There is no chance of May calling an election until the end of 2019 once May invokes Article 50 next month, the negotiations will be too time consuming
That's why I said Corbyn.
if we had a functional opposition, there would be more chance of an election
No there would not, May has an extremely tough 2 years of negotiations coming up and she is not going to risk a parliamentary majority and have the distraction of a general election campaign when she has that to focus on, regardless of who leads Labour
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
Alistair...I don't know why you even bother getting into a dialogue with the likes of the very clearly inadequate seant. You wrote a very good article this morning, all he can write is shit, crass, inane or stupid shit.
In the long run we will win...it might take some time...but bigotry, small mindedness, blind ideology and nastiness just aren't compatible with human evolution...
Ah, shit you say? Perhaps so.
But if I do write shit it is shit that is number 7 in the German bestseller lists, this week.
And also number 9 in Finland. And number 2 in your local Sainsburys. Number 3 in Brazil. Go check. That's THIS WEEK
You? I don't know what you do. Fuck dogs or something? I forget. I think you lack purpose since your retirement from your total non-career. If you need advice email me on Vanilla. I like to help.
Interesting that George Osborne is now on the Black Rock payroll.
This is what Black Rock predicted about the UK economy on 14th July:
' Britain will be plunged into a recession this year and be plagued with lower economic growth for another five years because of the shock decision for the UK to leave the EU, BlackRock analysts have said.
BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world with $4.6 trillion under management as of 2015. Richard Turnill, chief investment strategist, has said that firm's "base case" is recession, meaning at a minimum, it expects the UK GDP to fall for two successive quarters in a row. '
No there would not, May has an extremely tough 2 years of negotiations coming up and she is not going to risk a parliamentary majority and have the distraction of a general election campaign when she has that to focus on, regardless of who leads Labour
If we had a functional opposition it would not be her choice. that's the point.
What the referendum has revealed is that certain people were right all along; There really was nothing between the three major parties 2010-2015.
The country may be divided now, but it always was... the phoney war between Orange bookers, Blairites and Cameroons provided a smokescreen that let them stay in power as long as they acted out their roles without the public noticing
An exceptionally clever post...I don't agree with it, but I get your insight.....
Thank you! I will mark today on the calendar in the way I do when I have good fortune on my side in betting to remind me that sometimes people are complimentary on here!
If Melenchon teamed up with Hamon they could knock out both Macron and Fillon.
On paper maybe.
The reality is that some Melenchon supporters would be more likely to vote for Le Pen rather than Hamon and some Hamon supporters would be more likely to drift to Macron than vote for Melenchon.
And as @tig86 has said, if they did manage to get enough support to make it to the final round, it would be likely to hand the Presidency to Le Pen
When we vote for the Commons, we know that it's for five years and we have to live with it.
Why not do something similar with referendums? It's the same basic principle as the FTPA.
The subjects have longer term consequences so we accept that we live with it for a longer period. It should transcend party politics.
We have now had three referendums in the last five years. On each occasion the voters have been told it's a generational vote. Then, lo and behold, the losing side spends it's time saying it isn't. That's destabilising and disruptive.
The reality of Scotland, rather than your scenario, is perpetual calls for another referendum with little real sign that there is any great zest for it.
We have a situation now where some want referendums banned because they don't like the outcomes and then a situation where people want them constantly re-run, usually because they lost.
The answer has to be somewhere in the middle with due consideration given to the significance of the topic.
People must be allowed a say, but it's hugely disruptive to go back to the same subjects too frequently, especially where the subject is a very deep one like membership of the UK or the EU.
It's just a thought.
I don't see any great feeling within the UK or Scotland for quick re-runs of referendums.
If we re ran the referendum what do you think the turnout would be? 60%?
No there would not, May has an extremely tough 2 years of negotiations coming up and she is not going to risk a parliamentary majority and have the distraction of a general election campaign when she has that to focus on, regardless of who leads Labour
If we had a functional opposition it would not be her choice. that's the point.
You think they'd lose a no confidence motion? If she were facing a strong leader I think Tory MPs would be even less inclined to support one.
I am shocked I tell you, shocked that after the predictions of doom the downgrading of growth forecasts (NOW Scott not after exit) and yet.... a few revisions later the growth forecasts are back to where they were.
It's almost like it was all scaremongering bollox.
When we vote for the Commons, we know that it's for five years and we have to live with it.
Why not do something similar with referendums? It's the same basic principle as the FTPA.
The subjects have longer term consequences so we accept that we live with it for a longer period. It should transcend party politics.
We have now had three referendums in the last five years. On each occasion the voters have been told it's a generational vote. Then, lo and behold, the losing side spends it's time saying it isn't. That's destabilising and disruptive.
The reality of Scotland, rather than your scenario, is perpetual calls for another referendum with little real sign that there is any great zest for it.
We have a situation now where some want referendums banned because they don't like the outcomes and then a situation where people want them constantly re-run, usually because they lost.
The answer has to be somewhere in the middle with due consideration given to the significance of the topic.
People must be allowed a say, but it's hugely disruptive to go back to the same subjects too frequently, especially where the subject is a very deep one like membership of the UK or the EU.
It's just a thought.
I don't see any great feeling within the UK or Scotland for quick re-runs of referendums.
If we re ran the referendum what do you think the turnout would be? 60%?
I expect it would be down.
The idea that we ask the people and then keep asking them because we don't like the answer is a bad one. It's corrosive for democracy and public trust.
When we vote for the Commons, we know that it's for five years and we have to live with it.
Why not do something similar with referendums? It's the same basic principle as the FTPA.
The subjects have longer term consequences so we accept that we live with it for a longer period. It should transcend party politics.
We have now had three referendums in the last five years. On each occasion the voters have been told it's a generational vote. Then, lo and behold, the losing side spends it's time saying it isn't. That's destabilising and disruptive.
The reality of Scotland, rather than your scenario, is perpetual calls for another referendum with little real sign that there is any great zest for it.
