The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
@Sandpit The case for the defence is politicans are only flesh and blood. Copeland is one of the prettiest, safest and cheapest places to live in the UK. Why isn't it sucking in investment ? Why should Whitehaven town centre so different to Kendal ? Or even Workington ? Why is a large part of such a pretty, safe and cheap place also a depopulating and increasing scruffy sh*thole ?
Most Copeland voters don't want to face hard truths. It's the Jurrassc Park of Brexit. Whisper it but large sections of the population actually don't want change at all. They are furious a historically fleeting post war settlement they think is normative is gone and want it back as a birthright. But creating a dynamic mixed 21st Century economy to sustain their community ? Too much effort.
This is where Sellafield comes in. For practical purposes it's always been there. It's big enough to prevent socio economic collapse but not big ( or correctly structured ) enough to generate popular prosperity. It's a jealous lover and advocating anything else gets you labelled anti Sellafield. It strangles local politics via it's patronage.
Broadly if you have decades of appalling local government ( persistently re-elected ) , are satisfied with an economic monoculture and appalling NIMBYISM then Copeland is what you get.
The legacy of social capital from heavy industry then Labour's big social spending kept the show on the road. Now both have stopped the roof has fallen in.
The fact the one big new piece of information of this campaign, that Moorside is now under threat and what the government could do about it, hasn't been the define issue is deeply telling.
We can't reap what we don't sow.
Anyway polls have opened so I'm off to vote !
Good morning all. How I love this post!
I live in the Wye Valley AONB. I moved here of my own free will, gave up a successful commercial career (modulo I'm in exalted company here, many of you could buy and sell me manifold) to be with the woman I loved.
I accept that I pay a price for that decision. Culturally it's quite poor. The Internet is worse. My travel costs are far higher. Services aren't great. I could go on.
However, on what basis might I expect to have the equivalent services, infrastructure and job opportunities of one of the large conurbations? Country mice have to accept that sacrifices have to be made.
I could easily imagine a future where areas of the country are re-wilded and the overwhelming bulk of the populace are urbanites.
I lived in Hereford for a few years, housing costs are relatively cheap and your money goes much further and it does now have 1 multiplex and the Courtyard theatre. Farming and cider are the main industries but the council is also quite a big employee.
Some of those statistics are quite shocking. 11% of Ohioans are prescribed opiates, one in eight American men has a felony conviction, the actual unemployment rate is four times the official rate and half of those missing are on some sort of disability benefit etc etc.
I find it staggering that Italy has generated more jobs since 1999 (percentage-wise!) than the US.
One of the more depressing PB spats of recent days was about migrants to Sweden, and someone posted a tweet showing employment rates for native born and migrants to Sweden. Migrants had a 62% employment rate, native born about 80%. A problem no doubt, but the US employment rate for native born Americans was just about the same as those migrants in Sweden.
More Americans die from opiate addiction (majority prescription) than from either guns or vehicles. America is a very sick society, with social and geographic mobility declining, drugged up on prescription, obese and staring at screens all day. Or at least part of it is, while the other part works multiple jobs to make ends meet.
Many parts of Britain are similar. I see a bit too much of it in my clinics. As individual patients, I sympathise and treat, but as a culture it worries me.
but isnt that the culture you have voted for ?
It's not as if this happened overnight, it's the cumulation of pretty much the same policies for the last 20 years or so, irrespective of which party was in government.
No, it isn't what I voted for. Over the 35 years since I reached voting age, I have had a government that I voted for for 10 years, the rest one I opposed.
Unfortunately, in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner.
Which 10 years, incidentally? 1997-2007?
We would however have a better democracy if fewer votes were wasted, and if there were fewer places where voting is effectively pointless.
In a democracy, there is no right to vote for a winner.
I understood your post; you clearly didn't understand mine.
"Wasted vote" is a term used by electoral reform enthusiasts to describe a vote which does not elect a winner.
I remember one coal power station in Yorkshire (forget the name, alas) being denied funding to convert to burning wood pellets and so being planned for closure. Not sure if it's still open.
I wonder how UKIP will do in Stoke. If it's a close Lab-Con contest, they may get squeezed.
To me UKIP are finished - rudderless and pointless, no idea what their canvassers can say on doorsteps. The hatchet job on Nuttall was predictable and effective, Labour are brilliant at it. UKIP's ability to get voters out is dreadful, comfortable Labour win for me.
