People who aren’t privately educated are "... thickos" !! A rather telling and unpleasant comment, in my opinion.
I can understand that as a child at 12, you normally follow your parent’s wishes.
I can also understand that even at 16, when you may be old enough to choose for yourself, you might not fully understand the implications of any choice of school you make.
I can also understand (Shami’s excuse) that schooling for a child is a joint choice of both parents.
And I can also understand that people change, and you may now regret choices you made when you were younger, you may for example regret being privately educated.
However, I do think -- if you have opted out of the state system (as Shami and Diane have), then you lose the right to comment on the state system. It is not your concern, your kids are not being educated in the state system, and you should not comment volubly on the matter (as Shami and even TSE have done).
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
In particular note that Trump can't lose, he can only be sabotaged, so if Trump appears to be losing on election day, that's proof of sabotage, and Trump enthusiasts spoil their down-ticket ballots.
They really have let loose a monster haven't they?
Trump's PA rally was extraordinary, venue full to capacity and thousands in overflow - queued for up to six hours to get in. The press pack were loudly booed as they came in, Trump kept getting the audience to turn round and heckle them. Chanting of FCUK CNN and Jail Her!!
I'm not sure how productive abusing the press corp is going to be for Trump.
They have never been for him anyway - so what he says about them doesn't matter.
I keep thinking ..from what I read on here that Trump is similar toCornyn as being hopeless and bonkers,an impossible candidate who cannot win is supported by only those who are equally hopeless and the party loses humingously badly... this is the dress rehearsal to GE2020 or whenever it comes.
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
Amidst all the chaos of the Trump campaign, it strikes me that the biggest losers of this election could now be....House Democrats.
They now have the prospect of another mid-term pounding in 2018. A trump presidency may well have been their only shot at re-taking the house a la 2006. The senate map in 2018 looks tricky for the democrats too.
People who aren’t privately educated are "... thickos" !! A rather telling and unpleasant comment, in my opinion.
I can understand that as a child at 12, you normally follow your parent’s wishes.
I can also understand that even at 16, when you may be old enough to choose for yourself, you might not fully understand the implications of any choice of school you make.
I can also understand (Shami’s excuse) that schooling for a child is a joint choice of both parents.
And I can also understand that people change, and you may now regret choices you made when you were younger, you may for example regret being privately educated.
However, I do think -- if you have opted out of the state system (as Shami and Diane have), then you lose the right to comment on the state system. It is not your concern, your kids are not being educated in the state system, and you should not comment volubly on the matter (as Shami and even TSE have done).
I'm not worried about people commenting or even holding positions which contradict their own actions - but they are going to have to get used to being called hypocrites. Because they are.
The real issue with schooling is that the education system is tailored purely for getting certain social/education messages into kids, not preparing them for real work across a range of manual or professional occupations. The exam system is wrong, so the the pitch is only at the middle ground. Those who don't have the aptitude are left behind, those who have too much are forced to live with the disruption that causes while getting no extra support to fulfil their potential.
And it's all for a political ideal that was proven inadequate decades ago and just about everyone else in the world has rejected, except for the education unions and the so called (but not really in any way) 'Liberal' establishment.
In particular note that Trump can't lose, he can only be sabotaged, so if Trump appears to be losing on election day, that's proof of sabotage, and Trump enthusiasts spoil their down-ticket ballots.
They really have let loose a monster haven't they?
Trump's PA rally was extraordinary, venue full to capacity and thousands in overflow - queued for up to six hours to get in. The press pack were loudly booed as they came in, Trump kept getting the audience to turn round and heckle them. Chanting of FCUK CNN and Jail Her!!
I'm not sure how productive abusing the press corp is going to be for Trump.
They have never been for him anyway - so what he says about them doesn't matter.
Punking them 90mins before the debate was another fiddle playing example. They can't resist him - and eff it up by asking Trump about groping when faced with a handful of ladies claiming to be Bill victims.
It's bizarre one-eyedness. Beyond Fox and rare odd other reports - the whole thing is being ignored. WTF? The Democrat candidate's involvement isn't pertinent?
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
(Snip)
You make a good point, well put.
I'll take any excuse to watch that sketch. Couldn't resist. :-)
For the US, it is clear that Trump is the worse candidate & will seriously exacerbate internal problems, especially racial ones.
So, if I was an American, I would vote (reluctantly) for Hillary.
As regards foreign policy, it is not so clear-cut who is worse. I think a reasonable argument could be made that Trump might well cause less damage than Hillary.
So, as a non-American, I largely don’t care much. Both candidates are dreadful, and we must just hope that the Americans don’t set another area of the world on fire, as they managed to do in the Middle East.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
Let's be fair Casino. 619 has posted pretty much nothing else but Clinton Clinton Clinton and against Trump. Even on your splendid entry as a thread writer.
I really don't give a damn who wins but if there are going to be fingers pointed then let's have the playing field levelled. It's also a strange fact that the two or three other prolific anti trump / pro Clinton posters here accuse others of prolific posting about Trump.
TBH I am sick and tired of the entire race , it can't be over soon enough for me so we can move on because when we do move on whoever wins, the voters are going to lose.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
What insight have you shown?