We have a situation now where some want referendums banned because they don't like the outcomes and then a situation where people want them constantly re-run, usually because they lost.
The answer has to be somewhere in the middle with due consideration given to the significance of the topic.
People must be allowed a say, but it's hugely disruptive to go back to the same subjects too frequently, especially where the subject is a very deep one like membership of the UK or the EU.
It's just a thought.
I don't see any great feeling within the UK or Scotland for quick re-runs of referendums.
If we re ran the referendum what do you think the turnout would be? 60%?
I expect it would be down.
The idea that we ask the people and then keep asking them because we don't like the answer is a bad one. It's corrosive for democracy and public trust.
Democracy is just the means to an end for some people and can be dispensed with if it doesn't produce the 'right' answer.
No there would not, May has an extremely tough 2 years of negotiations coming up and she is not going to risk a parliamentary majority and have the distraction of a general election campaign when she has that to focus on, regardless of who leads Labour
If we had a functional opposition it would not be her choice. that's the point.
I remember a Spitting image sketch when Maggie says to Kinnock that a "tiny willied cringing vegetable was exactly what we needed for HM's opposition."
No there would not, May has an extremely tough 2 years of negotiations coming up and she is not going to risk a parliamentary majority and have the distraction of a general election campaign when she has that to focus on, regardless of who leads Labour
If we had a functional opposition it would not be her choice. that's the point.
Yes it would as she has an overall majority in Parliament and only 1 Tory MP voted against Article 50 and Labour MPs like Hoey and Field backed Leave as did Carswell and the DUP
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Buy some land, plant some trees. A legacy for your daughters and future generations.
I loved the post earlier something along the lines of. We were asked. We answered. Now we go back to sleep. Politicians, if you don't deliver, we'll wake up again. That how the British do change!
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Max your ISA's. Open and fill child ISA's for your kids. Invest n venture capital funds ( big tax rebates)
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Buy some land, plant some trees. A legacy for your daughters and future generations.
Buy a house next to J.K Rowling and build a big ugly block of council flats.
Just catching up on these numbers, was otherwise engaged earlier this evening. Appear on the whole to be similar to last weeks'. Breakdown by age still truly appalling for Labour:
Pensioners: Con 60%, Ukip 14%, Lab 11%, LD 8% 50-64: Con 49%, Lab 19%, Ukip 17%, LD 11%
May vs Corbyn: Pensioners: May 75%, Corbyn 7% 50-64: May 59%, Corbyn 10%
Important: (a) Median age of whole UK population recently passed 40, so would guess that of voters is somewhere close to 50 by now. (b) The older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to bother to turn out in the first place.
Other observations:
1. The social class gap in voting intention for Labour and the Tories has evaporated: ABC1s and C2DEs both prefer the Conservatives over Labour by similar margins. The main difference is now that the Liberal Democrats are the third party, ahead of Ukip, for the ABC1s; whereas Ukip are in a statistical dead heat with Labour as second party for the C2DEs. 2. The pattern of women being somewhat more sceptical about Theresa May (though not any more sympathetic to Jeremy Corbyn) than men, and of women continuing to support Labour in greater numbers than men, is maintained. The non-Conservative vote is even more fragmented amongst men than women, and I continue to maintain that, if Labour is mauled rather than routed at the next general election, it may well owe its survival to the dogged loyalty of (probably younger) female voters. 3. The Scottish sub-sample (albeit very small) gives a similar result to the recent Panelbase Scotland-specific poll, with the SNP cornering about half the vote, the Tories a very distant second in the upper twenties, and Labour shipwrecked in the mid-teens. Meanwhile, in Southern England outside of London (with nearly four times as many seats as Scotland,) the Tories have half the vote and the three main challenger parties are all sub 20%. 4. As continues to be the case in the majority of national VI surveys, Ukip scores above Anti-Ukip - in this case 15% vs 11% - despite the shambolic state of the former. If there is a massive groundswell of Continuity Remain sentiment in the general population then it is stubbornly refusing to reveal itself.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Max your ISA's. Open and fill child ISA's for your kids. Invest n venture capital funds ( big tax rebates)
My ISAS are already maxed. I've done the venture capital thing. That's my problem.
Gosh I wish I was in your position. You could always contribute to my SIPP I'd love to be able to have the occasional box of fish fingers after I retire "sigh"
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Foreign property - somewhere in Greece or Italy where you can have SeanT branded wine and olive oil.
Owning your own weight in silver will cost about £60k - commissioning a life-size silver statue of yourself will cost more but would be uberTrump style.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Buy some land, plant some trees. A legacy for your daughters and future generations.
Interesting. I have a very canny Chinese friend in Bangkok, daughter of a millionaire, niece of a multi-millionaire, and a hugely successful businesswoman in her own right.
And that was her advice. Buy Land. In fact she wants me to join with her in buying some land in Napa, California. She reckons it is undervalued.
Those Chinese know about money. Them and the Jews. I may do what she says.
Some Chinese know about money, they also tend to know about oppression.
The standard state of the majority of Chinese throughout history had been abject poverty.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Buy some land, plant some trees. A legacy for your daughters and future generations.
Interesting. I have a very canny Chinese friend in Bangkok, daughter of a millionaire, niece of a multi-millionaire, and a hugely successful businesswoman in her own right.
And that was her advice. Buy Land. In fact she wants me to join with her in buying some land in Napa, California. She reckons it is undervalued.
Those Chinese know about money. Them and the Jews. I may do what she says.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
I didn't think anyone read the headers? They got to be so obviously provocative that I stopped believing the authors meant it, and prefer now to get straight into a long, boring daily argument under the line w one of the usual suspects, ending in stalemate.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
Alistair...I don't know why you even bother getting into a dialogue with the likes of the very clearly inadequate seant. You wrote a very good article this morning, all he can write is shit, crass, inane or stupid shit.
