Early voting figures are up - does this mean Democrats are voting who otherwise wouldn't (I doubt it) or Democrats who'd vote on election day are scared? Why are more people voting early than last time? It doesn't achieve anything different from voting on election day. Is it a bit like putting your ballot into the box with special force, as if to say "Take that"?
Why not? Have you seen Trump's favourability? And the how he talks about women and Hispanics...
Sure, good luck to people who vote early because they think it's especially important to stop Trump, even if they achieve the same as if they vote on the day. But does a rise in early voting by Democrats mean a higher percentage for Clinton when they're counted? I'm not convinced.
You do know getting low propensity voters means that they rarely vote, so for them to vote early is very good for the Clinton campaign if they are Democrats/Hispanics? Its a big gain.
I have yet to see any adverts from Trump of democrats jumping ship. Why is that?
My memory is that some elections there are states where there are huge queues on the day. Nothing like as well organized as in UK (I have never had to queue or even seen a queue at a polling station). If I was in US I would vote early rather than stand in the cold for three hours.
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may be materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah. These deals took years to negotiate. No one is going to re-open cans of worms. It's why the Uk will get grandfathered in: it's the path of least resistance.
If as the article state inflation is expected to rise to 4% in the next year, how come I've just been able to tie in a 2 year mortgage rate at 1.5%?
Errr, because the bank is able to hedge its exposure through the swaps market and lock in a guaranteed profit.
So in that case the markets clearly aren't pricing in 4% inflation over the next year. We can safely say it's just another doomer economic opinion, which is the point I was trying to make.
We have had at least 4% annual inflation in house prices since 2009.
Why does no one care about the inflation rate in our biggest spend?
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
@faisalislam: Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree... pic.twitter.com/rj2YrBIWto
@faisalislam: ... in absence of an agreement with the EU27 about grandfathering the deals with Canada, Korea etc, UK businesses "no longer retain access"
Take Back Control...
a) We are taking back control of trade deals. In future Wallonia won't be able to frustrate our ability to make them.
b) IANAL, but if Canada/Korea/whatever and the UK are in principle willing to continue a trade deal, what power would the EU27 have to stop us?
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
Ahem: China?
And who really wants to sign trade deals with them? They are universally unfavourable to the other nation and it just means more Chinese crap in shops.
The TPP/TTIP is an American plan to replace WTO consensus with US exceptionalism. The Asian and European nations who agree with it are complete fools. Better to force the US into sector by sector NTB elimination via the WTO than to take up US goods standards with the TPP with zero input.
That's a very good call. A post-EU Britain should be pushing hard at the WTO for a reduction in NTBs and tariffs. TTP and TTIP are rediculously one sided.
@faisalislam: Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree... pic.twitter.com/rj2YrBIWto
@faisalislam: ... in absence of an agreement with the EU27 about grandfathering the deals with Canada, Korea etc, UK businesses "no longer retain access"
Take Back Control...
a) We are taking back control of trade deals. In future Wallonia won't be able to frustrate our ability to make them.
b) IANAL, but if Canada/Korea/whatever and the UK are in principle willing to continue a trade deal, what power would the EU27 have to stop us?
(b) is the key point: it's not within the EU's power to prevent us being grandfathered, with one caveat: some* trade deals' dispute resolution mechanism is the EU.
* About 5 out of 51, and the 5 are all small countries.
Surely this is a big misjudgement by Suzanne Evans; an appalling reason for anyone to go into teaching?:
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age, one of the frontrunners for the party’s leadership has said."
Jeezo, and she's supposed to be the credible one.
Oh do bugger off. Do you expect us to believe for one second that you wouldn't support Scot nats doing exactly the same to foster a brave new generation of indy-supporting boys and girls?
'Boo hoo, those Nasty Nats who everyone knows want to brainwash kids from the cradle won't admit it, yet when brave, honest Suzanne of the one, true, patriotic party says she wants us to infiltrate the teaching system, she gets called a fuckwit. IT'S NOT FAIR!'