A hint: posting links and twitter effluent is not insight.
I understand that the phrase you're hunting for is, "vapid bilge".
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
You're supposed to do Ithe other way round a lie in a sea of truth. I you do wall to wall easily debunked lies the truth gets ignored.
Mr. Divvie, well, not everyone enjoys the wisdom and insight of a morris dancer.
Mr. Walker, jein. I think the trust many people have in the media has been substantially diminished by the Cologne cover-up and the, ahem, unorthodox reporting of some terrorist events. Who knew the police could diagnose psychiatric disorders whilst electrocuting someone?
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
Let's be fair Casino. 619 has posted pretty much nothing else but Clinton Clinton Clinton and against Trump. Even on your splendid entry as a thread writer.
I really don't give a damn who wins but if there are going to be fingers pointed then let's have the playing field levelled. It's also a strange fact that the two or three other prolific anti trump / pro Clinton posters here accuse others of prolific posting about Trump.
TBH I am sick and tired of the entire race , it can't be over soon enough for me so we can move on because when we do move on whoever wins, the voters are going to lose.
I've commented on the issues/polls, and whilst I am very much anti-Racist Trump, but I'm not mindlessly posting propaganda links from wikileaks. If you don't like it, just ignore it.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
Of course you are not pressured into holding any particular views. But at the same time don't expect to go unchallenged when you make claims based on the font of unbiased wisdom that is Fox News.
Amidst all the chaos of the Trump campaign, it strikes me that the biggest losers of this election could now be....House Democrats.
They now have the prospect of another mid-term pounding in 2018. A trump presidency may well have been their only shot at re-taking the house a la 2006. The senate map in 2018 looks tricky for the democrats too.
Well, you are assuming that Trump will take a loss with grace and humility.
More likely is that he will go ballistic and blame the GOP leadership for sabotaging him, and then get his Trumpers to cause chaos for 2018.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
Of course you are not pressured into holding any particular views. But at the same time don't expect to go unchallenged when you make claims based on the font of unbiased wisdom that is Fox News.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
Of course you are not pressured into holding any particular views. But at the same time don't expect to go unchallenged when you make claims based on the font of unbiased wisdom that is Fox News.
Its does seem to be 'I believe in free speech except for your free speech to challenge my views'.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
WELL SAID PLATO , TWO FINGERS TO THE FROTHERS, bumptious know it alls
Mr. E, definitions may've changed, but when I was at university, there was little, if anything, beyond the name that differentiated psychopaths and sociopaths. Some felt there was an emphasis that sociopaths had a social disease (I think that's bloody silly, myself. But there we are).
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
Let's be fair Casino. 619 has posted pretty much nothing else but Clinton Clinton Clinton and against Trump. Even on your splendid entry as a thread writer.
I really don't give a damn who wins but if there are going to be fingers pointed then let's have the playing field levelled. It's also a strange fact that the two or three other prolific anti trump / pro Clinton posters here accuse others of prolific posting about Trump.
TBH I am sick and tired of the entire race , it can't be over soon enough for me so we can move on because when we do move on whoever wins, the voters are going to lose.
I've commented on the issues/polls, and whilst I am very much anti-Racist Trump, but I'm not mindlessly posting propaganda links from wikileaks. If you don't like it, just ignore it.
Some no doubt find it interesting. As do people in the US find the Wleaks interesting in this huge game of chess.
Can we presume then that all the Wiki stuff is untrue then....all of it?
Like I said I've never followed it or read any of the wicki stuff as I just don't care so it's a general question. Then I'm moving on and scrolling by.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
you said yourself earlier that there's no point watching news or pundits.
but then you seem to watch a particular set of pundits and take them at face value.
Maybe your history in PR makes you believe you are immune to propaganda. I think if you watch enough of this stuff you'll start to go Stockholm eventually.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
WELL SAID PLATO , TWO FINGERS TO THE FROTHERS, bumptious know it alls
The Turnips and the Trumpists just forged an unholy alliance.
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
However it's the only national poll with a Trump lead caused by a sample that has Trump winning three times the AA vote that Romney achieved and Hispanic levels of support that Bush II achieved. Believe it if you wish.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
Of course you are not pressured into holding any particular views. But at the same time don't expect to go unchallenged when you make claims based on the font of unbiased wisdom that is Fox News.
Fox news would be about 13 steps up from the wacko conspiracy website made up crap that is posted.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
Let's be fair Casino. 619 has posted pretty much nothing else but Clinton Clinton Clinton and against Trump. Even on your splendid entry as a thread writer.
I really don't give a damn who wins but if there are going to be fingers pointed then let's have the playing field levelled. It's also a strange fact that the two or three other prolific anti trump / pro Clinton posters here accuse others of prolific posting about Trump.
TBH I am sick and tired of the entire race , it can't be over soon enough for me so we can move on because when we do move on whoever wins, the voters are going to lose.
I've commented on the issues/polls, and whilst I am very much anti-Racist Trump, but I'm not mindlessly posting propaganda links from wikileaks. If you don't like it, just ignore it.