In the long run we will win...it might take some time...but bigotry, small mindedness, blind ideology and nastiness just aren't compatible with human evolution...
Ah, shit you say? Perhaps so.
But if I do write shit it is shit that is number 7 in the German bestseller lists, this week.
And also number 9 in Finland. And number 2 in your local Sainsburys. Number 3 in Brazil. Go check. That's THIS WEEK
You? I don't know what you do. Fuck dogs or something? I forget. I think you lack purpose since your retirement from your total non-career. If you need advice email me on Vanilla. I like to help.
I have to say, embarrassingly, that I bought one off your books...the Ice Twins....the concept of twins was interesting. But I couldn't get through the first few pages...it wasn't just crap and dross and badly written and tedious...it was worse. It was sad and pathetic. It actually made me feel bad about myself for wasting my time reading it. But you are in good company,,,,,,I once started the DeVinci Code and felt much the same.
But well done you for selling it...and making good money. Publishing novels is probably as competitive as it gets, so on that regard you are exceptional.
Looking back down thread, I see I was a little mean to Mister Tyson (tho he did start it).
Pierced by my conscience, I just want to rebalance the world by saying thankyou Tyson, for giving me some very very good advice about my older daughter, advice which turned out to be spot on, and which I followed - and all is much better in the world in that respect.
So you may be a fucker of dogs, but you did me and my family a big favour with some well-timed wisdom. Grazie.
I will now return to being a mean Son of a Bitch, etc etc
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
I didn't think anyone read the headers
The brief ones, and the lengthier pieces written by Cyclefree, are a good read.
Roger's during the last election were very good too. He's managed to achieve that fairly unusual position of seeming completely different above and below the line.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Tomorrow will be the end of my sixth week without alcohol. Big test on Monday - a night in Brussels on my own. What else is there to do but drink beer? The plan is to end the dry spell a week tomorrow on a flight to India. A few glasses of BA biz class wine await. It could get messy.
Amazingly, I have lost around a stone and a half just by laying off the booze. There's a lesson there.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenon. One day it will be diagnosed and given a special name. The psychosis that ensues when western intellectual liberal elites lose for the first time ever. Matthew Parris exhibits similar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
AC Grayling is my favourite. So totally other-worldly and unknowing.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenon. One day it will be diagnosed and given a special name. The psychosis that ensues when western intellectual liberal elites lose for the first time ever. Matthew Parris exhibits similar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
At GE 2015 there were 2 or 3 scenarios
Cameroon Majority Cameroon/Orange Book Coalition Blairite/Orange Book Coalition
The three protagonists magnified the tiny differences in their philosophies to kid the public they were representing different strands of opinion, safe in the knowledge that whoever won, the status quo would remain.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Buy some land, plant some trees. A legacy for your daughters and future generations.
Buy a house next to J.K Rowling and build a big ugly block of council flats.
lol! Superb.
Seriously. You could always give back in terms of charity (not saying you don't already) you've come along way since your addict days and giving to say a rehabilitation centre or something will make you feel good inside.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
I didn't think anyone read the headers
The brief ones, and the lengthier pieces written by Cyclefree, are a good read.
Roger's during the last election were very good too. He's managed to achieve that fairly unusual position of seeming completely different above and below the line.
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
Do you want a bet that the UK economy will not be smaller on June 23 2018 than it was on June 23 2016? i.e. Two years after the vote?
You could even do a spread bet on how many of the six predictions they actually got right
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenon. One day it will be diagnosed and given a special name. The psychosis that ensues when western intellectual liberal elites lose for the first time ever. Matthew Parris exhibits similar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of French aristocrats in 1789.
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
I didn't think anyone read the headers? They got to be so obviously provocative that I stopped believing the authors meant it, and prefer now to get straight into a long, boring daily argument under the line w one of the usual suspects, ending in stalemate.
OFF-topic, but are there any financial experts in the house? Is Mister Nabavi around, or Charles, perhaps?
It's just that (and I am genuinely not trying to sound like a smug twat, or at least no more than normal) thanks to the nice Germans and Dutch and Nordics and Frogs, I have stupid amounts of money now sitting in my various accounts, in cash. A very sizeable six figure sum.
What the F do I do with it? I've already got a fairly hefty sum in shares. I'm invested in a start-up company. My main asset is London property so it doesn't make sense to buy more property, as diversifying is key, isn't it? Plus it could crash.
So where do you put it? Land? Gold? What? Premium Bonds?
Advice welcome. And yes this is a Very Very First World Problem and I am sorry for sounding like a git, but I am genuinely clueless. And pb is often very good in these situations.
Ooh, you could always go all Titus Salt and set up a model community somewhere
Tomorrow will be the end of my sixth week without alcohol. Big test on Monday - a night in Brussels on my own. What else is there to do but drink beer? The plan is to end the dry spell a week tomorrow on a flight to India. A few glasses of BA biz class wine await. It could get messy.
Amazingly, I have lost around a stone and a half just by laying off the booze. There's a lesson there.
In all seriousness, how do you cope with the boredom?
I'd love to quit drinking, for a while. I drink too much, too often, it will kill me in the end. In Bangkok last month I did two days without (my first dry spell for a year?) but Jesus it was so DULL.
I went to bed at about 11 with a cup of green tea. I felt no better in the morning.
Tho I did manage to read Hillbilly Elegy in one session, which I recommend for an insight into Trump's victory and the decline of white working class America.
I've enjoyed the discipline. After a couple of weeks it's actually pretty easy. And losing weight helps. That'll all go back on again, no doubt. But a break has definitely done me good.
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
Yet Cameron and Osborne DIDN'T say 'over two years' did they.
They said
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy. '
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did o-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenonAs for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of French aristocrats in 1789.
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
The French aristocrats all got executed or fled. Wealthy Remainers will continue to lead gilded lives, as will wealthy Leavers. In fact, not much will change for anyone. If you are hoping for otherwise, you are going to be very disappointed.
