If we get involved in military action in Syria would it be: 1. With Assad against ISIL? 2. With Rebels against Assad? 3. With Rebels against ISIL? 4. With ISIL against Assad? 5. A more exotic combination involving Russia, Turkey, Kurds, USA, Momentum or Mickey Mouse?
What outcome is worth the bones of a British Grenadier in Syria?
We should sell enough weapons to all sides to keep the thing ticking along nicely in a profitable way. There should be some good mercenary work to spread around too for ex-Forces.
The last thing we should be doing is some sort of morality-driven interfering effort.
It was interesting listening to TM at PM questions that she saw the Softbank purchase of ARM as a major investment by Japanese companies. The reality is that this was a debt leveraged smash and grab acquisition of the most valuable family of patents owned by the UK. I was a reluctant seller of my shares in ARM.
If our PM cannot understand the difference between selling the family silver and new investment then I feel we are lost.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
But in a single move he's outed Labour, stop the war and others as a bunch of Putin/ISIS loving traitors. Very smart politics, even if a little bit blunt.
Its going to be epic here on Nov 9th if Trump does manage to win.
You keep saying that. I see you can get c.28/5 to back Trump on Matchbook at the mo'. I assume you're poised to fill your boots when it reaches the magic 6?
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
You posting a link from the Mail doesn't approach mullable I'm afraid.
Ahh.... but the Mail are only referring to a piece of independent research that points out how shite Scotland's deficit problem has become. Play the ball not the player. It is a serious financial problem for both Scotland and the UK. It is a serous political problem for the SNP. Part of their USP is appearing to be competent in the knowledge that Labour abandoned that aspiration years ago.
F1: gossip column, but this may ring true: an ex-Ferrari engineer says the staff there are too frightened of making a mistake, and being fired, to actually do anything.
Comparing them with Nate Silver's state-by-state estimates and averaging the three, the Clinton leads are around 0.5% bigger in the new polls.
Clearly Trump can't win unless there is either: (1) a systematic error in the polls or (2) a swing of 3-4% back to him.
1) would be a massive crisis in polling if true 2) Its down to Clinton to screw up. Cant see Trump having the skill or personaility to do anything to improve his standing
1) May 2015, June 2016. And from what I can make out the US pollsters are not nearly as good as the British ones who still systematically underestimated Tory/Leave voters
The pollsters might have got it wrong -- but in which direction? The most obvious problem is they might be missing previous non-voters who will turn out for Trump.
But there was some analysis on 538 which showed it was not actually Trump drawing this crowd -- it was Bernie Sanders. So if the polls are under-sampling Bernie's erstwhile supporters, are they more likely to vote for Hillary (same party, Establishment) or Trump (wrong party and while he is a political outsider, he is famously a billionaire property developer)?
And on that depends whether a long odds bet on Trump in a couple of weeks is worth a punt. He is 4-1 at the moment in a two horse race. 6-1 or more in a couple of weeks and I may bite unless he has been discovered to have deflowered the presidents daughters or something.
I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....
LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)
what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?
I'd list Cameron's successes as:
- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)
- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control
- SindyRef & AV
- Winning a second term.
Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....
Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.
You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....
Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...
The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.
How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?
May contemporary ?
Yes, knew both her & Philip - hence my more favourable view than many expressed on here....
So you're taking over my role as the Tory PM's Vicar on Earth PB?
Comparing them with Nate Silver's state-by-state estimates and averaging the three, the Clinton leads are around 0.5% bigger in the new polls.
Clearly Trump can't win unless there is either: (1) a systematic error in the polls or (2) a swing of 3-4% back to him.
1) would be a massive crisis in polling if true 2) Its down to Clinton to screw up. Cant see Trump having the skill or personaility to do anything to improve his standing
1) May 2015, June 2016. And from what I can make out the US pollsters are not nearly as good as the British ones who still systematically underestimated Tory/Leave voters
Yes, this is the wet dream of the PB Trumper fraternity - who think having a straight up racist in charge of the world's most powerful country will be "epic" "hilarious" and "fun" because it will upset the Guardian.
Perhaps it's more because it will upset you? Your self-appointment as Faultfinder General to the site can be a little grating.
You posting a link from the Mail doesn't approach mullable I'm afraid.
