow-raising points and the overall flavour is syumpathetic. By and large people will get out of it what they expected - Jez fans will be reminded what a genuinely nice man he is and how supporters love him, sceptics will pick up the low-key flavour and pessimism outside the ranks of supporters.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
On immigration, I think it's perfectly possible to reduce net migration to between 100-200k per year, focussing on high-skilled migration, by restricting work permits and visas, withdrawing from the EU, and qualifying, or withdrawing, from the ECHR that gives, for example, the right to family life. Migration bonds would also help.
I don't think it's economically possible to go much beneath that but less than 1 million every 5 years would be a manageable number I think and could command broad public support if we were clearly in control of the numbers and built the infrastructure to cope with it.
As someone on the Beeb made clear last night there are jobs, especially in rural areas, where there just aren’t enough locals to do them, even allowing for bussing people in from “nearby” towns.
Then wages will rise, and probably prices, or the structure of the rural economy will change to higher value-add products. Which it probably will anyway once we are out of CAP and the tariff walls on agriculture produce from outside the EU comes down.
The only thing inevitable about economics is change in the structure of the economy.
I am very comfortable with that.
Economics does indeed involve change; I suspect that what will happen is contained in your first clause, much to the displeasure of town dweller. While I suspect that you are right, and tariffs on non-EU food products will fall, I don’t there’ll be enough, at least in the short-term, to prevent price rises in the shops.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
IDS, Gove, Boris aren't Tory scum?
I thought that was his point.
Ah, right.
So, Cameron and Osborne aren't Tory scum?
If that is how you perceive them, that is your view and says more about you than them. But using such nasty words comes so easily from some folk supporting REMAIN on here.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
Nope. Stop making stuff up. Those who said it would lead to the EFTA route were in a distinct minority amongst Leavers on here. You could probably count them on one hand. And of those at least some of them still believe that EFTA will be the eventual result. Indeed if you remember I have a bet on with you on the very subject.
If that is the end result, I doubt your other prediction of UKIP having served its purpose and disappearing will come true. There will be howls of betrayal if nothing changes on free movement after a Leave vote.
On immigration, I think it's perfectly possible to reduce net migration to between 100-200k per year, focussing on high-skilled migration, by restricting work permits and visas, withdrawing from the EU, and qualifying, or withdrawing, from the ECHR that gives, for example, the right to family life. Migration bonds would also help.
I don't think it's economically possible to go much beneath that but less than 1 million every 5 years would be a manageable number I think and could command broad public support if we were clearly in control of the numbers and built the infrastructure to cope with it.
As someone on the Beeb made clear last night there are jobs, especially in rural areas, where there just aren’t enough locals to do them, even allowing for bussing people in from “nearby” towns.
Then wages will rise, and probably prices, or the structure of the rural economy will change to higher value-add products. Which it probably will anyway once we are out of CAP and the tariff walls on agriculture produce from outside the EU comes down.
The only thing inevitable about economics is change in the structure of the economy.
I am very comfortable with that.
Economics does indeed involve change; I suspect that what will happen is contained in your first clause, much to the displeasure of town dweller. While I suspect that you are right, and tariffs on non-EU food products will fall, I don’t there’ll be enough, at least in the short-term, to prevent price rises in the shops.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
IDS, Gove, Boris aren't Tory scum?
Go out and about and ask some Labour voters... It's Hobson's choice - will you support Cameron and Osborne by voting to Remain? * Euuuugggghhhhh.... * Or support IDS, Gove and Boris by voting to Leave *Looks at shoes, mumbles, throws up a little bit of sick...*
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
It's even worse than I heard. Holy Moly.
Isn't she the charmer who called a voter racist and said she would never go back to where ever this is the other week?
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
So we have David in the Bayesian corner! Compared to a frequentalist.
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
My guide in all this has been "What would Mrs Duffy do?"
It's not very exciting - the bits that were trailed are the only remotely eyebrow-raising points and the overall flavour is syumpathetic. By and large people will get out of it what they expected - Jez fans will be reminded what a genuinely nice man he is and how supporters love him, sceptics will pick up the low-key flavour and pessimism outside the ranks of supporters.
The documentary opens with I am a Labour Party member and voted for Jeremy...so no surprise it is sympathetic. I guess at least the journo is honest in his bias.