There were some good rumours/conspiracies around a couple of weeks back, that Charles was, umm, clearing obstacles out of the way in advance of his succession.
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
They have hundred of millions of people not yet working in the cities to call on before that before a remote issue. Issues about where people may or may not want to work have rather less salience in a dictatorship
I remember one coal power station in Yorkshire (forget the name, alas) being denied funding to convert to burning wood pellets and so being planned for closure. Not sure if it's still open.
There were some good rumours/conspiracies around a couple of weeks back, that Charles was, umm, clearing obstacles out of the way in advance of his succession.
There's only one obstacle in the way of his succession
I remember one coal power station in Yorkshire (forget the name, alas) being denied funding to convert to burning wood pellets and so being planned for closure. Not sure if it's still open.
This is a direct result of appointing energy ministers who know no science.
Huhne read PPE at Oxford. Davey read PPE at Oxford. Miliband read PPE at Oxford. The Three Science Dunces.
I wonder how UKIP will do in Stoke. If it's a close Lab-Con contest, they may get squeezed.
To me UKIP are finished - rudderless and pointless, no idea what their canvassers can say on doorsteps. The hatchet job on Nuttall was predictable and effective, Labour are brilliant at it. UKIP's ability to get voters out is dreadful, comfortable Labour win for me.
It will be interesting to see how ukip react to a loss, especially if pipped to second by the tories. I think a flood of people leaving would be avoided, people would be wary of committing to another party directly at this stage, but despite their best efforts on bin eu issues for a lot of people they don't register as a primary option, and if they don't find a good pitch - simply 'we are not the elite isn't enough' - then the end could be abrupt as a major force.
I remember one coal power station in Yorkshire (forget the name, alas) being denied funding to convert to burning wood pellets and so being planned for closure. Not sure if it's still open.
This is a direct result of appointing energy ministers who know no science.
Huhne read PPE at Oxford. Davey read PPE at Oxford. Miliband read PPE at Oxford. The Three Science Dunces.
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
Indigo's post is well argued, but it highlights the negatives we face and the positives they face. In realty, China and India face issues themselves. India should have been a giant for a couple of decades, but it has not due to structural issues that no-one in power appears to want to solve. And as China grows increasingly rich, the population can be bought off. Once the increase slows, there might be an increasing clamour for structural change.
To be fair to the Chinese authorities, they seem to realise this. The question is whether they're willing to do more to address it.
The UK can compete, and we can do well. We don't do this be being overly negative or positive, but by realistically looking at our strengths and weaknesses and acting accordingly.
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
Mr. Cwsc, not just 'don't know science', 'don't have any bloody sense'.
The hypocrisy stinks. That simpleton Davey was in favour of the green levy, hiking fuel prices for the public, whilst himself using a small supplier that was exempt from the charge (on the basis of the business being small).
Edited extra bit: perhaps that was a shade intemperate of me. But there we are.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
Agreed. Recent surveys show around a half of British men had committed adultery at least once and around a quarter of British Women. The women that commit adultery on average have double the number of partners that men do. Very soon its going to be the norm in practise if not admitted as such in polite company.
Mr. B2, disagree. Look at proportional systems. The government is determined by the political class following the vote, not by the electorate at the ballot box.
It's determined by both. There are cases of the largest party being excluded (Germany under Schmidt being one example, better than the PVV in Holland given the PVV's low share), but generally it's quit difficult to keep the largest party out both for mathematical reasons and because of political dynamics.
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
They have hundred of millions of people not yet working in the cities to call on before that before a remote issue. Issues about where people may or may not want to work have rather less salience in a dictatorship
Demographic advantages are likely to be moot. Automation will mean that on-shoring might become more attractive. Whatever happens, the post-WWII blue collar jobs aren't coming back.
Some of those statistics are quite shocking. 11% of Ohioans are prescribed opiates, one in eight American men has a felony conviction, the actual unemployment rate is four times the official rate and half of those missing are on some sort of disability benefit etc etc.
I find it staggering that Italy has generated more jobs since 1999 (percentage-wise!) than the US.
One of the more depressing PB spats of recent days was about migrants to Sweden, and someone posted a tweet showing employment rates for native born and migrants to Sweden. Migrants had a 62% employment rate, native born about 80%. A problem no doubt, but the US employment rate for native born Americans was just about the same as those migrants in Sweden.