Ahh.... but the Mail are only referring to a piece of independent research that points out how shite Scotland's deficit problem has become. Play the ball not the player. It is a serious financial problem for both Scotland and the UK. It is a serous political problem for the SNP. Part of their USP is appearing to be competent in the knowledge that Labour abandoned that aspiration years ago.
Why would I bother engaging with a player ineligible to get on the park, let alone kick the ball?
You posting a link from the Mail doesn't approach mullable I'm afraid.
Ahh.... but the Mail are only referring to a piece of independent research that points out how shite Scotland's deficit problem has become. Play the ball not the player. It is a serious financial problem for both Scotland and the UK. It is a serous political problem for the SNP. Part of their USP is appearing to be competent in the knowledge that Labour abandoned that aspiration years ago.
Why would I bother engaging with a player ineligible to get on the park, let alone kick the ball?
Fine, ignore the Scottish deficit then. I'm sure nothing painful will ever come of it anyway.
I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....
LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)
what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?
I'd list Cameron's successes as:
- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)
- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control
- SindyRef & AV
- Winning a second term.
Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....
Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.
You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....
Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...
The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.
How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?
May contemporary ?
Yes, knew both her & Philip - hence my more favourable view than many expressed on here....
So you're taking over my role as the Tory PM's Vicar on Earth PB?
Brace yourself!
A defrocked one no doubt. Not sure the AOC will warm to your posting style
It was interesting listening to TM at PM questions that she saw the Softbank purchase of ARM as a major investment by Japanese companies. The reality is that this was a debt leveraged smash and grab acquisition of the most valuable family of patents owned by the UK. I was a reluctant seller of my shares in ARM.
If our PM cannot understand the difference between selling the family silver and new investment then I feel we are lost.
ARM might have been a UK plc, in the FTSE 100, but that did not mean it was owned by Brits.
It's shareholder list will have been very international, and I suspect there are probably twice as many American shareholders than British ones. (ARM had a very actively traded ADR in the US; indeed, it may well have traded more shares there than in London.)
And Softbank may be a Japanese company, but it has an equally international shareholder list. Fidelity in London (rather than the parent in Boston) is a big holder, for example, as is Schroders.
Ultimately, the proportion of British ownership of ARM has probably decreased, but marginally. Perhaps from 25% to 15%. That is all.
"They know Clinton is deeply flawed but simply see Trump as far worse."
That's always been the issue, hasn't it? In your day ... sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. Nowadays, words, or even mis-speaks are far more important than deeds.
A wall to stop Mexican immigrants? How long is the US - Mexican border? And the Mexican government will pay for it? Worth a chortle at best, but clearly a joke. What will he do were he to be elected? Who really knows?
HRC ... more of the same. An unpalatable choice but I suspect they'll decide on words so Trump is doomed.
Very early on I called the primary races and the general election.
Trump = President Clinton.
Sufficient disaffected GOP voters would propel Trump to the nomination where he would face Clinton whose machine would eventually overwhelm Bernie.
Worsening demographics and faced with a poor choice the punters would opt for the least worst option and propel Hillary to the White House.
This race has not been difficult to call.
To be fair jack I recall you called GE 2015 for no overall majority and the referendum for remain?
The amount you were out probably points to Clinton winning by a narrow squeak, but we wont know until the night and if there is denial after early results it could be very profitable as it was in June.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
But in a single move he's outed Labour, stop the war and others as a bunch of Putin/ISIS loving traitors. Very smart politics, even if a little bit blunt.
It's easy to throw around allegations such as "Putin/ISIS loving traitors" but as no one knows or will understand what that means, it's just student banter.
Russia's principal objective in Syria is and always has been to ensure whoever runs the country will continue to grant naval facilities at Latakia and Tartus to Russian ships. Had the rebels realised this and accommodated Moscow, they might have overthrown Assad.
Assad is now a Russian client in a way he wasn't before. IS are no immediate threat to Damascus and can be confined to the far east and south of Syria - it's the rebels around Aleppo who are Assad's biggest threat. Russia is therefore concentrating on them and will leave IS to wither (with Kurdish help in the north and with the Iraqi advance in the east).
There's in truth very little Britain can and should do about any of this - Boris makes cheap political points and you lap it up. The truth of the human tragedy that is Syris shames us all ultimately but it's the Conservatives, not Labour, who have been the governing party in all of this and whatever cheap point you want to make about Ed Miliband's tactics in the last Parliament, the truth is neither Cameron nor Johnson has convinced anyone it's worth sending a single British soldier to die in Syria so we are left with air strikes which pale into insignificance beside the Russian and Syrian Government activities.