Early voting figures are up - does this mean Democrats are voting who otherwise wouldn't (I doubt it) or Democrats who'd vote on election day are scared? Why are more people voting early than last time? It doesn't achieve anything different from voting on election day. Is it a bit like putting your ballot into the box with special force, as if to say "Take that"?
Why not? Have you seen Trump's favourability? And the how he talks about women and Hispanics...
Sure, good luck to people who vote early because they think it's especially important to stop Trump, even if they achieve the same as if they vote on the day. But does a rise in early voting by Democrats mean a higher percentage for Clinton when they're counted? I'm not convinced.
You do know getting low propensity voters means that they rarely vote, so for them to vote early is very good for the Clinton campaign if they are Democrats/Hispanics? Its a big gain.
I have yet to see any adverts from Trump of democrats jumping ship. Why is that?
My memory is that some elections there are states where there are huge queues on the day. Nothing like as well organized as in UK (I have never had to queue or even seen a queue at a polling station). If I was in US I would vote early rather than stand in the cold for three hours.
The potential of the Monster Vote - those 20m Americans who're registered and haven't voted for at least two or more elections is the total unknown for Trump vote. They're the ones at rallies in many cases. They don't show up in the polling numbers either.
I'm very sceptical as I have been for several weeks that it's as hard for him to win as many predict.
EDIT And the ObamaCare price hikes are real world awful and a total gift for him to exploit. No wonder he's talking non-stop about it.
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
Ahem: China?
And who really wants to sign trade deals with them? They are universally unfavourable to the other nation and it just means more Chinese crap in shops.
More seriously, I think trade deals are generally easy when countries have complementary economies, and difficult when they have similar ones.
So, a trade deal between the (service exporting, commodity importing) UK and (commodity exporting, services importing) Australia will have few difficulties. Both sides see the benefit.
Where they are most difficult is where one country's exports are another country's protected domestic market. So, getting full access to the Indian financial services industry just isn't going to happen, inside or outside the EU.
In general, I think the fact that UK deals only need to satisfy the UK will benefit us post-Brexit, and I think decision making will be quicker. In other words, it will be a net benefit, but a relatively small one.
The big benefit of Brexit is that it increases the accountability of our politicians.
I don't know if this has already been noted, but there's a new, open-source statistical model of the US election available, based on polls only. It looks really rather good, and you can play with the model if you are so inclined and suitably skilled. The model seems to be giving similar results to NYT and HuffPost, with less of a long tail to the distribution than 538.
- 91% probability of a Clinton win overall in the ECV - NC 71% Clinton - FL 64% Clinton - NV 61% Clinton - OH 32% Clinton - IA 23% Clinton - AZ 18% Clinton
Note also the confidence limits on the Clinton national lead - well within the 0-5% band.
Always important to keep a cool head whilst punting on this. Although the media cycle appears to be with Trump, Clinton is still ahead - in addition Nate is factoring in further movement to Trump in his polls only model. I've balanced up a bit further by laying Trump at 3.7
The one thing that makes me a bit nervous is going against Rod Crosby' prediction - but on the flip side his model is still showing a Clinton victory.
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
Ahem: China?
And who really wants to sign trade deals with them? They are universally unfavourable to the other nation and it just means more Chinese crap in shops.
The big benefit of Brexit is that it increases the accountability of our politicians.
You're kidding, right? Any blip or bump along the way over the next 2-10 years will be blamed on Brexit one way or another by politicians (exhibit one: CotE's view on the deficit).
Surely this is a big misjudgement by Suzanne Evans; an appalling reason for anyone to go into teaching?:
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age, one of the frontrunners for the party’s leadership has said."
Jeezo, and she's supposed to be the credible one.
Oh do bugger off. Do you expect us to believe for one second that you wouldn't support Scot nats doing exactly the same to foster a brave new generation of indy-supporting boys and girls?