More Americans die from opiate addiction (majority prescription) than from either guns or vehicles. America is a very sick society, with social and geographic mobility declining, drugged up on prescription, obese and staring at screens all day. Or at least part of it is, while the other part works multiple jobs to make ends meet.
Many parts of Britain are similar. I see a bit too much of it in my clinics. As individual patients, I sympathise and treat, but as a culture it worries me.
but isnt that the culture you have voted for ?
It's not as if this happened overnight, it's the cumulation of pretty much the same policies for the last 20 years or so, irrespective of which party was in government.
No, it isn't what I voted for. Over the 35 years since I reached voting age, I have had a government that I voted for for 10 years, the rest one I opposed.
Unfortunately, in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner.
Which 10 years, incidentally? 1997-2007?
We would however have a better democracy if fewer votes were wasted, and if there were fewer places where voting is effectively pointless.
Nowhere is voting pointless. Every party starts on zero. If seats remain safe for one party, it's because that's what the voters there want (or, at least, because they can't agree on a better alternative).
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I agree. Living as I do every day with people in real poverty I have very little time for people whining about their lack of wide screen TV or not having a foreign holiday that year. It doesn't however stop it being a massive political issue, if the UK citizens feel they are worse off than Indian or Chinese citizens in the future, they are going to want to blame someone, and it won't be their own sense of entitlement or laziness that carries the can!
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
They have hundred of millions of people not yet working in the cities to call on before that before a remote issue. Issues about where people may or may not want to work have rather less salience in a dictatorship
Demographic advantages are likely to be moot. Automation will mean that on-shoring might become more attractive. Whatever happens, the post-WWII blue collar jobs aren't coming back.
We wont onshore with automation, because everyone seems to want to charge a Robot Tax to pay for Universal Basic Income, which will guarantee it stays offshore in perpetuity!
Demographic advantages are likely to be moot. Automation will mean that on-shoring might become more attractive. Whatever happens, the post-WWII blue collar jobs aren't coming back.
I have a (hopefully) interesting anecdote about this. A company I know makes many (scores per year) variants of the same basic products. They would design cases and other plastic parts electronically, send those plans off to China, and a few weeks later get prototypes back. This would then iterate over a period of time until they got what they and their customers want.
Now they have several 3D printers of different types, plus two more engineers in the UK. They rapidly iterate, send different versions off to customers to see what they prefer, and can respond to customer's requirements much more quickly.
The result is better products, several less jobs in China, a couple more jobs in the UK, and a more responsive service to their customers. Also, information is kept much more internal for longer (and this matters when you find your designs on the Chinese grey market).
I was amazed at how much prototype cases would cost, and what was involved in making them. If you're mass producing then you still (currently) need all that expensive tooling, but prototypes are orders of magnitude cheaper.
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I agree. Living as I do every day with people in real poverty I have very little time for people whining about their lack of wide screen TV or not having a foreign holiday that year. It doesn't however stop it being a massive political issue, if the UK citizens feel they are worse off than Indian or Chinese citizens in the future, they are going to want to blame someone, and it won't be their own sense of entitlement or laziness that carries the can!
Well quite. Having an iPhone 6 when your friends have iPhone 7s doesn't mean you're living in poverty, no matter what some will try to make us believe.
The NYT piece is really quite shocking and shows how badly the economy is providing for the just below average American. I am sure that someone enterprising enough could produce very similar statistics here and for similar reasons. The loss of well paid, semi-skilled jobs in both economies has devastated societies leaving them with chronic structural unemployment with the options being minimum wage work, the gig economy and zero hour contracts. This has a knock on effect to retail, the service economy and the demand on the State's resources.
Absolutely. The sad news is we are going to lose a lot in terms of relative living standards over the next few decades because globalisation acts to average the standard of living of the global workforce, and that means we are going to be averaged against a billion Indians and two billion Chinese. They work harder and longer for less money, business will inevitably move there. They have an effectively bottomless sump of labour to draw from so there will be very little movement in wages in those countries for the foreseeable future. Sure we can console ourselves that our dynamic liberal societies make betters ideas people and we are better at creativity, but how many people does that employ ? Half the population or more doesn't have the gifts to handle anything but a unskilled or semi-skilled job, the trick for the next half a century is going to be making those people feel like valued members of society, because if we continue to shaft them to maintain the standards of living of the lucky few things will get ugly.