Some no doubt find it interesting. As do people in the US find the Wleaks interesting in this huge game of chess.
Can we presume then that all the Wiki stuff is untrue then....all of it?
Like I said I've never followed it or read any of the wicki stuff as I just don't care so it's a general question. Then I'm moving on and scrolling by.
US Intelligence has briefed that Russia are forging and using wikileaks to forward there forgeries designed to manipulate the US election. As wikileaks are letting that happened, I consider all their stuff to be 'fruit of the poisoned tree' unless otherwise corroborated.
It is the hypocrisy that gets me. Pretendy Labour left wingers cannot wait to pack their brats off to private schools at the first opportunity, whilst condemning them.
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Sadly this misplaced triumphalism informed a great deal of Brexit opinion. But you voted Leave. Why? A deliberate attempt to shake up an unsustainable economic structure?
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
What insight have you shown?
A hint: posting links and twitter effluent is not insight.
Since your illness - you've done little to interact with me that isn't rude. Don't like me, fine - scroll by.
Rubbish. And you might like to consider your own position wrt that as well.
Laving that aside: what insight have you shown?
Certainly does not act like a big spoiled baby when called out, unlike you.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
Mr. E, definitions may've changed, but when I was at university, there was little, if anything, beyond the name that differentiated psychopaths and sociopaths. Some felt there was an emphasis that sociopaths had a social disease (I think that's bloody silly, myself. But there we are).
On that definition, it does fit rather better.
I sent a message to a friend in Florida. He's a bass playing tattoo'd biker Republican ex airforce man originally from New York.
It ended something like "There's over 300 million of ya'll and this is the best you can do? I'd rather vote for you as president!"
People who aren’t privately educated are "... thickos" !! A rather telling and unpleasant comment, in my opinion.
I can understand that as a child at 12, you normally follow your parent’s wishes.
I can also understand that even at 16, when you may be old enough to choose for yourself, you might not fully understand the implications of any choice of school you make.
I can also understand (Shami’s excuse) that schooling for a child is a joint choice of both parents.
And I can also understand that people change, and you may now regret choices you made when you were younger, you may for example regret being privately educated.
However, I do think -- if you have opted out of the state system (as Shami and Diane have), then you lose the right to comment on the state system. It is not your concern, your kids are not being educated in the state system, and you should not comment volubly on the matter (as Shami and even TSE have done).
they do like to feel superior even though they are far from it, usually braying insecure donkeys.
Quite interesting if you can get by the headline (I excuse remaining Trumplings as they will be sent immediately into a spasm of enraged paralysis). 'Ambivalent sexism' appears to be the big predictor.
'A ‘basket of deplorables’? A new study finds that Trump supporters are more likely to be Islamophobic, racist, transphobic and homophobic.'
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
Mr Robert, Mr Max, interested in your views on the place of ideology in modern economic issues - a clever mate of mine who reads the Economist like a Bible likes to think technocracy is the way forward and ideology has had its day. Putting aside the democracy issues for a minute, I disagree and suggest that the synthesis of competing governing ideologies (or I suppos different policies) is the only way to avoid stagnation. Thoughts?
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
Posting verifiably false things is not interesting.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
It's not being replicated. Leave won because it was a loose coalition of working class voters and those who wanted out of the political EU, the split was probably about 35/17. In the US Trump has the support of the former type of voters but not the latter. In a two way race he can't win with that kind of ceiling.
There are parallels between Brexit and the current election, but Trump has completely failed to engage the small state, fiscally responsible republicans all over the country who aren't moved by his style or his over the top nature. Leave had similar votes tied up before the referendum was even on the agenda. Much like many of us discussed here when we found the Turkey discussion quite depressing, the Leave campaign didn't care what someone like me thought because I was going to vote leave whatever happened and not on the basis of immigration.
Just look on this board, you are now the last Trump supporter standing, when the remain/leave split was about 50/50. It's not like we all only watch the BBC and Sky either and get their biased view. Trump has said things that I find disgusting, you may call it "locker room behaviour". I go to the gym and I have a lot of male friends, none have ever spoken about their daughters in the manner of Trump, or just sexually assaulted any women and then bragged about it afterwards.
Trump is a flawed character who should not have got this close to the White House. What he represents doesn't go away when he loses, in fact he's probably cleared the way for the next GOP candidate who can probably mobilise the same base but be less crazy and bring AAs and low income Hispanics on side.
And further, Trump has by accident or design alienated many demographics where he can't afford the loss of support. Despite perhaps some of Farage's efforts the leave campaign managed to avoid this - indeed I was surprised that the support for leave among ethnic minority voters was as high as it appears to have been.
Next time we see an age related sample of a UK poll. Ask why there are not 3x as many 65+ as under 25s in the weighted numbers.
"There are about 10.5m people over 65, of whom 78pc voted last year’s election – giving about 8m voters in that age group. There are just under 6m under-25s entited to vote, of whom 43pc voted. So about 2.5m voters. So as a group, the over-65s are three times as electorally valuable as the under-25s." http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/revealed-one-young-older-vote-worth-three-younger-voters/
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
What insight have you shown?