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
Do you want a bet that the UK economy will not be smaller on June 23 2018 than it was on June 23 2016? i.e. Two years after the vote?
No, because I don't think it will.
However, I do think that there is a substantial risk (I've put it at 10% to 20%) that the EU will be institutionally incapable of coming to a sensible deal with the UK, which would cause substantial damage in 2019. The damage would be as much to them as to us, but the decision-making process is so broken that we can't ignore that risk.
To answer your question about what to do with your well-earned loot, there are two parts to it. The first is wrappers - you say you've maxed out on ISAs (and VCTs?). Good, keep at it - ISAs really come into their own when you invest over 10 or 20 years, you can stash a serious amount of money out of reach of the taxman, under current legislation. I suspect that will change some time, but for now, it's a brilliant deal for the well-off.
Have you also maxed out on pension contributions? Those are also no-brainers if you've got spare cash. If you earn over £150K, you begin to lose the £40K annual allowance, but you might still be able to carry forward the allowance from previous years. If so, get on with it, because you can only carry forward for three years, so you might need to do it by the beginning of April.
All that is just wrappers. The question of where to invest within those wrappers is particularly difficult at the moment. US shares look to be in a bubble, which isn't to say they won't keep rising for a while at least, and the Trump political risk is a complete wild-card. The UK is at risk of Brexit troubles. The Eurozone is unfashionable, and might be worth a punt. Overall, though, I wouldn't go all-in on shares at the moment. If you do invest in shares, keep well-diversified geographically.
You can keep some in cash, for a while at least. That means you lose out because of inflation, but the loss is limited. There's no hurry to invest in troubled times.
Otherwise, property funds, infrastructure funds (eg John Laing Environmental Assets) might be worth a look.
Of course, I know nothing, this is not investment advice, do your own research, you might lose your shirt, etc etc.
Tomorrow will be the end of my sixth week without alcohol. Big test on Monday - a night in Brussels on my own. What else is there to do but drink beer? The plan is to end the dry spell a week tomorrow on a flight to India. A few glasses of BA biz class wine await. It could get messy.
Amazingly, I have lost around a stone and a half just by laying off the booze. There's a lesson there.
In all seriousness, how do you cope with the boredom?
I'd love to quit drinking, for a while. I drink too much, too often, it will kill me in the end. In Bangkok last month I did two days without (my first dry spell for a year?) but Jesus it was so DULL.
I went to bed at about 11 with a cup of green tea. I felt no better in the morning.
Tho I did manage to read Hillbilly Elegy in one session, which I recommend for an insight into Trump's victory and the decline of white working class America.
I've enjoyed the discipline. After a couple of weeks it's actually pretty easy. And losing weight helps. That'll all go back on again, no doubt. But a break has definitely done me good.
How about social engagements? And what do you do with the long winter evenings??
I've cracked the weight issue (I have had times as a fatty, and topped out at a gross 14 and a half stone). I now have a fitness app on my smartphone and a very smart scales.
When I go over 13 stone or 82 kilos I stop eating and exercise more. That's it. I literally stop eating (I'll have a nutritious breakfast but no lunch or dinner, I do allow myself red wine)
A few days later, at most, I'm back to my ideal weight. It usually takes 48 hours.
That's how you stay at your ideal eight. YOU STOP EATING. Its not quantum physics. But it does require a little bit of willpower. But then I quit heroin after 15 years, so I must have willlpower.
As a happily married beta male I don't go out much these days. And giving up eating is a step too far. I don't care *that* much about losing weight.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good aar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of French aristocrats in 1789.
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
Very interesting. And yes, those are all good examples.
Essentially (as Parris himself sometimes admits in moments of self doubt - or clarity) the liberal western elite has been in control, and won every battle, since 1945. That's three or four generations of easy, assured success, reinforced by a sense of moral purpose. That engenders a vivid form of complacency, and entitlement, a sense that we MUST be right because WE ARE clearly successful, and therefore superior in all ways, not least our moral world-view.
So a huge reversal like Brexit is mind-bending, and utterly befuddling. Like the French aristos of 1789 contemplating their entire world in collapse, as you say. No doubt many went mad before the Terror even got going.
To an extent the French aristos and Chinese mandarins might have seen worrying signs ahead if they'd been open minded - the French often losing wars and increasing outside trade with China.
The idea of generations of success brought to a crashing halt by people they despised matches the Southern plantation holders more or a more worrying comparison might be with German industrialists / Prussian militarists in 1918.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinginosters.
That ws a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you rntributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good aar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of Fin 1789.
The worldand they thought it would be always such.
And tchanged.
And theytraders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
Very interesting. And yes, those are all good examples.
Essentially (as Parris himself sometimes admits in moments of self doubt - or clarity) the liberal western elite has been in control, and won every battle, since 1945. That's three or four generations of easy, assured success, reinforced by a sense of moral purpose. That engenders a vivid form of complacency, and entitlement, a sense that we MUST be right because WE ARE clearly successful, and therefore superior in all ways, not least our moral world-view.
So a huge reversal like Brexit is mind-bending, and utterly befuddling. Like the French aristos of 1789 contemplating their entire world in collapse, as you say. No doubt many went mad before the Terror even got going.
As a symbolic act of rebellion the Brexit vote was quite something. As a game-changing event for the structure of society, a la French revolution, we'll have to see about that. The elites are all still in place and going nowhere; it remains an open question what if anything Brexit delivers in improving the lives of ordinary people. The chances are things will carry on pretty much as they are, which means for most people life will not be a bed of roses.
I am giving more to charity. Rich liberal guilt beckons. It's probably inevitable.
What about a specific charitable project, to diversify your life as well as your assets? Something you know about - perhaps a Sean Thomas Writing Fellowship - you'd invite people to send you a sample chapter of a thriller, and give the best 10 10 hours each of advice. Or offer these people https://www.addictionhelper.com/rehab/charity-rehab/ a series of unpaid talks for recovering addicts on how to make it stick and what worked for you?