I'm far from sure that's the way it's going to end up.
The Chinese working age population has already peaked.
They have hundred of millions of people not yet working in the cities to call on before that before a remote issue. Issues about where people may or may not want to work have rather less salience in a dictatorship
Demographic advantages are likely to be moot. Automation will mean that on-shoring might become more attractive. Whatever happens, the post-WWII blue collar jobs aren't coming back.
We wont onshore with automation, because everyone seems to want to charge a Robot Tax to pay for Universal Basic Income, which will guarantee it stays offshore in perpetuity!
Indigo's post is well argued, but it highlights the negatives we face and the positives they face. In realty, China and India face issues themselves. India should have been a giant for a couple of decades, but it has not due to structural issues that no-one in power appears to want to solve. And as China grows increasingly rich, the population can be bought off. Once the increase slows, there might be an increasing clamour for structural change.
To be fair to the Chinese authorities, they seem to realise this. The question is whether they're willing to do more to address it.
The UK can compete, and we can do well. We don't do this be being overly negative or positive, but by realistically looking at our strengths and weaknesses and acting accordingly.
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I'm far from convinced the Chinese authorities will be able to hold the line if and when the workers start wanting to see some real economic benefits in terms of higher pay, fewer hours and better housing.
The next big pool of cheap labour is Africa - the economic development and exploitation of that continent is well under way and will be the story of the 21st Century. The next big mega-cities will be Lagos, Khartoum and Kinshasa - Lagos is already larger than London and growing phenomenally fast.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
If we wanted to punish for adultery, surely we should be barring Charles from becoming king, rather than barring Camilla from becoming Queen Consort? It was Charles who cheated on the People's Princess, Camilla wasn't the one married to Diana.
I don't understand the ongoing national dislike of Camilla. This is all such ancient history now, and as you say, it was a personal matter among them, and doesn't actually affect anyone else.
Not at the current prices...did I notice you saying you were positive UKIP would get at least 25 percent in Stoke?
@AndyJS prediction of 25-30% for UKIP in Stoke was put quite confidently, it's a small band imo and his standing will increase yet further with the site if it holds up. Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I agree. Living as I do every day with people in real poverty I have very little time for people whining about their lack of wide screen TV or not having a foreign holiday that year. It doesn't however stop it being a massive political issue, if the UK citizens feel they are worse off than Indian or Chinese citizens in the future, they are going to want to blame someone, and it won't be their own sense of entitlement or laziness that carries the can!
Well quite. Having an iPhone 6 when your friends have iPhone 7s doesn't mean you're living in poverty, no matter what some will try to make us believe.
I'm wondering if my generation (end of the boomers) will be the last to know the difference between wants and needs! If you get the two mixed up then disaster looms.
Growing up, my mother managed to feed a family of four with 4oz meat, and generous quantities of pearl barley and vegetables. Eating like that these days is seen as demeaning!
Not at the current prices...did I notice you saying you were positive UKIP would get at least 25 percent in Stoke?
@AndyJS prediction of 25-30% for UKIP in Stoke was put quite confidently, it's a small band imo and his standing will increase yet further with the site if it holds up. Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
Cheers. I'm struggling to see them polling that highly but also loath to ignore anything Andy thinks. If much of that has come from Labour it really will be close at least 3 ways, possibly 4.
I remember thinking how good the 1990s were at the time, and wondering whether it was too good to last. IIRC 1994 was the year the UK had its highest growth rate in recent times.
1994 had growth per capita of 3.6%, only 2000 with 3.4% has been above 3.0% since then. From 2004 onwards every year has had growth in GDP per capita below 2.5%.
Mr. Stodge, maybe. There's a Chinese saying: the empire, long divided, must unite. The empire, long united, must divide.
It's a pretty good summary of Chinese history. I'd be a bit surprised if the empire divided, to be honest.
Not sure I'm suggesting that, Mr Dancer, but in all other developing societies there came a point when the emerging middle class wanted political power to match economic power and challenged the elite who were unwilling to relinquish their monopoly on political power.
In most societies this evolution occurred with violence - I fear the same will happen in China but in the form of a protracted period of economic and political instability.
Not at the current prices...did I notice you saying you were positive UKIP would get at least 25 percent in Stoke?