A hint: posting links and twitter effluent is not insight.
Since your illness - you've done little to interact with me that isn't rude. Don't like me, fine - scroll by.
Rubbish. And you might like to consider your own position wrt that as well.
Laving that aside: what insight have you shown?
Certainly does not act like a big spoiled baby when called out, unlike you.
Thanks for your contribution, Eliza. I have talked to your programmers, and they're going to look into the memory problems once they've sobered up.
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
Mr Robert, Mr Max, interested in your views on the place of ideology in modern economic issues - a clever mate of mine who reads the Economist like a Bible likes to think technocracy is the way forward and ideology has had its day. Putting aside the democracy issues for a minute, I disagree and suggest that the synthesis of competing governing ideologies (or I suppos different policies) is the only way to avoid stagnation. Thoughts?
I'm a bit busy at the moment but I'll give it a go later on today.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
Posting verifiably false things is not interesting.
It certainly is if they affect how people vote or respond to opinion pollsters.
I'm biased, but one of the reasons I think history needs to be taken a lot more seriously in the education system is that it provides a key life skill - source analysis. Far more significant than what causes a sodding volcano to erupt.
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption, and a rapid rise in savings, leading to high unemployment and big cuts in wages. The former seems preferable to me.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
The fastest way to cut the BOP is to make what we used to make and not import. A large chunk of what we buy are mid tech prodcuts from mid to high cost countries. Cars from Germany or France, fridges and washing machines from Italy etc. Our problem is structual in that we have pulled out of a lot a products for no real reason than it suited a multinat to shift production.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
Of course you are not pressured into holding any particular views. But at the same time don't expect to go unchallenged when you make claims based on the font of unbiased wisdom that is Fox News.
And you will know - I post input from many sources - often The Fix of the Washington Post.
Still - so much more comfortable to box me as a Fox fan.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato's contrarian posts linked to facts are welcome. We have had a referendum and a GE where the "shared view" amongst the "chattering classes" in the main media was wrong about the result. IMHO we should look more closely at the samples and weighting used in polls and challenge their validity.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
I would add that Osbourne was part of the problem. To keep the economy moving post the GFC and during the Eurozone crisis and beyond, he deliberately followed a set of policies designed to lower the savings rate.
The historic tax advantages (around ISAs and the like) were reduced to make it less appealing to save.
In the short run, this kept the economy buoyant, but it does mean that British people have far lower savings (outside their principle properties) than they should have. And it means people are used to spending too high a portion of their incomes.
There was another deleterious effect of this obsession with keeping consumers spending: banks were lent on to keep consumer credit flowing. As a result, the UK banking sector is starved of deposits (as saving is discouraged), and as a result of the Treasury and the BoE's regulatory regime, prefers to lend to consumers than businesses. British businesses, which need to invest, and which have been under-investing for about two decades, have been starved of capital from the banking sector.
Leave won because it was a loose coalition of working class voters and those who wanted out of the political EU, the split was probably about 35/17.
Aren't the lower orders able to "want out of the political EU"? Or would ascribing that level of human mental functioning to them be an act of class treason?
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
Private debt in the UK remains at very high levels, making our public debt position even more perilous. Politicians just hope they can keep the plates spinning long enough to get through their terms of office; I don't see any prospect of a solution in sight and the Japanese experience is not encouraging.
I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.
But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.
Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like an uncivilized uncouth boor. It is no excuse to say that people used to behave like that 30 years ago or may do so still in private. Boasting about sexual assault, about humiliating another person is gross behavior and it was 30 years ago as well. Men were perfectly well able to know the difference between right and wrong, between what it is to behave in a gentlemanly manner and what it is to behave like a brute. They know this now and we do a great disservice to those men who do know how to behave and control themselves and treat others with courtesy and politeness and respect to assume that they are really like Trump and only behaving well out of political correctness or fear of being criticized.
If we rightly criticize migrants from certain countries/cultures for their boorish/criminal/insulting/misogynistic behavior to women, then we should also do so when white middle class rich men with an overweening sense of indispensability or entitlement do the same. Or indeed when any man who is not a migrant behaves in such a way. Sexual assault is an abhorrent crime, no matter who does it.
Trump's behavior shows his unfitness for public office. IMO.
Just because he claims to speak for those who feel excluded does not excuse him from expectations of civilized behaviour. The problems of the "left behind" classes are not served (well or at all) by people who condescend to them, who use them for their own purposes and who show, by the way they talk about and treat those who are more vulnerable than they are, that they have no regard for the weak, the abandoned, the isolated, but simply see them as people to be used to advance their own ambitions.
I have only had a chance to glance at the threads and follow events.
But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.
Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like an uncivilized uncouth boor. It is no excuse to say that people used to behave like that 30 years ago or may do so still in private. Boasting about sexual assault, about humiliating another person is gross behavior and it was 30 years ago as well. Men were perfectly well able to know the difference between right and wrong, between what it is to behave in a gentlemanly manner and what it is to behave like a brute. They know this now and we do a great disservice to those men who do know how to behave and control themselves and treat others with courtesy and politeness and respect to assume that they are really like Trump and only behaving well out of political correctness or fear of being criticized.