"Under all scenarios the economy shrinks, the value of the pound falls, inflation rises, unemployment rises, wages are hit, and as a result - government borrowing goes up. "
Not yet, tick, tick, not yet, expected soon, tick.
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
Do you want a bet that the UK economy will not be smaller on June 23 2018 than it was on June 23 2016? i.e. Two years after the vote?
No, because I don't think it will.
k.
To answer your question about what to do with your well-earned loot, there are two parts to it. The first is wrappers - you say you've maxed out on ISAs (and VCTs?). Good, keep at it - ISAs really come into their own when you invest over 10 or 20 years, you can stash a serious amount of money out of reach of the taxman, under current legislation. I suspect that will change some time, but for now, it's a brilliant deal for the well-off.
Have you also maxed out on pension contributions? Those are also no-brainers if you've got spare cash. If you earn over £150K, you begin to lose the £40K annual allowance, but you might still be able to carry forward the allowance from previous years. If so, get on with it, because you can only carry forward for three years, so you might need to do it by the beginning of April.
All that is just wrappers. The question of where to invest within If you do invest in shares, keep well-diversified geographically.
You can keep some in cash, for a while at least. That means you lose out because of inflation, but the loss is limited. There's no hurry to invest in troubled times.
Otherwise, property funds, infrastructure funds (eg John Laing Environmental Assets) might be worth a look.
Of course, I know nothing, this is not investment advice, do your own research, you might lose your shirt, etc etc.
Thankyou for the advice. I knew you'd be good value.
I'm still tempted by LAND. My Chinese friend, a US citizen, is super sharp. She reckons we can get a decent plot in Napa for half a million. And California is almost immune to world catastrophe. Nothing but upside.
Hmm.
I have friends who own a small vineyard in Sonoma next door to Napa. The drought was killing them to the extent that if the rain had not come this year, they were going to be selling at a big loss and heading up to Oregon. But Jesus has the rain come. However, the eco-system there is in a fragile way. If you have the cash, San Francisco, San Jose, Palo Alto or Menlo Park may be a better option.
@ProfTomkins: Oh good. Nicola Sturgeon wasted £140,000 of public money pursuing her hopeless Article 50 case in the Supreme Ct. @HTScotPol has the story
@ProfTomkins: Remember: she lost 11-0. That's some return on £140k.
That engenders a vivid form of complacency, and entitlement, a sense that we MUST be right because WE ARE clearly successful, and therefore superior in all ways, not least our moral world-view.
And California is almost immune to world catastrophe.
Earthquakes...
Droughts. The most recent one has been horrific.
Unfortunately it has ended - ruining many of the AGW theories. Now they have too much water and they forgot to repair the dams when the sun was shining.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenonAs for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of French aristocrats in 1789.
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
The French aristocrats all got executed or fled. Wealthy Remainers will continue to lead gilded lives, as will wealthy Leavers. In fact, not much will change for anyone. If you are hoping for otherwise, you are going to be very disappointed.
If it hadn't caused change there wouldn't be so much anger from some Remainers.
Now that change might be moral or intellectual or psychological rather than material but its still change to those affected by it.
I am giving more to charity. Rich liberal guilt beckons. It's probably inevitable.
What about a specific charitable project, to diversify your life as well as your assets? Something you know about - perhaps a Sean Thomas Writing Fellowship - you'd invite people to send you a sample chapter of a thriller, and give the best 10 10 hours each of advice. Or offer these people https://www.addictionhelper.com/rehab/charity-rehab/ a series of unpaid talks for recovering addicts on how to make it stick and what worked for you?
"Sean Thomas Center For Kids Who Can't Write Good Thrillers And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too"
With the previous generation of 'energy saving bulbs' costing a fortune and containing mercury and impossible to dispose of legally there was a point. But now the LED bulbs have totally changed the market - I am sitting under a 1500lm yellow bulb as I type. 7w.
@ProfTomkins: Oh good. Nicola Sturgeon wasted £140,000 of public money pursuing her hopeless Article 50 case in the Supreme Ct. @HTScotPol has the story
@ProfTomkins: Remember: she lost 11-0. That's some return on £140k.
Tories just one point off 30% in Scotland in today's YG subsample.
Tomorrow will be the end of my sixth week without alcohol. Big test on Monday - a night in Brussels on my own. What else is there to do but drink beer? The plan is to end the dry spell a week tomorrow on a flight to India. A few glasses of BA biz class wine await. It could get messy.
Amazingly, I have lost around a stone and a half just by laying off the booze. There's a lesson there.
If Melenchon teamed up with Hamon they could knock out both Macron and Fillon.
And hand the Presidency to Le Pen.
Nah, Hamon would beat Le Pen, Melenchon probably too. But irritatingly they show no serious sign of thinking about it. It's like the Greens in Britain, still cheerfully splitting the left-wing vote (and even signing local pacts with the LibDems) even when most of their programme has been adopted by the Labour leadership.
And California is almost immune to world catastrophe.
Earthquakes...
Droughts. The most recent one has been horrific.
Unfortunately it has ended - ruining many of the AGW theories. Now they have too much water and they forgot to repair the dams when the sun was shining.
The drought caused a huge amount of damage and even now long-term supply is in doubt in many parts of the state - particularly in the south. If the rains go away again for a couple of years, it could get bad pretty quickly.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
Shame you don't seem to listen anymore. Antifrank was great. Al Meeks seems to be hung in a perpetual groundhog day of June 22nd 2016.
Talking of charities, I'm reading Macaskill's "Doing Good Better" at the moment. Most of it is fairly obvious to anyone who has an interest in charity and a vaguely mathematical leaning (editorial summary: decide what the most effective charity is, using independent data, and give them what you can, don't be distracted by cute ideas that don't actually work).