'Boo hoo, those Nasty Nats who everyone knows want to brainwash kids from the cradle won't admit it, yet when brave, honest Suzanne of the one, true, patriotic party says she wants us to infiltrate the teaching system, she gets called a fuckwit. IT'S NOT FAIR!'
IT'S NOT FAIR = one of SNP's most consistently voiced whines. It's a bit of a give away
Around 28 million people have now voted in the US election. That's almost a quarter of the total votes cast in 2012.
I've changed my view today, now think the turnout will be high.
The same happened in the Brexit referendum, in the last couple of weeks it became clear that a whole load of people who don't normally vote, were turning up this time.
I don't know if this has already been noted, but there's a new, open-source statistical model of the US election available, based on polls only. It looks really rather good, and you can play with the model if you are so inclined and suitably skilled. The model seems to be giving similar results to NYT and HuffPost, with less of a long tail to the distribution than 538.
- 91% probability of a Clinton win overall in the ECV - NC 71% Clinton - FL 64% Clinton - NV 61% Clinton - OH 32% Clinton - IA 23% Clinton - AZ 18% Clinton
Note also the confidence limits on the Clinton national lead - well within the 0-5% band.
What isn't being talked about is that the EU trade deals may have been materially changed for the EU once we Leave.
If the UK is a big importer via an EU trade deal currently, then (when we go) the deal will have substantially changed. The other side may no longer find the EU deal as attractive if we are no longer in it.
The UK may have to re-do trade deals post-Brexit, but so may the EU.
Nah, they've been signed already. Even if trade with the EU becomes less favourable by losing 17% of its GDP the deals are done. The issue will be deepening existing trade ties to include services and investment while forging new relationships. The EU sans UK will find life harder, not just because they have lost the nation most in favour of trade liberalisation, but also because the EU consumption capacity is severely diminished by our decision. No one really wants to do trade deals with export only nations/blocs.
Ahem: China?
And who really wants to sign trade deals with them? They are universally unfavourable to the other nation and it just means more Chinese crap in shops.
More seriously, I think trade deals are generally easy when countries have complementary economies, and difficult when they have similar ones.
So, a trade deal between the (service exporting, commodity importing) UK and (commodity exporting, services importing) Australia will have few difficulties. Both sides see the benefit.
Where they are most difficult is where one country's exports are another country's protected domestic market. So, getting full access to the Indian financial services industry just isn't going to happen, inside or outside the EU.
In general, I think the fact that UK deals only need to satisfy the UK will benefit us post-Brexit, and I think decision making will be quicker. In other words, it will be a net benefit, but a relatively small one.
The big benefit of Brexit is that it increases the accountability of our politicians.
That's a very good analysis. Trade deals with Australia and Canada will be quick to arrange, with India and China less so. But as a free country we don't have 27 other competing interests to deal with in the negotiations.
Surely this is a big misjudgement by Suzanne Evans; an appalling reason for anyone to go into teaching?:
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age, one of the frontrunners for the party’s leadership has said."
Jeezo, and she's supposed to be the credible one.
Oh do bugger off. Do you expect us to believe for one second that you wouldn't support Scot nats doing exactly the same to foster a brave new generation of indy-supporting boys and girls?
Surely this is a big misjudgement by Suzanne Evans; an appalling reason for anyone to go into teaching?:
"Ukip activists should sign up to train as teachers so that they can influence what children are taught from an early age, one of the frontrunners for the party’s leadership has said."
Jeezo, and she's supposed to be the credible one.
Oh do bugger off. Do you expect us to believe for one second that you wouldn't support Scot nats doing exactly the same to foster a brave new generation of indy-supporting boys and girls?
'Boo hoo, those Nasty Nats who everyone knows want to brainwash kids from the cradle won't admit it, yet when brave, honest Suzanne of the one, true, patriotic party says she wants us to infiltrate the teaching system, she gets called a fuckwit. IT'S NOT FAIR!'