You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious. [/pedant]
"epidemic adjective uk /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/ happening a lot and affecting many people: Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions . Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious. [/pedant]
"epidemic adjective uk /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/ happening a lot and affecting many people: Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions . Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.
You posting a link from the Mail doesn't approach mullable I'm afraid.
Ahh.... but the Mail are only referring to a piece of independent research that points out how shite Scotland's deficit problem has become. Play the ball not the player. It is a serious financial problem for both Scotland and the UK. It is a serous political problem for the SNP. Part of their USP is appearing to be competent in the knowledge that Labour abandoned that aspiration years ago.
Why would I bother engaging with a player ineligible to get on the park, let alone kick the ball?
Fine, ignore the Scottish deficit then. I'm sure nothing painful will ever come of it anyway.
I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....
LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)
what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?
I'd list Cameron's successes as:
- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)
- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control
- SindyRef & AV
- Winning a second term.
Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....
Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.
You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....
Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...
The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.
How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?
This Marmite saga does point to a deeper risk for EU traders into the UK. If we get into tariffs and pricing disputes via a 'hard' Brexit we will see consumers just shift their preferences in many cases. It won't be a profit margin squeeze but a sales collapse for some.
In a fully globalised and debt laden world all countries are in a devaluation arms race. The UK has just managed by the back door to achieve a significant movement in its currency - back towards fair value. We're very lucky. AEP has a decent article on a similar theme in today's Telegraph.
I'm not sure consumers will change their preference to a large degree. The media will persecute one or two brands, whilst others who are more canny or lucky will emerge unscathed.
As an aside, what d you see as the 'fair value' for the pound?
The IMF see fair value to the USD as around $1.10:
Lord King, the former Governor of the Bank of England, echoed the comments on sterling, saying the sell-off was largely welcome.
"During the referendum campaign, someone said the real danger of Brexit is you'll end up with higher interest rates, lower house prices and a lower exchange rate, and I thought: dream on.
Because that's what we've been trying to achieve for the past three years and now we have a chance of getting it."
It was interesting listening to TM at PM questions that she saw the Softbank purchase of ARM as a major investment by Japanese companies. The reality is that this was a debt leveraged smash and grab acquisition of the most valuable family of patents owned by the UK. I was a reluctant seller of my shares in ARM.
If our PM cannot understand the difference between selling the family silver and new investment then I feel we are lost.
ARM might have been a UK plc, in the FTSE 100, but that did not mean it was owned by Brits.
It's shareholder list will have been very international, and I suspect there are probably twice as many American shareholders than British ones. (ARM had a very actively traded ADR in the US; indeed, it may well have traded more shares there than in London.)
And Softbank may be a Japanese company, but it has an equally international shareholder list. Fidelity in London (rather than the parent in Boston) is a big holder, for example, as is Schroders.
Ultimately, the proportion of British ownership of ARM has probably decreased, but marginally. Perhaps from 25% to 15%. That is all.
Fair point although we could argue percentages. Softbank is more debt funded so this is also transferring wealth to banks in addition to asset management companies.
However what is clear this is not a major investment in the UK unlike the Nissan plant in Sunderland.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious. [/pedant]
"epidemic adjective uk /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/ happening a lot and affecting many people: Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions . Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.
Pretty sure that just about every dictionary will have epidemic as a non-infectious-disease- specific adjective.
I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....
LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)
what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?
I'd list Cameron's successes as:
- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)
- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control
- SindyRef & AV
- Winning a second term.
Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....
Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.
You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....
Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...
The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.
How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?
I didn't say you were a researcher! In any case, I'm not going to bully your identity out of you - that's not nice. I more just interested in your inexplicable Damascene conversion to Mayite euroscepticism!!
I'm not a 'Mayite eurosceptic'.
I knew May personally at University, so possibly have a better measure of her than others.
I'm a Remainer who accepts we're leaving the EU.....or are those too many facts to process?
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
But he has the job because he would be a bigger liability (aka risk to May) anywhere else. May will just arrange for him to be abroad a bit more.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
I think our policy is to wait for Putin to die. He won't be around for ever.
You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious. [/pedant]
"epidemic adjective uk /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/ happening a lot and affecting many people: Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions . Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.