But one of his themes is that doing good works (as I've just urged on Sean) is a bad idea for high-earners - they should maximise their income, however frivolous or controversial it may be, and give the surplus to the efficient charity, not mess about trying to do stuff themselves. For example, he says that cosmetic surgeons shouldn't switch to heart surgery - if they're good at making film stars beautiful, they should stick to that and generate funds for mosquito nets.
What do others think of this? I see the logic and like his disciplined focus, but think it underestimates the willingness of people to give more if they have an interest and overestimates the dedicated will to give away extra income - I suspect the cosmetic surgeon who redoubles his efforts on this basis will olten end up buying another yacht.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenonAs for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of French aristocrats in 1789.
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
The French aristocrats all got executed or fled. Wealthy Remainers will continue to lead gilded lives, as will wealthy Leavers. In fact, not much will change for anyone. If you are hoping for otherwise, you are going to be very disappointed.
If it hadn't caused change there wouldn't be so much anger from some Remainers.
Now that change might be moral or intellectual or psychological rather than material but its still change to those affected by it.
Of course. Some people lost when they usually win. They'll get used to it. But their privilege gives them the opportunity and time to rail against the result. I see no evidence that anything much will change for the vast majority who live further down the wealth scale.
If Melenchon teamed up with Hamon they could knock out both Macron and Fillon.
And hand the Presidency to Le Pen.
Nah, Hamon would beat Le Pen, Melenchon probably too. But irritatingly they show no serious sign of thinking about it. It's like the Greens in Britain, still cheerfully splitting the left-wing vote (and even signing local pacts with the LibDems) even when most of their programme has been adopted by the Labour leadership.
Do I take it you don't like Greens ?
Now in Broxtowe Labour and the LibDems have often got along very well.
And then there are some LibDems, OGH for example, who have really negative views about Greens.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinginosters.
That ws a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, y
Nah, it was drivel.
But you rntributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good aar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
Its the mentality of Fin 1789.
The worldand they thought it would be always such.
And tchanged.
And theytraders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
Very integot going.
As a symbolic act of rebellion the Brexit vote was quite something. As a game-changing event for the structure of society, a la French revolution, we'll have to see about that. The elites are all still in place and going nowhere; it remains an open question what if anything Brexit delivers in improving the lives of ordinary people. The chances are things will carry on pretty much as they are, which means for most people life will not be a bed of roses.
But, the French Revolution did not change or transform French society in a trice. Largely, the rich remained rich, the poor remained poor. Society became more meritocratic over time, but it took decades (and Napoleon) and France is still highly stratified by class in ways we don't always appreciate
However the French Revolution changed the prism through which the French looked at themselves, in a good way. It also led to a national revival which saw them conquer most of Europe. Indeed if it weren't for plucky Britain - and Prussia, and Russia - the world would now be speaking French, not English.
Brexit, I hope, will unleash and revive the animal, Napoleonic spirits of the British. The old order is overturned. The lazy and the smug elite, however bright, have been brutally defeated, and their world view upturned.
It says ' WEEKS AND MONTHS AFTER A VOTE TO LEAVE ON JUNE 23 '.
Please explain what timescale ' WEEKS AND MONTHS AFTER A VOTE TO LEAVE ON JUNE 23 ' is supposed to mean ?
It means, as the article makes clear, an immediate shock (tick, just look at sterling, which fell exactly as predicted), and the period thereafter, which as the article makes clear is initially two years, but some of it is up to 2030.
Of course, at the time no-one expected the delay to invoking Article 50 to be as long as it has been, so the timescales are extended; after all, we haven't even started the process yet. It's also true that most economists and other observers (including me) expected the mere fact of the uncertainty produced by the referendum result to have a bigger effect than it did. The reasons for that are twofold, and quite interesting. The first reason is that, contrary to expectations, consumers kept on spending, rather than drawing in their horns straight away. That's a bit of a surprise, but not a big deal really; consumer spending is very fickle, and the signs are that the expected slowdown is now beginning. The second reason is that business investment didn't slow down as much as expected. But that's now happening.
Overall, the effect is slower than expected. But we're very, very far from being able to say the forecasts were wrong overall. You need to wait until the end of 2019 to get the first preliminary data on that.
If you tell me what the deal with our EU friends is going to be, I could make an updated stab at guessing how the economy will react. But you can't, for the very good reason that our EU friends haven't got a clue themselves.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinging tonight has all been by bedwetting Leavers complaining that a former Prime Minister has views. They daren't engage with his arguments so they froth about his past.
Much like, in a small way, the response to my article this morning by the more feeble-minded and incontinent posters.
That was the most dreadful piece of bollocks you wrote this morning. Sorry. But as a professional writer, I just have to be honest. You can be witty and sharp, and you have a good memory for an apposite quote, but there's a reason you are a lawyer not a writer, and that shite this morning was a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, you keep commenting on it; as did many others. Writer gets reaction, bin him. Nah. You look out for Mr Meeks. He does something to you. It's the same with quite a few on here. OGH should be selling ad space against his pieces. No-one else engages the readership like he does.
Nah, it was drivel.
But you read it. And you'll read the next one he writes; then comment on it. Many others will, too. Meeks, they'll call him as they say how wrong he is. Alastair has a following. The only contributor who does.
Actually no. This was the first one where I gave up. It was pitiful.
Meeks is a good amateur writer but Brexit is sending him bonkers. Cf that amazing A C Grayling rant in the New European. Borderline crazy. And, like Meeks, he's a clever man.
It's a definite phenomenon. One day it will be diagnosed and given a special name. The psychosis that ensues when western intellectual liberal elites lose for the first time ever. Matthew Parris exhibits similar symptoms. As for Ian Dunt, his brain should be embalmed and sliced up and cross sections put in the Wellcome museum.
That AC Grayling article was hilariously poor. I took it apart in a facebook post. Only the most swivel eyed of my Remainer friends quoted it.
Has the state of journalism ever been so bad? This weekend I bought an unpublished C18th manuscript that was funnier and better composed than anything I've read this week.