Now that he doesn't speak to anybody from Sky, Mail, Telegraph, Times, Sun and only the Guardian / BBC if they are promise to be nice. I suppose he can add Vice to Press TV as go to media outlets.
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
It's even worse than I heard. Holy Moly.
Isn't she the charmer who called a voter racist and said she would never go back to where ever this is the other week?
New Corbynista strategy = "We hate a lot of our voters".
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
It's even worse than I heard. Holy Moly.
Isn't she the charmer who called a voter racist and said she would never go back to where ever this is the other week?
New Corbynista strategy = "We hate a lot of our voters".
The Labour Leave number is starting to climb steadily upwards.
Perhaps it is Scotland again?
As I've said repeatedly, it's the number to watch. But probably the full extent won't be apparent until the result comes out. Lots of reasons for there to be shy Labour Leavers, "siding with the Tory scum..."
IDS, Gove, Boris aren't Tory scum?
Go out and about and ask some Labour voters... It's Hobson's choice - will you support Cameron and Osborne by voting to Remain? * Euuuugggghhhhh.... * Or support IDS, Gove and Boris by voting to Leave *Looks at shoes, mumbles, throws up a little bit of sick...*
Go out and about and ask some Labour voters... will you support Cameron and Osborne by voting to Remain and to keep them in office?
Or "vote LEAVE and it will cause turmoil in the Conservative Govt and they may have to call a GE."
All caused by the strategy of having Cameron and Osborne front the Remain campaign.
I can't help thinking some Remain posters here are actually hoping for economic collapse in the event of a Leave vote.
I think they'll be disappointed.
Quite so.
All very revealing, the sheer nastiness of some people has been surprising.
Is it? I've found so-called liberals turn very nasty indeed when their interests are threatened.
I think it is a symptom of their faith being challenged and their being forced to defend it. Their arguments are remarkable in their constant appeals to authority and faith in economists, a profession utterly discredited only recently.
Furthermore, their concern for people has been shown to be disguised self-interest, thus the constant attempts to simply not talk about immigration. Perhaps they shouldn't have had massive immigration forecasts in their economic projections?
Despite being 99% highly polite on Twitter - I get the most bizarre shouty, aggressive and insulting stuff from some Lefties. Particularly those with an NHS heart twibbon.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
It's even worse than I heard. Holy Moly.
Isn't she the charmer who called a voter racist and said she would never go back to where ever this is the other week?
New Corbynista strategy = "We hate a lot of our voters".
I can't help thinking some Remain posters here are actually hoping for economic collapse in the event of a Leave vote.
I think they'll be disappointed.
Quite so.
All very revealing, the sheer nastiness of some people has been surprising.
Is it? I've found so-called liberals turn very nasty indeed when their interests are threatened.
I think it is a symptom of their faith being challenged and their being forced to defend it. Their arguments are remarkable in their constant appeals to authority and faith in economists, a profession utterly discredited only recently.
Furthermore, their concern for people has been shown to be disguised self-interest, thus the constant attempts to simply not talk about immigration. Perhaps they shouldn't have had massive immigration forecasts in their economic projections?
Despite being 99% highly polite on Twitter - I get the most bizarre shouty, aggressive and insulting stuff from some Lefties. Particularly those with an NHS heart twibbon.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
I think we can all agree that lefties and liberals really are disgusting lowlife. I just wish I could be a better person than I am. But I was born this way: a vile leftie; cursed to be that way until the day I die. I so envy the pure, good people of the right :-D
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
Just spent nearly half an hour watching a Labour Remainer leafleting on Poole High St. 3 people took a leaflet, 2 more made positive noises. 5 people took a leaflet then retuned it, some making 20 yard journeys back just to make their point. Over 50 people waved it off dismissively; I heard more than 10 of them say they were voting Leave.
Even accounting for the usual 'I'm not wanting to talk about politics' factor which I've experienced myself around here, and the geneal demographic of 11am shoppers in Poole, this gee'd me up to plump for the 40-45 and under 40 % remain bands on BF. DYOR!
I can't help thinking some Remain posters here are actually hoping for economic collapse in the event of a Leave vote.
I think they'll be disappointed.
Quite so.
All very revealing, the sheer nastiness of some people has been surprising.
Is it? I've found so-called liberals turn very nasty indeed when their interests are threatened.