Pretty sure that just about every dictionary will have epidemic as a non-infectious-disease- specific adjective.
As a noun it has to be an infectious disease. It seems a bit of a fudge to allow it as an adjective to describe anything else.
A tutor of mine at Oxford had a real bugbear about the phrase "humanitarian crisis". He considered it to be a contradiction in terms. He also didn't like people using contemporary as a synonym for modern.
You can't have an epidemic of diabetes as it isn't infectious. [/pedant]
"epidemic adjective uk /ˌep.ɪˈdem.ɪk/ us /ˌep.əˈdem.ɪk/ happening a lot and affecting many people: Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions . Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
I think that just goes to show how words can be misused.
Pretty sure that just about every dictionary will have epidemic as a non-infectious-disease- specific adjective.
As a noun it has to be an infectious disease. It seems a bit of a fudge to allow it as an adjective to describe anything else.
A tutor of mine at Oxford had a real bugbear about the phrase "humanitarian crisis". He considered it to be a contradiction in terms. He also didn't like people using contemporary as a synonym for modern.
What is the English language if not a glorious, malleable, ever-changing fudge?
On the Marmite wars. In the short term it will damage Tesco more as customers can go over to ASDA, Morrisons etc and stock up there, along with their other groceries. In the longer term it will damage Unilever more as customers discover Tesco sell a commoditised version of Marmite at a much lower price. The dispute tests how much brands are worth, including Tesco's brand. It's a massive issue for both firms as a lot of their value derives from their brands. I think both parties will be looking to put it to bed quickly.
So if Unilever "want to increase prices" are they seeking to renege on a contract, or are they simply opening negotiations for the next one? And why don't they start buying their spent yeast for Marmite from foreign breweries? And exactly what has their Forex department been up to? It's business, if you f*** up, you make a loss.
FWIW I prefer Bovril. Is that also a Unilever product? Made in the UK?
According to Wiki, made in Burton-on-Trent and South Africa.
I lived near Burton as a child, and the smells over the town were always quite nice. Unlike the Nestle factory in nearby Hatton, where the smell of coffee was always rather too strong.
As an aside, my dad used to drive past the Nestle factory, roll down his window and shout 'Maxwell House!" at the workers...
Its campaign season at the moment for the sugar beet factory at Newark. We get a burnt earth smell across the town for a few weeks each year and whilst most people would probably hate it I love it as it reminds me of home and also of the approach of winter.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
I think our policy is to wait for Putin to die. He won't be around for ever.
The Unilever/Tesco spat is easy to resolve . Unilever simply say , if you want to pay in Euros or another sound currency there is no price increase at all , if you want to pay in pounds sterling a currency which even Brexiteers think is worthless the price increase is 20%
How do you think Tesco would respond?
Where they exist they will try and source similar products from elsewhere . They may find that sourcing them from say US manufacturers is even more expensive because of the collapsed pound .
The boss of Tesco probably knows that. Does the Head of Unilever?
I suspect he does. Unilever owns Marmite!
Kraft Foods own Vegemite, but the slide in Sterling vs the Aus $ has been pretty steep, so up in cost by 18%, making good old British Marmite a bargain at just 10% up.
We know Unilever owns Marmite. It seems the head of Unilever is unaware it is made entirely in Britain and so is not subject to exchange rate pressures.
That doesn't follow, unless the main ingredient of marmite is fresh English seaside air and their plants are powered by cockneys peddling little bicycles.
It follows when their main ingredient is a waste product from something else that is also made in this country.
That could happen anyway, in fact is likely to happen if Russia were to move towards a more democratic system. I would add that destabilising your enemy is in general a good thing, although if Russia fell apart it might make Syria look like a vicarage tea party.
On the Marmite wars. In the short term it will damage Tesco more as customers can go over to ASDA, Morrisons etc and stock up there, along with their other groceries. In the longer term it will damage Unilever more as customers discover Tesco sell a commoditised version of Marmite at a much lower price. The dispute tests how much brands are worth, including Tesco's brand. It's a massive issue for both firms as a lot of their value derives from their brands. I think both parties will be looking to put it to bed quickly.
Fair point although we could argue percentages. Softbank is more debt funded so this is also transferring wealth to banks in addition to asset management companies.
However what is clear this is not a major investment in the UK unlike the Nissan plant in Sunderland.
Yes but neither was it "selling the family silver" which was the point you were trying to make.