IT'S NOT FAIR = one of SNP's most consistently voiced whines. It's a bit of a give away
a) We are taking back control of trade deals. In future Wallonia won't be able to frustrate our ability to make them.
Did you miss this bit?
Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
Not sure if or how ground troops can be counted in election expenses.
Plus there is no Cons effort (which was substantial in Witney) vs the LDs.
Just Zac. And his mum. And his valet. And his wallet.
Of course, if a Tory member funds another party - you know, bus fare to Richmond or sitting on campaign bus, then they can be thrown out of party for backing another one. So, supporters will be thin on the ground.
a) We are taking back control of trade deals. In future Wallonia won't be able to frustrate our ability to make them.
Did you miss this bit?
Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
The UK will likely just inherit/grandfather the CETA deal, of which it is already a signatory. There is nothing in the EU treaties that requires the UK to 'step away' from Treaties it signed while an EU member, so - as it is the path of least resistance - in all but a few cases, it will be in the interests of all parties for the UK to remain as a signatory even after Brexit.
If as the article state inflation is expected to rise to 4% in the next year, how come I've just been able to tie in a 2 year mortgage rate at 1.5%?
Errr, because the bank is able to hedge its exposure through the swaps market and lock in a guaranteed profit.
So in that case the markets clearly aren't pricing in 4% inflation over the next year. We can safely say it's just another doomer economic opinion, which is the point I was trying to make.
We have had at least 4% annual inflation in house prices since 2009.
Why does no one care about the inflation rate in our biggest spend?
A proper building program would sort that out.
Why would developers want to build if house prices are falling?
If as the article state inflation is expected to rise to 4% in the next year, how come I've just been able to tie in a 2 year mortgage rate at 1.5%?
Errr, because the bank is able to hedge its exposure through the swaps market and lock in a guaranteed profit.
So in that case the markets clearly aren't pricing in 4% inflation over the next year. We can safely say it's just another doomer economic opinion, which is the point I was trying to make.
We have had at least 4% annual inflation in house prices since 2009.
Why does no one care about the inflation rate in our biggest spend?
A proper building program would sort that out.
Why would developers want to build if house prices are falling?
Well personally I'm in favour of the public and private sector getting involved. It's a big reason why I'm a Lib Dem member at the moment rather than with the Conservatives.
Around 28 million people have now voted in the US election. That's almost a quarter of the total votes cast in 2012.
I've changed my view today, now think the turnout will be high.
The same happened in the Brexit referendum, in the last couple of weeks it became clear that a whole load of people who don't normally vote, were turning up this time.
Trump is certainly a candidate the likes of which folks haven't had the chance to vote for since...the time of the dinosaurs?
a) We are taking back control of trade deals. In future Wallonia won't be able to frustrate our ability to make them.
Did you miss this bit?
Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
The UK will likely just inherit/grandfather the CETA deal, of which it is already a signatory. There is nothing in the EU treaties that requires the UK to 'step away' from Treaties it signed while an EU member, so - as it is the path of least resistance - in all but a few cases, it will be in the interests of all parties for the UK to remain as a signatory even after Brexit.
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
They are talking about the current deal
As rcs1000 pointed out, EU arbitration might be an issue in 5 of the less important deals.
I see Arron Banks' statement is a good read, as always...
What's he saying? As far as I'm concerned, the more Jonathan Rees-Evans is on our screens, the greater the gaiety of the nation.
He names Hamilton, Carswell and Evans as a "fifth column". Although he gets on fine with Nuttall, he thinks Nuttall would keep the fifth column in place, whilst Banks would have them expelled.
If as the article state inflation is expected to rise to 4% in the next year, how come I've just been able to tie in a 2 year mortgage rate at 1.5%?
Errr, because the bank is able to hedge its exposure through the swaps market and lock in a guaranteed profit.
So in that case the markets clearly aren't pricing in 4% inflation over the next year. We can safely say it's just another doomer economic opinion, which is the point I was trying to make.