I think it is a symptom of their faith being challenged and their being forced to defend it. Their arguments are remarkable in their constant appeals to authority and faith in economists, a profession utterly discredited only recently.
Furthermore, their concern for people has been shown to be disguised self-interest, thus the constant attempts to simply not talk about immigration. Perhaps they shouldn't have had massive immigration forecasts in their economic projections?
Despite being 99% highly polite on Twitter - I get the most bizarre shouty, aggressive and insulting stuff from some Lefties. Particularly those with an NHS heart twibbon.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
I think we can all agree that lefties and liberals really are disgusting lowlife. I just wish I could be a better person than I am. But I was born this way: a vile leftie; cursed to be that way until the day I die. I so envy the pure, good people of the right :-D
It doesn't have to be that way. Change is possible.... Although, thinking about it, in your case - being a capitalist leftie - that's a bit of a stretch.
The UK has a massive balance of trade deficit because its exports are not sufficiently competitive and imports are cheap.
The traditional way to correct the position is to devalue the currency, making exports cheaper and imports more expensive.
The only downside would normally be the increase in inflation due to highjer inport costs. However, when inflation is 0.3% and target inflation is 2%, any fall in sterling just helps to raise inflation to target.
So a fall in the sterling exchange rate should surely be welcomed by economists and the government?
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
How to cr*p on your supporters, the Ratner approach to politics from the Labour party.
At times like this - I wonder if some Labour MPs have actually met any of their voters.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
He has told you something, he opened a door with a goat. If he could open the door with the car, things would be different.
I can't help thinking some Remain posters here are actually hoping for economic collapse in the event of a Leave vote.
I think they'll be disappointed.
Quite so.
All very revealing, the sheer nastiness of some people has been surprising.
Is it? I've found so-called liberals turn very nasty indeed when their interests are threatened.
I think it is a symptom of their faith being challenged and their being forced to defend it. Their arguments are remarkable in their constant appeals to authority and faith in economists, a profession utterly discredited only recently.
Furthermore, their concern for people has been shown to be disguised self-interest, thus the constant attempts to simply not talk about immigration. Perhaps they shouldn't have had massive immigration forecasts in their economic projections?
Despite being 99% highly polite on Twitter - I get the most bizarre shouty, aggressive and insulting stuff from some Lefties. Particularly those with an NHS heart twibbon.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
Being a lefty is not synonymous with being a liberal. Being liberal means being anti authoritarian.
The Labour party and far left are strongly in favour of government being authoritarian.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
I can't help thinking some Remain posters here are actually hoping for economic collapse in the event of a Leave vote.
I think they'll be disappointed.
Quite so.
All very revealing, the sheer nastiness of some people has been surprising.
Is it? I've found so-called liberals turn very nasty indeed when their interests are threatened.
I think it is a symptom of their faith being challenged and their being forced to defend it. Their arguments are remarkable in their constant appeals to authority and faith in economists, a profession utterly discredited only recently.
Furthermore, their concern for people has been shown to be disguised self-interest, thus the constant attempts to simply not talk about immigration. Perhaps they shouldn't have had massive immigration forecasts in their economic projections?
Despite being 99% highly polite on Twitter - I get the most bizarre shouty, aggressive and insulting stuff from some Lefties. Particularly those with an NHS heart twibbon.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
I think we can all agree that lefties and liberals really are disgusting lowlife. I just wish I could be a better person than I am. But I was born this way: a vile leftie; cursed to be that way until the day I die. I so envy the pure, good people of the right :-D
Funnily enough I just watched a youtube video featuring the female and remainer director of the CBI. The comments underneath were vile misogyny and anti-semitic - the EU is controlled by Jews. There's nastiness on both sides I'm sure. How you quantify the amount of it I don't know. All I do know is that I can't take seriously anyone who claims that their own side are paragons and the other is evil.
Nope. Stop making stuff up. Those who said it would lead to the EFTA route were in a distinct minority amongst Leavers on here. You could probably count them on one hand. And of those at least some of them still believe that EFTA will be the eventual result. Indeed if you remember I have a bet on with you on the very subject.
If that is the end result, I doubt your other prediction of UKIP having served its purpose and disappearing will come true. There will be howls of betrayal if nothing changes on free movement after a Leave vote.
I think you are right unfortunately. All I can say as I always have is that I know which result would be best for the UK in the long run in my opinion and of the three available options EFTA/EEA strikes me as the best and remaining in the EU strikes me as the worst.