I see that pb's Leavers are having a night off from arguing that the decision whether to leave the EU shouldn't be influenced by the people making the argument.
There is no decision to be made. We decided. We're out. It's done.
Go away and think of something new to whinge about.
The whinginosters.
That ws a bilious piece of dreck.
So bad, y
Nah, it was drivel.
But you rntributor who does.
Its the mentality of Fin 1789.
The worldand they thought it would be always such.
And tchanged.
And theytraders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
Very integot going.
As a symbolic act of rebellion the Brexit vote was quite something. As a game-changing event for the structure of society, a la French revolution, we'll have to see about that. The elites are all still in place and going nowhere; it remains an open question what if anything Brexit delivers in improving the lives of ordinary people. The chances are things will carry on pretty much as they are, which means for most people life will not be a bed of roses.
But, the French Revolution did not change or transform French society in a trice. Largely, the rich remained rich, the poor remained poor. Society became more meritocratic over time, but it took decades (and Napoleon) and France is still highly stratified by class in ways we don't always appreciate
However the French Revolution changed the prism through which the French looked at themselves, in a good way. It also led to a national revival which saw them conquer most of Europe. Indeed if it weren't for plucky Britain - and Prussia, and Russia - the world would now be speaking French, not English.
Brexit, I hope, will unleash and revive the animal, Napoleonic spirits of the British. The old order is overturned. The lazy and the smug elite, however bright, have been brutally defeated, and their world view upturned.
This is good. Let Brexit unfurl.
Goodnight.
What a load of old crap.
How does it feel to have a crazed war criminal, I mean, Tony Blair on your side?
Talking of charities, I'm reading Macaskill's "Doing Good Better" at the moment. Most of it is fairly obvious to anyone who has an interest in charity and a vaguely mathematical leaning (editorial summary: decide what the most effective charity is, using independent data, and give them what you can, don't be distracted by cute ideas that don't actually work).
But one of his themes is that doing good works (as I've just urged on Sean) is a bad idea for high-earners - they should maximise their income, however frivolous or controversial it may be, and give the surplus to the efficient charity, not mess about trying to do stuff themselves. For example, he says that cosmetic surgeons shouldn't switch to heart surgery - if they're good at making film stars beautiful, they should stick to that and generate funds for mosquito nets.
What do others think of this? I see the logic and like his disciplined focus, but think it underestimates the willingness of people to give more if they have an interest and overestimates the dedicated will to give away extra income - I suspect the cosmetic surgeon who redoubles his efforts on this basis will olten end up buying another yacht.
There used to be a bloke who collected charity money in Leeds city centre. He had given up his job and every day he would be singing away and rattling his tin outside M&S.
Someone in a office above calculated that if he'd continued working (he had been an engineer) he could have donated more from his extra earnings than what he raised from his collecting.
Which might have been more efficient but the charity collector always seemed to be really enjoying himself.
Comments
The reality is that some Melenchon supporters would be more likely to vote for Le Pen rather than Hamon and some Hamon supporters would be more likely to drift to Macron than vote for Melenchon.
And as @tig86 has said, if they did manage to get enough support to make it to the final round, it would be likely to hand the Presidency to Le Pen
It's almost like it was all scaremongering bollox.
Lapped up by useful idiots on here.
I really wish I could read French.
The idea that we ask the people and then keep asking them because we don't like the answer is a bad one. It's corrosive for democracy and public trust.
Just catching up on these numbers, was otherwise engaged earlier this evening. Appear on the whole to be similar to last weeks'. Breakdown by age still truly appalling for Labour:
Pensioners: Con 60%, Ukip 14%, Lab 11%, LD 8%
50-64: Con 49%, Lab 19%, Ukip 17%, LD 11%
May vs Corbyn:
Pensioners: May 75%, Corbyn 7%
50-64: May 59%, Corbyn 10%
Important:
(a) Median age of whole UK population recently passed 40, so would guess that of voters is somewhere close to 50 by now.
(b) The older half of the electorate is substantially more likely to bother to turn out in the first place.
Other observations:
1. The social class gap in voting intention for Labour and the Tories has evaporated: ABC1s and C2DEs both prefer the Conservatives over Labour by similar margins. The main difference is now that the Liberal Democrats are the third party, ahead of Ukip, for the ABC1s; whereas Ukip are in a statistical dead heat with Labour as second party for the C2DEs.
2. The pattern of women being somewhat more sceptical about Theresa May (though not any more sympathetic to Jeremy Corbyn) than men, and of women continuing to support Labour in greater numbers than men, is maintained. The non-Conservative vote is even more fragmented amongst men than women, and I continue to maintain that, if Labour is mauled rather than routed at the next general election, it may well owe its survival to the dogged loyalty of (probably younger) female voters.
3. The Scottish sub-sample (albeit very small) gives a similar result to the recent Panelbase Scotland-specific poll, with the SNP cornering about half the vote, the Tories a very distant second in the upper twenties, and Labour shipwrecked in the mid-teens. Meanwhile, in Southern England outside of London (with nearly four times as many seats as Scotland,) the Tories have half the vote and the three main challenger parties are all sub 20%.
4. As continues to be the case in the majority of national VI surveys, Ukip scores above Anti-Ukip - in this case 15% vs 11% - despite the shambolic state of the former. If there is a massive groundswell of Continuity Remain sentiment in the general population then it is stubbornly refusing to reveal itself.
Owning your own weight in silver will cost about £60k - commissioning a life-size silver statue of yourself will cost more but would be uberTrump style.
Some nice art
Vintage sports car
Something for your kids
The standard state of the majority of Chinese throughout history had been abject poverty.
And get some advice on AIM investment.
But well done you for selling it...and making good money. Publishing novels is probably as competitive as it gets, so on that regard you are exceptional.
Roger's during the last election were very good too. He's managed to achieve that fairly unusual position of seeming completely different above and below the line.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/832708293516632065
Amazingly, I have lost around a stone and a half just by laying off the booze. There's a lesson there.