We have had at least 4% annual inflation in house prices since 2009.
Why does no one care about the inflation rate in our biggest spend?
A proper building program would sort that out.
Why would developers want to build if house prices are falling?
A developers' profit is determined by the cost at which it bought land, and how much building the house cost. Even during downturns, the spread between these costs and sale price is positive. And don't forget, developers are often sitting on a tonne of debt and have other costs they need to cover. That means that there are always - even at the depths of house price recessions - at least some houses being built and sold.
Not sure if or how ground troops can be counted in election expenses.
Plus there is no Cons effort (which was substantial in Witney) vs the LDs.
Just Zac. And his mum. And his valet. And his wallet.
Of course, if a Tory member funds another party - you know, bus fare to Richmond or sitting on campaign bus, then they can be thrown out of party for backing another one. So, supporters will be thin on the ground.
I think such party rules only aply if you are opposing a candidate from your own party. In this case there is no Conservative standing.
I see Arron Banks' statement is a good read, as always...
What's he saying? As far as I'm concerned, the more Jonathan Rees-Evans is on our screens, the greater the gaiety of the nation.
He names Hamilton, Carswell and Evans as a "fifth column". Although he gets on fine with Nuttall, he thinks Nuttall would keep the fifth column in place, whilst Banks would have them expelled.
The TPP/TTIP is an American plan to replace WTO consensus with US exceptionalism. The Asian and European nations who agree with it are complete fools. Better to force the US into sector by sector NTB elimination via the WTO than to take up US goods standards with the TPP with zero input.
It's possible that a Brexit deal which leaves the EU in control of goods standards will set a precedent for the EU to pull off the same trick where the US has failed.
IEA get an airing for low taxation in the DT. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/02/philip-hammond-needs-a-bonfire-of-taxes-to-spark-growth-here-are/ "Raising revenues necessary to provide a state of an ideal size would enable the abolition of 20 current taxes, including corporation tax, national insurance, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, council tax, and a range of duties. The efficient reformed system would comprise a flat-rate income tax at 15 per cent of income above a personal allowance of £10,000; VAT at 12.5 per cent; a new housing consumption tax at 12.5 per cent; a new location land value tax; and fuel duty at around half the current rate. On a static basis, this would lead to significant income gains across the income distribution, with particularly significant gains for the poorest. In fact, were this package to be implemented, static modelling would suggest that the poorest decile would enjoy tax cuts worth 26 per cent of gross income."
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
They are talking about the current deal
As rcs1000 pointed out, EU arbitration might be an issue in 5 of the less important deals.
I'm sure we can offer arbitration in a third party country with a lovely series of beaches, great food, liberal amounts of booze and bathing beauties....
If as the article state inflation is expected to rise to 4% in the next year, how come I've just been able to tie in a 2 year mortgage rate at 1.5%?
Errr, because the bank is able to hedge its exposure through the swaps market and lock in a guaranteed profit.
So in that case the markets clearly aren't pricing in 4% inflation over the next year. We can safely say it's just another doomer economic opinion, which is the point I was trying to make.
We have had at least 4% annual inflation in house prices since 2009.
Why does no one care about the inflation rate in our biggest spend?
A proper building program would sort that out.
Why would developers want to build if house prices are falling?
Their existing land banks still make them a profit. If rental returns are 5%, then depreciation of less than that figure still makes it better off to buy rather than rent.
Focus leaflets aren't that expensive to print. That's the only cost.
The limit for byelections is £100,000.
This covers not only leaflets but rental of office space, paid for deliveries, advertising and much more.
Zac may find it easier to raise the money but harder to keep within the limit as he may have to pay for data and paid or posted deliveries as he won't have as many volunteers.
The UK will likely just inherit/grandfather the CETA deal, of which it is already a signatory. There is nothing in the EU treaties that requires the UK to 'step away' from Treaties it signed while an EU member, so - as it is the path of least resistance - in all but a few cases, it will be in the interests of all parties for the UK to remain as a signatory even after Brexit.