Headline in today's (Wolverhampton) Express and Star, "Britain's Best Selling Regional Newspaper" "Old? White? You are the problem. Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station, adding, 'Go and speak to your mother, your grandmother. Don't speak to your grandfather, we know the problem are older white men'. The comments were met with muted laughter. Mr McDonnell appeared to sit back and wince when Ms Glass made the remark."
How to cr*p on your supporters, the Ratner approach to politics from the Labour party.
At times like this - I wonder if some Labour MPs have actually met any of their voters.
This is/was a problem in many solid Labour seats, as NickP testified when he found almost no canvassing data at some by elections.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
David is mounting the Bayesian challenge.
Say we flip the coin 1000 times, all heads.
We contract the proposition: Is this coin fair?. Since p < ~0, we reject the hypothesis. Therefore the coin cannot be taken as fair and the whole reasoning collapses.
Just on the thread topic and I expect this point has already been made but I haven't time to read the thread surely basing such decisions on an exit poll up to 4pm is risking disaster. Early voting will be dominated by Brexit supporting oldies. Younger people voting later, postal voters etc could well swing things back to Remain.
And on the bank holiday/half term polling more mobile people and maybe Remain supporting would be off and away and not answering phones.
If Leave does win - and I'm starting to think they might - I wonder how long it will take for the first Brexit moan story to appear in the Daily Mail. It's got to happen. Rural communities being devastated because of a lack of CAP subsidies? Chaos at the Passport Office as people wait six months for their EU visa? (Mail readers will soon get bored with their Brexit utopia and will be after new things to curse.)
Since money out > Money back CAP subsidies could be kept - if needed. Alternatively farms could start growing food rather than soil banking. There won't be an EU visa - after all until recently when going to America you filled in a (green) form en-route - if they didn't need a visa for the UK, why would the EU?
Scaremongering might work in The Guardian or Morning Star, but give the readership of PB SOME brains.
You are assuming that there will be no negative impact from Brexit - that government income will either stay as forecast or rise. If it doesn't, then any money we save on our EU contributions will be used to fill gaps that a lower tax take will create in spending that has already been planned for. Again, this is a situation where we just have to hope that Leave has called it right.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
Only if it's a fair coin. If it comes up heads 1000 times in a row it almost certainly isn't.
If you are saying "ah, but actually it is a fair coin" then you are adding some new information that we didn't originally have.
Mr. Booth, Youtube comments are often rather extreme.
Speaking of such things, the delay to No Man's Sky (a videogame) prompted death threats for both the developers and for some journalists who reported it.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
He has told you something, he opened a door with a goat. If he could open the door with the car, things would be different.
No -- as I said earlier, it depends whether the host *intended* to show you a goat or whether he opened a random door that just happened to have a goat behind it.
"Rural depopulation has taken place though, with former low value cottages now occupied by weekenders "
Lincolnshire is different to the twee places in the South. Boston has seen a massive population rise. Lincolnshire is an industrial county, but the industry is agriculture.
Ditto Norfolk - and that's very eurosceptic too. When I worked there a decade ago - there were 30 000 Portuguese plucking chickens et al, and almost as many assorted Eastern Europeans.
The behind the scenes Corbyn documentary, Team Corbyn look very amateurish. But it generally very dull.
Basically, Corbyn goes from event to event where he only meets people who love him and want selfies, but when he is at the HoC few like him and his team are a bunch of amateurs.
He really hates the media though. Even the Vice News guy who is a Corbyn supporter gets the boot twice.
He won't last under the pressure of a GE campaign, as he gets really shirty and the famous Corbyn temper comes out with even the Vice News guy who asks one hard-ish question.
>"Old? White? You are the problem. >Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station
I love that.
Did anyone ask her the age of Corbyn and McDonnell?
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
Only if it's a fair coin. If it comes up heads 1000 times in a row it almost certainly isn't.
If you are saying "ah, but actually it is a fair coin" then you are adding some new information that we didn't originally have.
I'm not sure you understand. The chances of 1000 on the trot are quite high, the price on the 1001st toss is evens.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
Actually assuming the host was always going to open a door a show you goat, and that door was neither the one you picked, nor the one you could change to, your original chance was 50% and it remains so.