SoftBank's justification for buying ARM rests on the success of IoT, which will be a very cutthroat business, and the real money in that sector will be made by the services and data centre hardware not the dirt cheap client hardware. SoftBank paid a large premium for ARM and the shareholders were very happy to take it. Only time will tell if they paid too much.
"It's going to be hilarious/epic etc if [nasty right winger] wins."
It will be excellent if Hillary wins as it will stop the nasty anti-immigrant, anti-intellectual Red BNP juggernaut in its tracks. And the unpleasant Platoite wing of PB will STFU.
@Innocent_Abroad@Jobabob One of you wants someone, anyone, to ban the Labour party. The other is very keen on banning things. Why don't you work together?
I guess the question on Cameron (which we're many years away from being able to answer) is does his Brexit "failure' (sic) outweigh his other successes.....
LOL at the "middling Churchill" trollement" (EDIT: Ah, OK missed the 'post-war' bit)
what are Cameron's successes? Didn't break anything too badly during the first term when Nick was helping him?
I'd list Cameron's successes as:
- Creating and running a stable coalition government that went to full term (recall how this site was thick with 'Govt will fall by October 2010' predictions)
- Getting the economy moving and starting to bring the public finances under control
- SindyRef & AV
- Winning a second term.
Of course if BREXIT is the unmitigated disaster the remoaners wish for would have us believe, then all of these are overshadowed - but I think that is what has weighed heavily in the academics' estimation of him.....
Your conversion from europhile Cameroon to Mayite eurosceptic shill is one of the hardest things to swallow on here. You work for CCHQ and just spin the government line of the day. No other explanation stands up to any scrutiny. Thank God for Tories like TSE and - yes - ScottP. They have their own mind.
You're more entertaining (which isn't saying much) when you are proposing banning things....
Ha! I think the word you are looking for is ... 'rumbled'...
The word you're looking for is 'delusional'.
How many CCHQ researchers do you think there are who went to University 40 years ago?
I didn't say you were a researcher! In any case, I'm not going to bully your identity out of you - that's not nice. I more just interested in your inexplicable Damascene conversion to Mayite euroscepticism!!
I'm not a 'Mayite eurosceptic'.
I knew May personally at University, so possibly have a better measure of her than others.
I'm a Remainer who accepts we're leaving the EU.....or are those too many facts to process?
CarlottaVance was she always as shy/nervous as she comes across?
@SkyData: Wld you support British military intervention in Aleppo? Support 46% Oppose 37%
...if it meant conflict with Russia? Oppose 51% Support 31%
The West needs to accept Assad is here to stay unless and until the Syrian people in free elections decide otherwise. The sooner Assad wins against the rebels, the sooner the bombing will stop.
We need to be focusing on defeating ISIS (a much bigger threat to us), arming the Kurds (sod Turkey) and withdrawing support from the rebels, many of whom are Jihadists (sod Saudi).
Obama can't do this because he will be depicted as weak in the election campaign. Once elected, Hillary could, but she is more likely to continue to support the Saudis and drag this thing out. The most useful thing the British Government could do is to persuade her to change policy.
Don't the politicians who are desperate to interfere know the old advice? 'Always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something [or someone] worse'. Three clear examples: Iraq, Libya, Syria ...
Trump appears to get it. Peter Hitchens gets it. Andrew Mitchell doesn't.
Assad's father had the blood of 30,000 on his hands from 1982 but this conflict is said to have killed 400,000.
FWIW I prefer Bovril. Is that also a Unilever product? Made in the UK?
According to Wiki, made in Burton-on-Trent and South Africa.
I lived near Burton as a child, and the smells over the town were always quite nice. Unlike the Nestle factory in nearby Hatton, where the smell of coffee was always rather too strong.
As an aside, my dad used to drive past the Nestle factory, roll down his window and shout 'Maxwell House!" at the workers...
Well there we are then. Spread Bovril on yer toast!
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
But he has the job because he would be a bigger liability (aka risk to May) anywhere else. May will just arrange for him to be abroad a bit more.
It did smoke out an anti-American, anti-West response from Corbyn. Although risky to use foreign affairs to make internal political points.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
+1
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
I wonder how long TM will put up with him? The govt fixers had obviously had words with him - he hadn't been doing too badly thus far - but he can't help himself can he, and a few more faux pas like this and he'll be too much of a liability.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
I think our policy is to wait for Putin to die. He won't be around for ever.