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
Focus leaflets aren't that expensive to print. That's the only cost.
The limit for byelections is £100,000.
This covers not only leaflets but rental of office space, paid for deliveries, advertising and much more.
Zac may find it easier to raise the money but harder to keep within the limit as he may have to pay for data and paid or posted deliveries as he won't have as many volunteers.
I expect Zac's spend will be close to the £100k limit.
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
@MSmithsonPB: .@Yokeronian@JolyonMaugham Looks it'll be Stay single market Continue paying £££ > Brussels Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement No say
The UK will likely just inherit/grandfather the CETA deal, of which it is already a signatory. There is nothing in the EU treaties that requires the UK to 'step away' from Treaties it signed while an EU member, so - as it is the path of least resistance - in all but a few cases, it will be in the interests of all parties for the UK to remain as a signatory even after Brexit.
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
I can't see any meaningful changes in product standards, irrespective. All electronics, for example, are FCC, CE and UL certified, no matter where they are sold in the world.
Its a huge election for them. Their narrative is that, in fact, remain WON the referendum argument and actually the country wants to stay in the EU on current terms.
IF the result is MEH in a solid remain constituency, they have nowhere to go.
Focus leaflets aren't that expensive to print. That's the only cost.
The cost of bussing in supporters and paying their B&B qualify as election expenses. Also advertising, posters, hire of halls, postage and so on.
Do the LDs pay for supporters B&Bs? I somehow doubt it.
The infamous Tory Battle Bus in 2015 required volunteers to pay for their own accommodation. One of the things Crick got wrong in his reporting.
The Electoral Commission need to get a serious grip on expenses categorisation before 2020. Every party was alleged to have screwed up, so let's clarify the rules and introduce serious penalties for non-compliance.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
@MSmithsonPB: .@Yokeronian@JolyonMaugham Looks it'll be Stay single market Continue paying £££ > Brussels Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement No say
I can't see any meaningful changes in product standards, irrespective. All electronics, for example, are FCC, CE and UL certified, no matter where they are sold in the world.
Well exactly. I got seriously flamed by some of the usual suspects for making that obvious point before the referendum.
So, sorry guys, if you voted for Brexit in the hope of being able to buy a mega-powerful vacuum cleaner, you're set for a disappointment.
I can't see any meaningful changes in product standards, irrespective. All electronics, for example, are FCC, CE and UL certified, no matter where they are sold in the world.
Well exactly. I got seriously flamed by some of the usual suspects for making that obvious point before the referendum.
So, sorry guys, if you voted for Brexit in the hope of being able to buy a mega-powerful vacuum cleaner, you're set for a disappointment.
I didn't vote for Brexit, but I'm sorry to hear that I won't be able to buy a decent powered vacuum in the coming years and decades
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
@MSmithsonPB: .@Yokeronian@JolyonMaugham Looks it'll be Stay single market Continue paying £££ > Brussels Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement No say
A five year restriction on immigrants claiming benefits, as is happening in Germany, would meaningfully reduce low-skilled immigration (from everywhere).
Comments
http://tinyurl.com/h2h3c35
b) IANAL, but if Canada/Korea/whatever and the UK are in principle willing to continue a trade deal, what power would the EU27 have to stop us?
Surely it does affect margins, because margins protect the (real) value of capital.
Perhaps I am missing something.
Clinton 44 .. Trump 44
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/
* About 5 out of 51, and the 5 are all small countries.
Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree
I'm very sceptical as I have been for several weeks that it's as hard for him to win as many predict.
EDIT And the ObamaCare price hikes are real world awful and a total gift for him to exploit. No wonder he's talking non-stop about it.
So, a trade deal between the (service exporting, commodity importing) UK and (commodity exporting, services importing) Australia will have few difficulties. Both sides see the benefit.