I had a neighbour who had a contract with the council to keep the grass short on a plot of land.
Leave seems to be tightening a bit on the exchanges - does anybody have any sense of which opinion polls we are likely to exepct to be released over next 48 hours, and on what sort of time schedule?
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Of course you switch! But I can't see how the Monty Hall problem addresses whether you are or are not "talking crap". Otherwise I agree with you. Probabilities are subjective. Note that I said "it is said" precisely for that reason. My point however was about possible movement in the exchange rate on the assumption that people are working on a .7 hypothesis.
Yeah - I dismissed that as part of my Economics degree. It's actually bound to fail: the better will always run out of money at some point. IIRC (and it's 20 years ago), any attempt to double the size of the fund incurs a 50%+ risk of being wiped out at some point.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
Only if it's a fair coin. If it comes up heads 1000 times in a row it almost certainly isn't.
If you are saying "ah, but actually it is a fair coin" then you are adding some new information that we didn't originally have.
I'm not sure you understand. The chances of 1000 on the trot are quite high, the price on the 1001st toss is evens.
Only if it's a fair coin. If it's a double-headed coin then the probability of a tail is 0.
In the question you originally put we don't know if the coin is fair or not. It is very likely (given the 1000 heads) that it is not.
I've little doubt that leaving the EU will be the wost decision this country has made in my lifetime. This is not voting on who should leave the big brother household. This will adversely affect everyone but particularly those under 40 who will miss out on so much that we've all taken for granted for decades.
It's time for everyone who has thought this through to go out and sell.
And fast.
The lunatics are taking over the asylum
In order for us to leave there needs to be about 15 million Lunatics, nice that you have such a high opinion of your fellow citizens, most of whom to be fair would not have dreamed of voting for leave if Blairite idiots had not opened the floodgates in the first place.
We are largely a tolerant live-and-let-live sort of people, had there been a steady flow of immigrants into the country of 100-150k per year, and more than proforma attempts to help them integrate, along with adequate increases in health and school provisions to support that increase I doubt we would be where we are now.
My big hope is that enough of those 15 million won't be able to drag themselves away from Jeremy Kyle long enough to vote
No wonder you moved to France, you have such a low opinion of your countrymen. We should feel honoured you're prepared to grace us with your presence.
If we do vote to Brexit I will in all probability be joining the retiree exodus whilst it's still an option.
Sorry mate, you'll be conscripted to round up everyone without blue eyes and herd them onto ferries. You ain't going nowhere.
Too late, application for residence elsewhere already in hand, I'm a cautious sort of person like to have all the bases covered!
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
Just spent nearly half an hour watching a Labour Remainer leafleting on Poole High St. 3 people took a leaflet, 2 more made positive noises. 5 people took a leaflet then retuned it, some making 20 yard journeys back just to make their point. Over 50 people waved it off dismissively; I heard more than 10 of them say they were voting Leave.
Even accounting for the usual 'I'm not wanting to talk about politics' factor which I've experienced myself around here, and the geneal demographic of 11am shoppers in Poole, this gee'd me up to plump for the 40-45 and under 40 % remain bands on BF. DYOR!
Wish I could recall the article - may be in The Times re Labour MPs not canvassing for Remain, even in their own seats. They know it's a nightmare and don't want to be tarred with it.
If Leave does win - and I'm starting to think they might - I wonder how long it will take for the first Brexit moan story to appear in the Daily Mail. It's got to happen. Rural communities being devastated because of a lack of CAP subsidies? Chaos at the Passport Office as people wait six months for their EU visa? (Mail readers will soon get bored with their Brexit utopia and will be after new things to curse.)
Since money out > Money back CAP subsidies could be kept - if needed. Alternatively farms could start growing food rather than soil banking. There won't be an EU visa - after all until recently when going to America you filled in a (green) form en-route - if they didn't need a visa for the UK, why would the EU?
Scaremongering might work in The Guardian or Morning Star, but give the readership of PB SOME brains.
You are assuming that there will be no negative impact from Brexit - that government income will either stay as forecast or rise. If it doesn't, then any money we save on our EU contributions will be used to fill gaps that a lower tax take will create in spending that has already been planned for. Again, this is a situation where we just have to hope that Leave has called it right.
If that was really an issue then Osborne would have resigned over his £4bn shortfall this year. In reality the BoE will step in and increase QE by around £50bn to cover any fiscal shortfalls for the next couple of years.