@AndyJS prediction of 25-30% for UKIP in Stoke was put quite confidently, it's a small band imo and his standing will increase yet further with the site if it holds up. Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
He didn't get POTY!!
It really was a year of favourites getting turned over
Wouldn't she be formally styled Queen when he inherits? Henry VIII wives come to mind, the ones after those divorced were till Queen.
Edit: ah, annulled, so not the same. The question still stands though.
Currently Camilla's The Princess of Wales but no one calls her that
Fair enough given the previous occupant of the position, but the same situation doesn't apply for the style Queen consort.
I've got a good compromise.
Make Camilla the Empress of India instead of Queen.
Could upgrade Cornwall from Duchy to Archduchy.
William will become Duke of Cornwall when Charles becomes king, so Kate will already be duchess of it.
The best solution would be to give Camilla a title in her own right. Make Duchess of Slough, or wherever, with remainder to the lawful heirs male, by Charles.
Not at the current prices...did I notice you saying you were positive UKIP would get at least 25 percent in Stoke?
@AndyJS prediction of 25-30% for UKIP in Stoke was put quite confidently, it's a small band imo and his standing will increase yet further with the site if it holds up. Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
He didn't get POTY!!
It really was a year of favourites getting turned over
I think the favourite is going to get turned over in Copeland :>
Wouldn't she be formally styled Queen when he inherits? Henry VIII wives come to mind, the ones after those divorced were till Queen.
Edit: ah, annulled, so not the same. The question still stands though.
Currently Camilla's The Princess of Wales but no one calls her that
Fair enough given the previous occupant of the position, but the same situation doesn't apply for the style Queen consort.
I've got a good compromise.
Make Camilla the Empress of India instead of Queen.
Could upgrade Cornwall from Duchy to Archduchy.
William will become Duke of Cornwall when Charles becomes king, so Kate will already be duchess of it.
The best solution would be to give Camilla a title in her own right. Make Duchess of Slough, or wherever, with remainder to the lawful heirs male, by Charles.
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I agree. Living as I do every day with people in real poverty I have very little time for people whining about their lack of wide screen TV or not having a foreign holiday that year. It doesn't however stop it being a massive political issue, if the UK citizens feel they are worse off than Indian or Chinese citizens in the future, they are going to want to blame someone, and it won't be their own sense of entitlement or laziness that carries the can!
Well quite. Having an iPhone 6 when your friends have iPhone 7s doesn't mean you're living in poverty, no matter what some will try to make us believe.
I'm wondering if my generation (end of the boomers) will be the last to know the difference between wants and needs! If you get the two mixed up then disaster looms.
Growing up, my mother managed to feed a family of four with 4oz meat, and generous quantities of pearl barley and vegetables. Eating like that these days is seen as demeaning!
Indeed. One only needed to observe the reaction to the PM's comments about those who are 'Just About Managing', to see some of the people on 75-150k salaries who thought they were in that category because of large houses, school fees and multiple annual foreign holidays. Mrs May is going to have to convince them that they're not who she'll be targeting.
Some of those statistics are quite shocking. 11% of Ohioans are prescribed opiates, one in eight American men has a felony conviction, the actual unemployment rate is four times the official rate and half of those missing are on some sort of disability benefit etc etc.
I find it staggering that Italy has generated more jobs since 1999 (percentage-wise!) than the US.
One of the more depressing PB spats of recent days was about migrants to Sweden, and someone posted a tweet showing employment rates for native born and migrants to Sweden. Migrants had a 62% employment rate, native born about 80%. A problem no doubt, but the US employment rate for native born Americans was just about the same as those migrants in Sweden.
More Americans die from opiate addiction (majority prescription) than from either guns or vehicles. America is a very sick society, with social and geographic mobility declining, drugged up on prescription, obese and staring at screens all day. Or at least part of it is, while the other part works multiple jobs to make ends meet.
Many parts of Britain are similar. I see a bit too much of it in my clinics. As individual patients, I sympathise and treat, but as a culture it worries me.
but isnt that the culture you have voted for ?
It's not as if this happened overnight, it's the cumulation of pretty much the same policies for the last 20 years or so, irrespective of which party was in government.
No, it isn't what I voted for. Over the 35 years since I reached voting age, I have had a government that I voted for for 10 years, the rest one I opposed.