Where they are most difficult is where one country's exports are another country's protected domestic market. So, getting full access to the Indian financial services industry just isn't going to happen, inside or outside the EU.
In general, I think the fact that UK deals only need to satisfy the UK will benefit us post-Brexit, and I think decision making will be quicker. In other words, it will be a net benefit, but a relatively small one.
The big benefit of Brexit is that it increases the accountability of our politicians.
I think the 6/4 LDs in Richmond is good value.
Edit to add: lots of places I see...
With Zac 26 points ahead in the only poll ?
The same happened in the Brexit referendum, in the last couple of weeks it became clear that a whole load of people who don't normally vote, were turning up this time.
Plus there is no Cons effort (which was substantial in Witney) vs the LDs.
Just Zac. And his mum. And his valet. And his wallet.
Post Brexit trade deals between Uk and Canada will not be subject to the agreement of the 27 remaining EU countries unless the UK stays within the customs union of EU and some other countries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMA-RI3NE6w
Why would developers want to build if house prices are falling?
Washington Post-ABC Tracking Poll finds race tied, as Trump opens up an 8-point edge on honesty (@sfcpoll @emgusk) https://t.co/Mj69Q9ULp4
And to vote against.
Is something I would pay a large amount to see.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/02/philip-hammond-needs-a-bonfire-of-taxes-to-spark-growth-here-are/
"Raising revenues necessary to provide a state of an ideal size would enable the abolition of 20 current taxes, including corporation tax, national insurance, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, council tax, and a range of duties. The efficient reformed system would comprise a flat-rate income tax at 15 per cent of income above a personal allowance of £10,000; VAT at 12.5 per cent; a new housing consumption tax at 12.5 per cent; a new location land value tax; and fuel duty at around half the current rate. On a static basis, this would lead to significant income gains across the income distribution, with particularly significant gains for the poorest. In fact, were this package to be implemented, static modelling would suggest that the poorest decile would enjoy tax cuts worth 26 per cent of gross income."
The cost of bussing in supporters and paying their B&B qualify as election expenses. Also advertising, posters, hire of halls, postage and so on.
If rental returns are 5%, then depreciation of less than that figure still makes it better off to buy rather than rent.
Looks like trading discussions with China are going well for the Germans and EU.
The slitty eyes comments are going down especially well
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/eu-kommissar-china-veraergert-ueber-oettingers-schlitzaugen-aeusserung-14508868.html
This covers not only leaflets but rental of office space, paid for deliveries, advertising and much more.
Zac may find it easier to raise the money but harder to keep within the limit as he may have to pay for data and paid or posted deliveries as he won't have as many volunteers.
Clinton 39 .. Trump 35
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-02/independents-poll?utm_content=politics&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cmpid==socialflow-twitter-politics
Stay single market
Continue paying £££ > Brussels
Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement
No say
@thomasknox: @MSmithsonPB @gt_carter @JolyonMaugham I think Mike is right, but govt will use semantics to disguise it: call single market something else
Its a huge election for them. Their narrative is that, in fact, remain WON the referendum argument and actually the country wants to stay in the EU on current terms.
IF the result is MEH in a solid remain constituency, they have nowhere to go.
A novel concept, I know.
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
If they can;t get it via the tories, they will get it another way. And this is why.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/01/segregation-blackburn-whalley-range?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
So, sorry guys, if you voted for Brexit in the hope of being able to buy a mega-powerful vacuum cleaner, you're set for a disappointment.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/we-need-to-teach-children-about-porn-at-the-earliest-possible-ag/
"Child abuse, sexual exploitation, and domestic violence are not inevitable crimes. They are terrible acts, compounded by harmful attitudes, that are allowed to thrive through ignorance and disbelief. They are crimes that live with a victim for the rest of their life.
"But the hard-learnt lesson from the child sexual exploitation scandal in my constituency of Rotherham is that they are all preventable crimes."
And they call it the single market. Sheeesh.
It is one of the things that makes the election so hard to predict