We are a nation that can and has monetised its debt, the idea that an additional £30-40bn in government debt on our £1.5tn pile will make even the blindest bit of difference is misguided at best and stupid at worst.
REMAIN's strategy director speaks... Ryan Coetzee @RyanCoetzee "The Leave people really are wreckers, aren't they? Happy to wreck the British economy, wreck the EU, wreck their own parties."
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
He has told you something, he opened a door with a goat. If he could open the door with the car, things would be different.
No -- as I said earlier, it depends whether the host *intended* to show you a goat or whether he opened a random door that just happened to have a goat behind it.
Just spent nearly half an hour watching a Labour Remainer leafleting on Poole High St. 3 people took a leaflet, 2 more made positive noises. 5 people took a leaflet then retuned it, some making 20 yard journeys back just to make their point. Over 50 people waved it off dismissively; I heard more than 10 of them say they were voting Leave.
Even accounting for the usual 'I'm not wanting to talk about politics' factor which I've experienced myself around here, and the geneal demographic of 11am shoppers in Poole, this gee'd me up to plump for the 40-45 and under 40 % remain bands on BF. DYOR!
Wish I could recall the article - may be in The Times re Labour MPs not canvassing for Remain, even in their own seats. They know it's a nightmare and don't want to be tarred with it.
If you find it, might be worth HYUFD having a read. He is convinced that this referendum won't hurt Labour at all....
REMAIN's strategy director speaks... Ryan Coetzee @RyanCoetzee "The Leave people really are wreckers, aren't they? Happy to wreck the British economy, wreck the EU, wreck their own parties."
I do like the hysterical reaction from the Remain side about Leave wanting to reduce migration, I think it all smacks of hypocrisy and the "RAAAACIST" chants aren't working because Dave spent over half of his renegotiation time on getting measures to reduce migration and the stated government target is "tens of thousands". It rings very hollow to ordinary people which is why the polls seem to be swinging in favour of Leave recently. It's such an easy rebuttal for Leave when anyone on the Remain side shouts and screams about racism, as SO has pointed out, it may be the one issue that wins it for Leave.
On leave vote the pound is expected to fall by 10-15% against the dollar but I would expect a similar fall in the euro but as I am not an expert does anyone have a view on this
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Good post, few understand probability, even fewer value.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
Almost certainly zero.
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
Maybe, but its still evens.
It's not though is it. You're assuming that the coin is fair and unbiased, is as the toss. Neither need necessarily be true.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
It doesn't matter how many times you toss a coin or what the ensuing result is, every time you toss it it is evens tails and evens heads. There are no possible interfering factors, it is a 50/50 outcome.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
Only if it's a fair coin. If it comes up heads 1000 times in a row it almost certainly isn't.
If you are saying "ah, but actually it is a fair coin" then you are adding some new information that we didn't originally have.
I'm not sure you understand. The chances of 1000 on the trot are quite high, the price on the 1001st toss is evens.
If someone bought a single ticket for the Euromillions lottery every draw, and won 38 weeks in a row (which is roughly the same odds as 1000 heads coming up in a row on a standard coin toss), would you conclude:
REMAIN's strategy director speaks... Ryan Coetzee @RyanCoetzee "The Leave people really are wreckers, aren't they? Happy to wreck the British economy, wreck the EU, wreck their own parties."
Yeah - I dismissed that as part of my Economics degree. It's actually bound to fail: the better will always run out of money at some point. IIRC (and it's 20 years ago), any attempt to double the size of the fund incurs a 50%+ risk of being wiped out at some point.
A few years ago I was being entertained in a marquee, a bloke at our table announced a sure fire winning system (it was martingale) and I agreed to take his bets to save him walking to the ring. After 3 losers he gave up.
On leave vote the pound is expected to fall by 10-15% against the dollar but I would expect a similar fall in the euro but as I am not an expert does anyone have a view on this
EUR falls about 5-8 points if we leave, Sterling about 10-12 points. We need the weaker currency tbh, our current account deficit is absolutely dire, shitty for tourists but a reduction in our buying power may stem our addiction to imports.
At present it is said that the probability of remain is around 0.70.
No it isn't. It's said that that's the view of the betting markets, or to be more exact, the view of the money that's been placed with general-purpose mass-market bookmakers.