If we rightly criticize migrants from certain countries/cultures for their boorish/criminal/insulting/misogynistic behavior to women, then we should also do so when white middle class rich men with an overweening sense of indispensability or entitlement do the same. Or indeed when any man who is not a migrant behaves in such a way. Sexual assault is an abhorrent crime, no matter who does it.
Trump's behavior shows his unfitness for public office. IMO.
Just because he claims to speak for those who feel excluded does not excuse him from expectations of civilized behaviour. The problems of the "left behind" classes are not served (well or at all) by people who condescend to them, who use them for their own purposes and who show, by the way they talk about and treat those who are more vulnerable than they are, that they have no regard for the weak, the abandoned, the isolated, but simply see them as people to be used to advance their own ambitions.
That's all.
The last poll had his favourable at 29%, so a lot of people agree with you.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
You have a very generous interpretation of "insights".
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
Excellent question. And it's even worse in Ireland, where ordinary cheddar cheese usually costs at least 25 euros a kilogram and I've seen a litre of orange juice for 3.5 euros. I asked myself the same question: how do people afford these prices? The answer must be by borrowing money.
Consumerism, advertising and debt are all closely bound up with each other.
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
Our imports are about 32% of GDP and our current account deficit around 7%.
Perhaps the best way to think of it is that more than a quarter of our imports are being put on our national credit card.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
You have a very generous interpretation of "insights".
Hey, I'm just a generous sort of guy. I applied an equal amount of latitude to the term 'jokes' to include your offerings
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
I don't think comparing what Trump said on tape with a fictional series set in New York counts as insight, frankly.
Plato's contrarian posts linked to facts are welcome. We have had a referendum and a GE where the "shared view" amongst the "chattering classes" in the main media was wrong about the result. IMHO we should look more closely at the samples and weighting used in polls and challenge their validity.
I've been genuinely shocked by the crap demographics in these polls - and then used to drive the news cycle. 58% of the CNN poll sample were Dems before the debate WTF? The WSJ one was a sample of 477 IIRC with a 8pt bias to Dems.
And all the stations are running with Trump polling meltdown "why hasn't he thrown in the towel - stick a fork in him"
It's not an accident. There's far too much evidence of it used to make the news.
Followed by the longest boom the country has ever seen.
We have seen it all before. .
Yes, when we were in the single market and had barrier free trade with europe. I imagine all the immigration we had during that time also helped with gdp growth figures.
Immigration would have had little effect on GDP in the 1990s when the economy was performing strongly - it only became a significant factor from 2004 onwards when the economy has done much worse.
You might also consider how strongly the economy performed during the 1980s when net migration was often negative and sterling more than halved in value against the dollar between 1981 and 1985.
I would have hoped that after 1992 we had seen the last of the sterling value fetishists.
If you want to have a higher sterling exchange rate then:
1) Create more wealth 2) Live within your means 3) Increase your savings ratio
"Live within your means" is an interesting one. I remember back to the mid-1980s, when as a child I was lucky when I got a computer costing about £400. Some friends had to make do with lesser non-Acorn computers from the likes of Commodore or Atari.
Now, it seems like everyone has to have expensive smartphones (and the call tariffs), large TVs, game consoles, etc, etc. Whilst the price comparison doesn't take inflation into account, it does seem as if we're getting a lot more (ahem) tat being seen as essentials.
Have wages really increased to cover these expenses, or is the majority of it going on debt?
Excellent question. And it's even worse in Ireland, where ordinary cheddar cheese usually costs at least 25 euros a kilogram and I've seen a litre of orange juice for 3.5 euros. I asked myself the same question: how do people afford these prices? The answer must be by borrowing money.
Consumerism, advertising and debt are all closely bound up with each other.
And it can't go on forever.
(Although Ireland's exports exceed its imports by a comfortable margin, and they have been paying down their public and private sector debt at a fair clip.)
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
SNIP
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
SNIPshows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
SNIP debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
Mr Robert, Mr Max, interested in your views on the place of ideology in modern economic issues - a clever mate of mine who reads the Economist like a Bible likes to think technocracy is the way forward and ideology has had its day. Putting aside the democracy issues for a minute, I disagree and suggest that the synthesis of competing governing ideologies (or I suppos different policies) is the only way to avoid stagnation. Thoughts?
I am neither of those illustrious posters, but I tend to dislike ideology: like battle plans, they rarely survive first contact with the enemy (in this case reality).
As an engineer, what matters is what works. Test if it works, fix, then repeat.
The problem is economic (and to some extent political) theory cannot be well tested IMO. There are far too many variables: what worked in the 1990s might not work today as the background has changed. There can be no control subject. This means ideology has fertile ground to grow: if something failed before, it was the situation back then, which does not apply in the here and now).
(Except Venezuela, which has been a very god example of what doesn't work).
We have a big balance of payments deficit. That can be corrected either by a fall in Sterling; or, if the value of a currency were fixed, by a sharp reduction in consumption,e.