I've not commented much on the US Presidential election as it seems to provoke all sorts of reaction.
The Wisconsin numbers reported yesterday show Clinton doing about as well as Obama in 2012 which would be more than sufficient. There's still one debate to come and a lot of time for things to change but as OGH would say, it's not one contest but 50 smaller contests.
Trump's journey to 270 EVs looks incredibly difficult unless a lot of pollsters are getting things very wrong in a lot of places at the same time. It may be that the Trump supporters are a very vocal minority (on social media and forums like this) but as each person only has one vote, that amount of anger only gets you so far.
Turning it round, HRC gets to 182 with states she won't lose. Adding in PA, MI, MN, WI and Virginia gets her to 251. Add in NV, CO and NM and she's over the line at 271. That's before we've even considered OH, FL and NC. Add those plus 3/4 of ME and she's at 340.
Beyond that it gets much tougher for HRC and we would be into landslide territory. Could she win AK, AZ, SC and IA plus nick one of NE's to end up 370-168. I think that's her absolute top line and Trump's lowest possible. I haven't seen any polling to suggest she can go deeper into the red states unless there are mass GOP abstentions.
Trump can still win - of course it's possible - but national polls mean very little and the State polls are the ones to look at.
The West needs to accept Assad is here to stay unless and until the Syrian people in free elections decide otherwise. The sooner Assad wins against the rebels, the sooner the bombing will stop.
We need to be focusing on defeating ISIS (a much bigger threat to us), arming the Kurds (sod Turkey) and withdrawing support from the rebels, many of whom are Jihadists (sod Saudi).
Obama can't do this because he will be depicted as weak in the election campaign. Once elected, Hillary could, but she is more likely to continue to support the Saudis and drag this thing out. The most useful thing the British Government could do is to persuade her to change policy.
Yep. I think you are absolutely right with all of that. It is not where we would have chosen to start from but given the current situation it seems to be the only sane way to resolve this crisis.
Mr. Stodge, agree entirely on Boris. A Foreign Secretary calling for rabble to protest outside the Russian embassy was not an edifying spectacle.
He was mostly taking the piss out of Stop The West, sorry "War", to be fair. But yes, I'm fed up with us fighting other people's wars.
It was a good line, aimed fairly at Labour, but should have been donated to a backbencher, not delivered by the Foreign Secretary. "Knockabout" is not what you expect from the Foreign Secretary. Dark threats backed up with gunboats, more so.
Boris talking about looking at more "kinetic" options in Syria.
What an absolute tosser, totally out of his depth using words he think are sexy, of which he has absolutely no idea of the implications.
Yes, it comes to something when David Davis has proved the most competent of the Three Clowns
It has always seemed strange to me that the 'c' word should be seen as a derogatory word when the majority of children get enjoyment from their antics.
@SkyData: Wld you support British military intervention in Aleppo? Support 46% Oppose 37%
...if it meant conflict with Russia? Oppose 51% Support 31%
The West needs to accept Assad is here to stay unless and until the Syrian people in free elections decide otherwise. The sooner Assad wins against the rebels, the sooner the bombing will stop.
We need to be focusing on defeating ISIS (a much bigger threat to us), arming the Kurds (sod Turkey) and withdrawing support from the rebels, many of whom are Jihadists (sod Saudi).
Obama can't do this because he will be depicted as weak in the election campaign. Once elected, Hillary could, but she is more likely to continue to support the Saudis and drag this thing out. The most useful thing the British Government could do is to persuade her to change policy.
Don't the politicians who are desperate to interfere know the old advice? 'Always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something [or someone] worse'. Three clear examples: Iraq, Libya, Syria ...
Trump appears to get it. Peter Hitchens gets it. Andrew Mitchell doesn't.
Assad's father had the blood of 30,000 on his hands from 1982 but this conflict is said to have killed 400,000.
Yes - Trump seems to get it. I think it is the only thing in his favour.
Unfortunately that is likely to harden Clinton against modifying her foreign policy to recognise realpolitik. Under Clinton, the bombing (and hand-wringing) in Syria is likely to continue and the relationship with Russia is likely to heat up. I want Clinton to get the presidency rather than Trump, but this is a major downside.
The Unilever/Tesco spat is easy to resolve . Unilever simply say , if you want to pay in Euros or another sound currency there is no price increase at all , if you want to pay in pounds sterling a currency which even Brexiteers think is worthless the price increase is 20%
How do you think Tesco would respond?