Probability is not a physical reality that can be measured, whether accurately or otherwise. There is no "real" probability of Remain or Leave.
If people think I'm talking crap, they should try the following problem.
You're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind one is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick door no.1. The host, who knows what's behind all three doors, then opens another one, no. 2, to reveal a goat. He then asks whether you want to change your choice to no.3. Should you switch or not?
Yes, you should switch. It increases your chances of winning the car by 16 2/3 %.
Next.
Actually, it doubles your chances.
It makes no difference at all, unless you believe the host is trying to tell you something or mislead you. Your chance of success was 33.3%, and now it's 50%, but the position is exactly the same as if there had been only two doors to start with.
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
I have always had a problem with this because I have read more than once that if you change your chances of winning are greater. But not changing is also a choice on the new facts of 2 doors. I have never understood how that choice is any less valid than changing.
I have always had a problem with this because I have read more than once that if you change your chances of winning are greater. But not changing is also a choice on the new facts of 2 doors. I have never understood how that choice is any less valid than changing.
It depends entirely on the actions and motives of the host.
Without knowing what the host will do, the classic interpretation is that your first pick has 33% chance of being a car
But if you know in advance the host is going to show you a goat, your first pick has 50% chance of being a car, so no value in changing
I have always had a problem with this because I have read more than once that if you change your chances of winning are greater. But not changing is also a choice on the new facts of 2 doors. I have never understood how that choice is any less valid than changing.
It depends entirely on the actions and motives of the host.
Without knowing what the host will do, the classic interpretation is that your first pick has 33% chance of being a car
But if you know in advance the host is going to show you a goat, your first pick has 50% chance of being a car, so no value in changing
No less counterintuitive though. But that's kinda the point, it's designed to challenge the nature of probability.
Comments
Next.
Awesome plan.
Glad you're well.
"Rural depopulation has taken place though, with former low value cottages now occupied by weekenders "
Lincolnshire is different to the twee places in the South. Boston has seen a massive population rise. Lincolnshire is an industrial county, but the industry is agriculture.
So, Cameron and Osborne aren't Tory scum?
The proof is that you have a 1/3 chance of picking the car. In that case, the host can choose either other door to reveal a goat and if you switch you'll pick the other goat. Result: lose. probability 1/3.
if you don't pick the car, then the host must choose the other goat meaning that the third door must have the car behind it. The probability of not picking the car is 2/3.
If it is happening what possible grounds would there be for trying to censor the information?
What they would try to avoid reporting or commenting about would be when people go en masse to bank branches and draw lots of money out, fearing a bank crash: a run on the banks, not just a run on the pound.
A simpler question is if you flip a coin 1000 times and every time it comes up heads, what price is tails next time? Watch the furrowed brows.
The interesting thing about that problem is that you get different answers in Britain and America, because the answer depends on hidden assumptions about the behaviour of the host (and Americans know how it works on the telly). Americans tend to say it is 1/3 vs 2/3 so swap. Britons tend to say it is 50/50 so it makes no difference. The difference is whether the host can open a door with the car behind it.
https://news.vice.com/video/jeremy-corbyn-the-outsider
It's not very exciting - the bits that were trailed are the only remotely eyebrow-raising points and the overall flavour is syumpathetic. By and large people will get out of it what they expected - Jez fans will be reminded what a genuinely nice man he is and how supporters love him, sceptics will pick up the low-key flavour and pessimism outside the ranks of supporters.
In a fly-on-the-wall documentary, Seumas Milne said the "annoying" leaks from his top team were handing an advantage to the Conservatives.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36423619
Mossad agents?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox
The odds on a fair coin coming up heads 1000 times in a row are so negligible as to be irrelevant (about 10^-300, I think, which is about the same as picking a specific atom in the entire universe - and then doing it again three times).
If a coin comes up heads 1000 times in a row, I'd conclude that it has two heads.
36.8% TNS (net)
34.7% ICM (net)
34.5% Yougov (net)
34.0% ORB (phone)
33.0% BMG (net)
30.9% Yougov (phone)
30.2% Ipsos (phone)
30.0% Survation (phone)
22.0% Comres (phone)
Comres is some time ago now, and it won't be too long before someone hits 40% on this.