It's actually worse than that. The period of great prosperity the UK enjoyed between 1992 and 2007 was a period marked by a massive drawdown of the UK's overseas assets.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
An excellent post. On increasing the savings rate, the easiest way to do it is to make imports more expensive, which is exactly what weak Sterling will achieve. It's not a silver bullet but it is definitely going to help our long term balance of payments deficit. Over the longer term we need UK business to produce goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy.
Mr Robert, Mr Max, interested in your views on the place of ideology in modern economic issues - a clever mate of mine who reads the Economist like a Bible likes to think technocracy is the way forward and ideology has had its day. Putting aside the democracy issues for a minute, I disagree and suggest that the synthesis of competing governing ideologies (or I suppos different policies) is the only way to avoid stagnation. Thoughts?
I'm a bit busy at the moment but I'll give it a go later on today.
Ta. Look forward to it. I suppos I must go and do my bit at improving the BOP through selling antiquarian books abroad!
In general terms for a betting site it is important to know a broad range of information including any falsehoods out there from BOTH sides.
Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.
It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
A rather naughty part of me wants Trump to win purely because of the liberal sh*tstorm of wailing and gnashing of teeth that would follow. It would be epic.
I couldn't vote for him though. It would be like voting for Alf Garnett.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
I don't think comparing what Trump said on tape with a fictional series set in New York counts as insight, frankly.
But each to their own, I suppose.
Someone said up thread that Trump will lose but the "angry man" sentiment that he represents will remain - to be capitalised on by a slightly saner Rep. candidate in due course.
It seems to me though that the Republicans are taking a massive hit to the brand. Who, in conscience, can support a party that has enabled this terrible, terrible human being?
I know it's been a long time coming, but it seems that the kind of liberal, moral Republicanism of Reagan is now utterly dead. The Democracts have a clear field.
The weighting in that appears to be two 65 + year olds for every 24 and under voter. Is a 2:1 voting ratio appropriate for the USA in those age categories?
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
Plato gets the news straight from her Russian handlers. It's the only rational conclusion after weeks of bombardment from wikileaks, Breitbart etc. As always there may be a smidgeon of truth buried somewhere in the mix, but that's the secret of dirty propaganda.
Plato has been here, providing insights, for a lot longer than you and most of her detractors have. Those who sneer often think that those who disagree with them must be propagandists or trolls - in fact, alternative sources of information are generally far more interesting and insightful to a betting site than 'clever' jokes straight out of the sixth form common room.
You have a very generous interpretation of "insights".
And you've got a very liberal political viewpoint. I contrast your views with my understanding of small town US. You can find it awful and tut all night, but it doesn't change it.
Probably would get a very different answer to that depending on how question was phrased, for example: would you support or oppose investing in restoring the RY Britannia, or a new RY, as part of the UK's global diplomatic effort to develop trade deals and influence ?
The way that question is phrased makes it look like it's just an extra free toy for the Royal Family.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it. I don't need to consult Google for an explanation.
I don't think comparing what Trump said on tape with a fictional series set in New York counts as insight, frankly.
I do find it genuinely fascinating that so many on a betting site don't value insight and prefer to sneer at it.
We'd yards of it over Brexit - and it's being replicated over POTUS. Uncomfortable truths are handwaved away. I find this election absolutely riveting because I get the small town fly-over-state mindset. I don't agree with lots of it - but I understand it and the values dearly held.
So, I'll continue for another 29 days to share what I've picked up in the small hours from the dozens of video clips and articles I've read. Some may find it interesting - others can skip by it.
Plato, the trouble is that you come over as biased in favour of right wing issues generally and Trump in particular. I'm sorry if I have misjudged you. I'm all in favour of facts, but they're a bit thin on the ground on Fox News chat shows.
I reflect an opinion that's in very short supply on here. If most posters just go URGH and dismiss - we learn nothing at all.
But, you are obsessive about it. When I had my first guest article published a few weeks ago the thread beneath it was peppered with comments about Trump, by you, and you didn't make reference to what I wrote once - or engage with the debate amongst other posters - at all.
I do it because no one else is sharing the load. If I didn't post, there'd be nothing but tutting.
You've been marvelous and will have the last laugh come November.
A rather naughty part of me wants Trump to win purely because of the liberal sh*tstorm of wailing and gnashing of teeth that would follow. It would be epic.
I couldn't vote for him though. It would be like voting for Alf Garnett.
But I have things to lose, alas many have not.
This I do not grasp. You want a deranged straight up racist to win the most powerful office in the world because the 'shitstorm' from 'those liberals' would be entertaining for a while. A bizarre sentiment, that I see expressed too often on here.
Comments
I can understand that as a child at 12, you normally follow your parent’s wishes.
I can also understand that even at 16, when you may be old enough to choose for yourself, you might not fully understand the implications of any choice of school you make.
I can also understand (Shami’s excuse) that schooling for a child is a joint choice of both parents.
And I can also understand that people change, and you may now regret choices you made when you were younger, you may for example regret being privately educated.