Where they exist they will try and source similar products from elsewhere . They may find that sourcing them from say US manufacturers is even more expensive because of the collapsed pound .
Let them eat Vegemite.
But does vegemite keep mosquitos at bay? I took a small pot of Marmite with me into the Pantanale, and was initially mocked each breakfast as I spread it on my toast. But I was the one laughing when I didn't get bitten once, although I am usually a walking buffet for biting critters.
On the 'c' word: it's one of the few to become harsher over the centuries. [I've actually written a blog post due to be posted tomorrow with some references to this].
Things like 'mischief' and 'naughty' used to mean thinks like popping out for a spot of rape or sexual assault.
It may simply be phonetic (harder sounds than the two words above) or could be due to the wildly differing range of slang terms and suchlike for the genitals of the genders. There are tons of todger-related euphemisms and terms, but relatively few for fairy caves. That may also be a function of tallywhackers being inherently more amusing [there's quite a bit of gender-related humour in Sir Edric].
We've heard quite a bit about the Libertarian and Green candidates in the States, both of whom sound deeply unimpressive, but I had to check out Wikipedia for McMullin, who seems close to winning Utah. He sounds reactionary but sane:
More problems for Labour ... If they try too hard to stop Brexit with Parliamentary shenanigans, May could arrange to lose a vote - an excuse for a GE, and a nice three week campaign with Jeremy discussing Syria and his cunning plan to stop the violence. Non-intervention but intervening in a statesmanlike way via a request to ISIS to play nicely.
Plus his insistence to open the borders completely in a nice cuddly Trotskyite international way. Perhaps inviting ISIS to talks, thus revealing his real cunning plan - to split the nasty, revisionist racist vote between all the other parties, Blairites included, who are the worst of all.
Comments
The last thing we should be doing is some sort of morality-driven interfering effort.
I see you can get c.28/5 to back Trump on Matchbook at the mo'. I assume you're poised to fill your boots when it reaches the magic 6?
Typical Boris, done just to get himself in the media. No political upside at all, and a pointless diplomatic black mark that will make dealing with Russia on something else more difficult down the line. The sort of behavour that he is supposed to be learning himself out of.
Brace yourself!
It's shareholder list will have been very international, and I suspect there are probably twice as many American shareholders than British ones. (ARM had a very actively traded ADR in the US; indeed, it may well have traded more shares there than in London.)
And Softbank may be a Japanese company, but it has an equally international shareholder list. Fidelity in London (rather than the parent in Boston) is a big holder, for example, as is Schroders.
Ultimately, the proportion of British ownership of ARM has probably decreased, but marginally. Perhaps from 25% to 15%. That is all.
The amount you were out probably points to Clinton winning by a narrow squeak, but we wont know until the night and if there is denial after early results it could be very profitable as it was in June.
A single poll duth not make a deep red state go doolally.
Trump is certainly struggling but the split vote will help him and enough voters will hold their nose, very tightly, for Donald to cross the line.
There was value early on as a trading bet against Trump but that has gone.
Russia's principal objective in Syria is and always has been to ensure whoever runs the country will continue to grant naval facilities at Latakia and Tartus to Russian ships. Had the rebels realised this and accommodated Moscow, they might have overthrown Assad.
Assad is now a Russian client in a way he wasn't before. IS are no immediate threat to Damascus and can be confined to the far east and south of Syria - it's the rebels around Aleppo who are Assad's biggest threat. Russia is therefore concentrating on them and will leave IS to wither (with Kurdish help in the north and with the Iraqi advance in the east).
There's in truth very little Britain can and should do about any of this - Boris makes cheap political points and you lap it up. The truth of the human tragedy that is Syris shames us all ultimately but it's the Conservatives, not Labour, who have been the governing party in all of this and whatever cheap point you want to make about Ed Miliband's tactics in the last Parliament, the truth is neither Cameron nor Johnson has convinced anyone it's worth sending a single British soldier to die in Syria so we are left with air strikes which pale into insignificance beside the Russian and Syrian Government activities.
happening a lot and affecting many people:
Poverty in this country has reached epidemic proportions .
Crime and poverty are epidemic in the city."
Now theres a conspiracy theory
http://order-order.com/2016/10/13/labour-councillor-posts-anti-semitic-propaganda/
How is that peerage shameless err Shami??