Now that he doesn't speak to anybody from Sky, Mail, Telegraph, Times, Sun and only the Guardian / BBC if they are promise to be nice. I suppose he can add Vice to Press TV as go to media outlets.
Or "vote LEAVE and it will cause turmoil in the Conservative Govt and they may have to call a GE."
All caused by the strategy of having Cameron and Osborne front the Remain campaign.
It's really quite something. Someone who runs their own PR business branded all Leavers as racist xenophobes a bit earlier. We made fun of her with kitten pix and she disappeared. I remain perplexed by this sort of routine abuse re c50% of the electorate.
Had you said 10 heads in a row (a 0.1% shot), I'd be far more inclined to accept a 50% chance of a tails next time.
Just spent nearly half an hour watching a Labour Remainer leafleting on Poole High St. 3 people took a leaflet, 2 more made positive noises. 5 people took a leaflet then retuned it, some making 20 yard journeys back just to make their point. Over 50 people waved it off dismissively; I heard more than 10 of them say they were voting Leave.
Even accounting for the usual 'I'm not wanting to talk about politics' factor which I've experienced myself around here, and the geneal demographic of 11am shoppers in Poole, this gee'd me up to plump for the 40-45 and under 40 % remain bands on BF. DYOR!
The traditional way to correct the position is to devalue the currency, making exports cheaper and imports more expensive.
The only downside would normally be the increase in inflation due to highjer inport costs. However, when inflation is 0.3% and target inflation is 2%, any fall in sterling just helps to raise inflation to target.
So a fall in the sterling exchange rate should surely be welcomed by economists and the government?
Mind you, living in car-unfriendly Islington, I'd be much better off in terms of the reaction of passers-by if I had a nice goat.
Being a lefty is not synonymous with being a liberal. Being liberal means being anti authoritarian.
The Labour party and far left are strongly in favour of government being authoritarian.
Until or unless you grasp that you really shouldn't be betting.
Say we flip the coin 1000 times, all heads.
We contract the proposition: Is this coin fair?. Since p < ~0, we reject the hypothesis. Therefore the coin cannot be taken as fair and the whole reasoning collapses.
And on the bank holiday/half term polling more mobile people and maybe Remain supporting would be off and away and not answering phones.
If you are saying "ah, but actually it is a fair coin" then you are adding some new information that we didn't originally have.
Speaking of such things, the delay to No Man's Sky (a videogame) prompted death threats for both the developers and for some journalists who reported it.
Basically, Corbyn goes from event to event where he only meets people who love him and want selfies, but when he is at the HoC few like him and his team are a bunch of amateurs.
He really hates the media though. Even the Vice News guy who is a Corbyn supporter gets the boot twice.
He won't last under the pressure of a GE campaign, as he gets really shirty and the famous Corbyn temper comes out with even the Vice News guy who asks one hard-ish question.
>Labour's shadow Europe minister described old white men as 'the problem' over the EU referendum at a rally in Wolverhampton. Pat Glass made the remarks as she spoke alongside shadow chancellor John McDonnell, Rob Marris and Guardian columnist Owen Jones at the city's Grand Station
I love that.
Did anyone ask her the age of Corbyn and McDonnell?
I had a neighbour who had a contract with the council to keep the grass short on a plot of land.
He bought a goat.
In the question you originally put we don't know if the coin is fair or not. It is very likely (given the 1000 heads) that it is not.
Mr. Observer, but then we get into sensible lefties like you, and lunatics like McDonnell and Corbyn. I suspect you're the better bettor.
We are a nation that can and has monetised its debt, the idea that an additional £30-40bn in government debt on our £1.5tn pile will make even the blindest bit of difference is misguided at best and stupid at worst.
Ryan Coetzee @RyanCoetzee
"The Leave people really are wreckers, aren't they? Happy to wreck the British economy, wreck the EU, wreck their own parties."
Guido’s favourite recent tweet from the campaigner who oversaw the loss of 85% of the LibDem parliamentary party:
http://order-order.com/2016/06/01/lyin-ryan-losin-it/
Very odd considering the polls haven't really moved.
https://m.facebook.com/rhea4nec/posts/1742021402677271
a. The person is lucky, or
b. The draw is rigged?
Without knowing what the host will do, the classic interpretation is that your first pick has 33% chance of being a car
But if you know in advance the host is going to show you a goat, your first pick has 50% chance of being a car, so no value in changing