However, I do think -- if you have opted out of the state system (as Shami and Diane have), then you lose the right to comment on the state system. It is not your concern, your kids are not being educated in the state system, and you should not comment volubly on the matter (as Shami and even TSE have done).
https://twitter.com/DailyMailUK/status/785730388450766848
https://twitter.com/sallykohn/status/785633172771966976
They now have the prospect of another mid-term pounding in 2018. A trump presidency may well have been their only shot at re-taking the house a la 2006. The senate map in 2018 looks tricky for the democrats too.
The real issue with schooling is that the education system is tailored purely for getting certain social/education messages into kids, not preparing them for real work across a range of manual or professional occupations. The exam system is wrong, so the the pitch is only at the middle ground. Those who don't have the aptitude are left behind, those who have too much are forced to live with the disruption that causes while getting no extra support to fulfil their potential.
And it's all for a political ideal that was proven inadequate decades ago and just about everyone else in the world has rejected, except for the education unions and the so called (but not really in any way) 'Liberal' establishment.
It's bizarre one-eyedness. Beyond Fox and rare odd other reports - the whole thing is being ignored. WTF? The Democrat candidate's involvement isn't pertinent?
So, if I was an American, I would vote (reluctantly) for Hillary.
As regards foreign policy, it is not so clear-cut who is worse. I think a reasonable argument could be made that Trump might well cause less damage than Hillary.
So, as a non-American, I largely don’t care much. Both candidates are dreadful, and we must just hope that the Americans don’t set another area of the world on fire, as they managed to do in the Middle East.
Clinton 43.3 .. Trump 45.3
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
I really don't give a damn who wins but if there are going to be fingers pointed then let's have the playing field levelled. It's also a strange fact that the two or three other prolific anti trump / pro Clinton posters here accuse others of prolific posting about Trump.
TBH I am sick and tired of the entire race , it can't be over soon enough for me so we can move on because when we do move on whoever wins, the voters are going to lose.
Mr. Walker, jein. I think the trust many people have in the media has been substantially diminished by the Cologne cover-up and the, ahem, unorthodox reporting of some terrorist events. Who knew the police could diagnose psychiatric disorders whilst electrocuting someone?
I honestly can't get over it. I feel pressured into not sharing an unfashionable view because it doesn't *fit*. My insomnia allows me to spend a lot of small hours watching US news live.
Bugger that.
How do you like your sociopaths? Corrupt and sneering, or obnoxious and misogynist?
More likely is that he will go ballistic and blame the GOP leadership for sabotaging him, and then get his Trumpers to cause chaos for 2018.
ˈsəʊsɪə(ʊ)paθ,ˈsəʊʃɪə(ʊ)-/
noun
noun: sociopath; plural noun: sociopaths
a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behaviour.
I dunno....
Edit: Maybe it's a Psychopath v a Sociopath?
On that definition, it does fit rather better.
Can we presume then that all the Wiki stuff is untrue then....all of it?
Like I said I've never followed it or read any of the wicki stuff as I just don't care so it's a general question. Then I'm moving on and scrolling by.
but then you seem to watch a particular set of pundits and take them at face value.
Maybe your history in PR makes you believe you are immune to propaganda. I think if you watch enough of this stuff you'll start to go Stockholm eventually.
At their peak in the mid 1980s, the UK had net overseas financial assets equivalent to about 60% of GDP. This meant that every year, we could run a small balance of payments deficit, because the gap was filled by remittances from overseas.
We now are in deficit to the world by about 40% of GDP - and it's increasing at about 7% of GDP per year (it changes, all others things being equal, by our current account balance). This means that, as we are now net remitters, we need to run a trade surplus just to stop getting further into the hole.
As we have been patting ourselves on the back, pointing to our fantastic economy, and pitying at our continental neigbours, our bank balance has gone from flush, to non-existent, to seriously overdrawn.
Fortunately, as you note, the currency decline makes a big difference. Our foreign holdings usually remit in currencies other than sterling. Our debts to the outside world are also, fortunately mostly (although not entirely) in sterling. So, the decline in sterling increases the value of dividends and interest payments coming into the UK.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the currency can take the entire strain. Our savings rate is 3%. Pretty much every other European country is around 10% (and Switzerland is 15%). That needs to change. And I struggle to see how we can manage that without some pain.
However it's the only national poll with a Trump lead caused by a sample that has Trump winning three times the AA vote that Romney achieved and Hispanic levels of support that Bush II achieved. Believe it if you wish.
Clinton 48.97 .. Trump 42.55
https://datastudio.google.com/#/org//reporting/0B29GVb5ISrT0TGk1TW5tVF9Ed2M/page/YgS
It ended something like "There's over 300 million of ya'll and this is the best you can do? I'd rather vote for you as president!"
'A ‘basket of deplorables’? A new study finds that Trump supporters are more likely to be Islamophobic, racist, transphobic and homophobic.'
http://tinyurl.com/jddlm7s
"There are about 10.5m people over 65, of whom 78pc voted last year’s election – giving about 8m voters in that age group. There are just under 6m under-25s entited to vote, of whom 43pc voted. So about 2.5m voters. So as a group, the over-65s are three times as electorally valuable as the under-25s."
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/revealed-one-young-older-vote-worth-three-younger-voters/
How different is the situation in USA?