However what is clear this is not a major investment in the UK unlike the Nissan plant in Sunderland.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
What's so galling about this particular speech, looking at it from our side, is that when he calls for members of the public to protest outside the Russian embassy, he's trying to avoid taking any responsibility himself, or onto the government, for standing up to Russia. I know it's not easy, but we shouldn't be running scared. Much stronger sanctions should've been put in place when there was the interference in Eastern Ukraine, and the longer we show weakness the worse our long-term position is getting.
As a noun it has to be an infectious disease. It seems a bit of a fudge to allow it as an adjective to describe anything else.
A tutor of mine at Oxford had a real bugbear about the phrase "humanitarian crisis". He considered it to be a contradiction in terms. He also didn't like people using contemporary as a synonym for modern.
What an absolute tosser, totally out of his depth using words he think are sexy, of which he has absolutely no idea of the implications.
SoftBank's justification for buying ARM rests on the success of IoT, which will be a very cutthroat business, and the real money in that sector will be made by the services and data centre hardware not the dirt cheap client hardware. SoftBank paid a large premium for ARM and the shareholders were very happy to take it. Only time will tell if they paid too much.
Until it turned out the new emperor had a thing for mutilating people.
Well of course Boris is Boris. He is also an absolute cunt.
Three clear examples: Iraq, Libya, Syria ...
Trump appears to get it. Peter Hitchens gets it. Andrew Mitchell doesn't.
Assad's father had the blood of 30,000 on his hands from 1982 but this conflict is said to have killed 400,000.
The Wisconsin numbers reported yesterday show Clinton doing about as well as Obama in 2012 which would be more than sufficient. There's still one debate to come and a lot of time for things to change but as OGH would say, it's not one contest but 50 smaller contests.
Trump's journey to 270 EVs looks incredibly difficult unless a lot of pollsters are getting things very wrong in a lot of places at the same time. It may be that the Trump supporters are a very vocal minority (on social media and forums like this) but as each person only has one vote, that amount of anger only gets you so far.
Turning it round, HRC gets to 182 with states she won't lose. Adding in PA, MI, MN, WI and Virginia gets her to 251. Add in NV, CO and NM and she's over the line at 271. That's before we've even considered OH, FL and NC. Add those plus 3/4 of ME and she's at 340.
Beyond that it gets much tougher for HRC and we would be into landslide territory. Could she win AK, AZ, SC and IA plus nick one of NE's to end up 370-168. I think that's her absolute top line and Trump's lowest possible. I haven't seen any polling to suggest she can go deeper into the red states unless there are mass GOP abstentions.
Trump can still win - of course it's possible - but national polls mean very little and the State polls are the ones to look at.
It has always seemed strange to me that the 'c' word should be seen as a derogatory word when the majority of men seek more of it.
Unfortunately that is likely to harden Clinton against modifying her foreign policy to recognise realpolitik. Under Clinton, the bombing (and hand-wringing) in Syria is likely to continue and the relationship with Russia is likely to heat up. I want Clinton to get the presidency rather than Trump, but this is a major downside.
It's an old SAS thing, I was told.
Things like 'mischief' and 'naughty' used to mean thinks like popping out for a spot of rape or sexual assault.
It may simply be phonetic (harder sounds than the two words above) or could be due to the wildly differing range of slang terms and suchlike for the genitals of the genders. There are tons of todger-related euphemisms and terms, but relatively few for fairy caves. That may also be a function of tallywhackers being inherently more amusing [there's quite a bit of gender-related humour in Sir Edric].
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_McMullin
Has anyone heard him speak or have any views about him?
Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground,
You in mid-air..
Where are the clowns?
Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around,
One who can't move...
Where are the clowns?
Send in the clowns.
Plus his insistence to open the borders completely in a nice cuddly Trotskyite international way. Perhaps inviting ISIS to talks, thus revealing his real cunning plan - to split the nasty, revisionist racist vote between all the other parties, Blairites included, who are the worst of all.
Thus the old joke now goes as follows. "No, you're not a vagina. A vagina's useful, you're not."
For clarity, not aimed at the moderator, of course.
'Labour 2016
http://order-order.com/2016/10/13/labour-councillor-posts-anti-semitic-propaganda/
How is that peerage shameless err Shami??'
The nasty party seems to be ram packed with racists.