Given that Tony "Warmonger" Blair hates Brexit so much, that surely means it's the right thing to do!
Cameroon Majority
Cameroon/Orange Book Coalition
Blairite/Orange Book Coalition
The three protagonists magnified the tiny differences in their philosophies to kid the public they were representing different strands of opinion, safe in the knowledge that whoever won, the status quo would remain.
Then Dave called the referendum... KABOOM!!!
Not bad so far, given that the forecast was explicitly over two years.
Edit: ah, I see your edit.
A real no cruncher would be able to transpose a table. The SNP vote is 6 (no change)
The world was configured in a way agreeable to themselves and they thought it would be always such.
And then it was changed.
And even worse changed by people they despise.
Perhaps Chinese mandarins and intellectuals in the 19th century when they encountered aggressive Western traders would be an alternative.
Or yet another (and one they would really hate) - the Graylings and Parrises are the Deep South plantation owners after 1860.
They said
' Today, we are setting out our assessment of what would happen in the weeks and months after a vote to Leave on June 23.
It is clear that there would be an immediate and profound shock to our economy. '
WEEKS AND MONTHS
IMMEDIATE AND PROFOUND SHOCK TO OUR ECONOMY
This was from a couple of days ago so may already have been posted but I thought some of these were inspired.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/amazing-adventures-paul-nuttall-according-12611244
However, I do think that there is a substantial risk (I've put it at 10% to 20%) that the EU will be institutionally incapable of coming to a sensible deal with the UK, which would cause substantial damage in 2019. The damage would be as much to them as to us, but the decision-making process is so broken that we can't ignore that risk.
To answer your question about what to do with your well-earned loot, there are two parts to it. The first is wrappers - you say you've maxed out on ISAs (and VCTs?). Good, keep at it - ISAs really come into their own when you invest over 10 or 20 years, you can stash a serious amount of money out of reach of the taxman, under current legislation. I suspect that will change some time, but for now, it's a brilliant deal for the well-off.
Have you also maxed out on pension contributions? Those are also no-brainers if you've got spare cash. If you earn over £150K, you begin to lose the £40K annual allowance, but you might still be able to carry forward the allowance from previous years. If so, get on with it, because you can only carry forward for three years, so you might need to do it by the beginning of April.
All that is just wrappers. The question of where to invest within those wrappers is particularly difficult at the moment. US shares look to be in a bubble, which isn't to say they won't keep rising for a while at least, and the Trump political risk is a complete wild-card. The UK is at risk of Brexit troubles. The Eurozone is unfashionable, and might be worth a punt. Overall, though, I wouldn't go all-in on shares at the moment. If you do invest in shares, keep well-diversified geographically.
You can keep some in cash, for a while at least. That means you lose out because of inflation, but the loss is limited. There's no hurry to invest in troubled times.
Otherwise, property funds, infrastructure funds (eg John Laing Environmental Assets) might be worth a look.
Of course, I know nothing, this is not investment advice, do your own research, you might lose your shirt, etc etc.
https://twitter.com/joshop68/status/831511725065269249/photo/1
The idea of generations of success brought to a crashing halt by people they despised matches the Southern plantation holders more or a more worrying comparison might be with German industrialists / Prussian militarists in 1918.
@ProfTomkins: Remember: she lost 11-0. That's some return on £140k.
Now that change might be moral or intellectual or psychological rather than material but its still change to those affected by it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/22/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-brexit-would-put-our-economy-in/
It says ' WEEKS AND MONTHS AFTER A VOTE TO LEAVE ON JUNE 23 '.
Please explain what timescale ' WEEKS AND MONTHS AFTER A VOTE TO LEAVE ON JUNE 23 ' is supposed to mean ?
But one of his themes is that doing good works (as I've just urged on Sean) is a bad idea for high-earners - they should maximise their income, however frivolous or controversial it may be, and give the surplus to the efficient charity, not mess about trying to do stuff themselves. For example, he says that cosmetic surgeons shouldn't switch to heart surgery - if they're good at making film stars beautiful, they should stick to that and generate funds for mosquito nets.
What do others think of this? I see the logic and like his disciplined focus, but think it underestimates the willingness of people to give more if they have an interest and overestimates the dedicated will to give away extra income - I suspect the cosmetic surgeon who redoubles his efforts on this basis will olten end up buying another yacht.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/832734742713733120
Now in Broxtowe Labour and the LibDems have often got along very well.
And then there are some LibDems, OGH for example, who have really negative views about Greens.
Lib Dem 1575
Con 879
UKIP 104
Lab 79
Of course, at the time no-one expected the delay to invoking Article 50 to be as long as it has been, so the timescales are extended; after all, we haven't even started the process yet. It's also true that most economists and other observers (including me) expected the mere fact of the uncertainty produced by the referendum result to have a bigger effect than it did. The reasons for that are twofold, and quite interesting. The first reason is that, contrary to expectations, consumers kept on spending, rather than drawing in their horns straight away. That's a bit of a surprise, but not a big deal really; consumer spending is very fickle, and the signs are that the expected slowdown is now beginning. The second reason is that business investment didn't slow down as much as expected. But that's now happening.
Overall, the effect is slower than expected. But we're very, very far from being able to say the forecasts were wrong overall. You need to wait until the end of 2019 to get the first preliminary data on that.
If you tell me what the deal with our EU friends is going to be, I could make an updated stab at guessing how the economy will react. But you can't, for the very good reason that our EU friends haven't got a clue themselves.
Has the state of journalism ever been so bad? This weekend I bought an unpublished C18th manuscript that was funnier and better composed than anything I've read this week.
Lets make Sub Editors great again....
Someone in a office above calculated that if he'd continued working (he had been an engineer) he could have donated more from his extra earnings than what he raised from his collecting.
Which might have been more efficient but the charity collector always seemed to be really enjoying himself.