Yougov
% of a countries voters who DISAPPROVE of their government
French 79%
Swedish 74%
Germans 66%
Danes 62%
British 49%
Norwegians 43%
Clinton 46.6 .. Trump 37.0 - Note - Sampled Pre Pussygate
http://myweb.loras.edu/Loras/PDF/LCPWIOctober102016.pdf
Pennsylvania - Susquehanna
Clinton 44 .. Trump 40
https://mgtvwhtm.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/toplines-statewideabc27-oct16.pdf
Florida - AIF
Clinton 44 .. Trump 41 - Sampled Pre Pussygate
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/223845-national-democrats-pull-ads-new-associated-industries-poll-shows-patrick-murphy-trailing-marco-rubio-eight
I'm biased, but one of the reasons I think history needs to be taken a lot more seriously in the education system is that it provides a key life skill - source analysis. Far more significant than what causes a sodding volcano to erupt.
Still - so much more comfortable to box me as a Fox fan.
The historic tax advantages (around ISAs and the like) were reduced to make it less appealing to save.
In the short run, this kept the economy buoyant, but it does mean that British people have far lower savings (outside their principle properties) than they should have. And it means people are used to spending too high a portion of their incomes.
There was another deleterious effect of this obsession with keeping consumers spending: banks were lent on to keep consumer credit flowing. As a result, the UK banking sector is starved of deposits (as saving is discouraged), and as a result of the Treasury and the BoE's regulatory regime, prefers to lend to consumers than businesses. British businesses, which need to invest, and which have been under-investing for about two decades, have been starved of capital from the banking sector.
History will not treat Osbourne and Brown well.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/785759629632376833
But the willingness of people to overlook or excuse Trump's appalling behavior and comments is simply astonishing and really quite appalling.
Trump is no gentleman. He behaves like an uncivilized uncouth boor. It is no excuse to say that people used to behave like that 30 years ago or may do so still in private. Boasting about sexual assault, about humiliating another person is gross behavior and it was 30 years ago as well. Men were perfectly well able to know the difference between right and wrong, between what it is to behave in a gentlemanly manner and what it is to behave like a brute. They know this now and we do a great disservice to those men who do know how to behave and control themselves and treat others with courtesy and politeness and respect to assume that they are really like Trump and only behaving well out of political correctness or fear of being criticized.
If we rightly criticize migrants from certain countries/cultures for their boorish/criminal/insulting/misogynistic behavior to women, then we should also do so when white middle class rich men with an overweening sense of indispensability or entitlement do the same. Or indeed when any man who is not a migrant behaves in such a way. Sexual assault is an abhorrent crime, no matter who does it.
Trump's behavior shows his unfitness for public office. IMO.
Just because he claims to speak for those who feel excluded does not excuse him from expectations of civilized behaviour. The problems of the "left behind" classes are not served (well or at all) by people who condescend to them, who use them for their own purposes and who show, by the way they talk about and treat those who are more vulnerable than they are, that they have no regard for the weak, the abandoned, the isolated, but simply see them as people to be used to advance their own ambitions.
That's all.
Consumerism, advertising and debt are all closely bound up with each other.
And it can't go on forever.
Perhaps the best way to think of it is that more than a quarter of our imports are being put on our national credit card.
But each to their own, I suppose.
Even at the nadir, that government actually wasn't as bad as some of its neighbours.
And all the stations are running with Trump polling meltdown "why hasn't he thrown in the towel - stick a fork in him"
It's not an accident. There's far too much evidence of it used to make the news.
2016's incarnation of Stuart Truth?
As an engineer, what matters is what works. Test if it works, fix, then repeat.
The problem is economic (and to some extent political) theory cannot be well tested IMO. There are far too many variables: what worked in the 1990s might not work today as the background has changed. There can be no control subject. This means ideology has fertile ground to grow: if something failed before, it was the situation back then, which does not apply in the here and now).
(Except Venezuela, which has been a very god example of what doesn't work).
Although this information can be dissected here by the politically astute this is quite simply not the case in the general public. They normally take a view based on their own beliefs and prejudices on whichever side of the political spectrum they stand. To a point, we all do it consciously or sub consciously it's in the nature of the human mind. We have seen this recently in our own referendum from both sides so from a betting prospective only, its better to have a full overview.
It quite simply doesn't matter if that which is in circulation is true or untrue, it's in circulation and its what people believe rightly or wrongly to be true that can determine the election outcome and of course most importantly, the difference between a winning or a losing bet.
I couldn't vote for him though. It would be like voting for Alf Garnett.
But I have things to lose, alas many have not.
It seems to me though that the Republicans are taking a massive hit to the brand. Who, in conscience, can support a party that has enabled this terrible, terrible human being?
I know it's been a long time coming, but it seems that the kind of liberal, moral Republicanism of Reagan is now utterly dead. The Democracts have a clear field.
Trump's real analogy is not Brexit, it's Corbyn.
This isn't Political Safe Space.
The way that question is phrased makes it look like it's just an extra free toy for the Royal Family.
NEW THREAD
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37605311
The question would seem to be whether that's to drive with Magnussen or if another chap will also join the team.