Unfortunately, in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner.
Which 10 years, incidentally? 1997-2007?
We would however have a better democracy if fewer votes were wasted, and if there were fewer places where voting is effectively pointless.
Nowhere is voting pointless. Every party starts on zero. If seats remain safe for one party, it's because that's what the voters there want (or, at least, because they can't agree on a better alternative).
That's disingenuous. There are many constituencies where the outcome is a foregone conclusion under FPTP.
I remember thinking how good the 1990s were at the time, and wondering whether it was too good to last. IIRC 1994 was the year the UK had its highest growth rate in recent times.
1994 had growth per capita of 3.6%, only 2000 with 3.4% has been above 3.0% since then. From 2004 onwards every year has had growth in GDP per capita below 2.5%.
IIRC pornography is officially banned in Iceland, although it isn't enforced.
Also, beer was banned in Iceland between about 1920 and 1989. They tried to ban wine as well but Spain threatened a trade war if they didn't exchange wine for fish so the ban was repealed after a few years.
Wouldn't she be formally styled Queen when he inherits? Henry VIII wives come to mind, the ones after those divorced were till Queen.
Edit: ah, annulled, so not the same. The question still stands though.
Currently Camilla's The Princess of Wales but no one calls her that
Fair enough given the previous occupant of the position, but the same situation doesn't apply for the style Queen consort.
I've got a good compromise.
Make Camilla the Empress of India instead of Queen.
Could upgrade Cornwall from Duchy to Archduchy.
William will become Duke of Cornwall when Charles becomes king, so Kate will already be duchess of it.
The best solution would be to give Camilla a title in her own right. Make Duchess of Slough, or wherever, with remainder to the lawful heirs male, by Charles.
So only 5% of people have heard of RL-B but 15|% dislikeability rating. OK
Ignore and move on
Every Labour figure has a net negative likeability; the fact that people are getting higher negative likeability than awareness implies that there's an intrinsic dislikeability by being identified as a Labour figure senior enough to be in the leadership conversation.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
@JackW will know better than me, but I believe that Charles and Camilla's wedding was morganatic (are you sure she is Princess of Wales - I've always called her the Duchess of Cornwall). That means there'd need to be an Act of Parliament to make her Queen.
Not at the current prices...did I notice you saying you were positive UKIP would get at least 25 percent in Stoke?
@AndyJS prediction of 25-30% for UKIP in Stoke was put quite confidently, it's a small band imo and his standing will increase yet further with the site if it holds up. Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
He didn't get POTY!!
It really was a year of favourites getting turned over
I think the favourite is going to get turned over in Copeland :>
And possibly Stoke if UKIP poll that highly and the Tories think they might beat them.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
@JackW will know better than me, but I believe that Charles and Camilla's wedding was morganatic (are you sure she is Princess of Wales - I've always called her the Duchess of Cornwall). That means there'd need to be an Act of Parliament to make her Queen.
If they had a morganatic marriage, why does she have any title whatsoever?
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
@JackW will know better than me, but I believe that Charles and Camilla's wedding was morganatic (are you sure she is Princess of Wales - I've always called her the Duchess of Cornwall). That means there'd need to be an Act of Parliament to make her Queen.
Incorrect, we don't do morganatic in these parts.
I think the way the two of them behaved, scarcely bothering to disguise their relationship even during the Charles/Di engagement, was about as vile as it gets. Lots of people who have got to the age they are now have in our past incidents of behaviour in relationships of which are now deeply ashamed, but they were special.
A hereditary monarchy necessarily involves familial chance. Accordingly the Prince of Wales will succeed his mother and the present Princess of Wales (aka, out of deference to the previous incumbent, as the Duchess of Cornwall) will become Queen Camilla.
An Act of Parliament signed off by new King will be required to formalize any other arrangement and would also require appropriate acts in Commonwealth parliaments that have the monarch as head of state.
Seems a bit overblown in truth. The principal objection being it rewards adultery? Being adulterous is a major personal failing but in normal circumstances doesn't effect anybody else, so the question is what harm arises from Camille being called queen rather than princess consort, since royal figures have more public impact. Other than it making Charles happier I'm struggling to see what difference it would make. Even if not done they're still 'rewarded' for their adultery, not allowing it won't change that.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
@JackW will know better than me, but I believe that Charles and Camilla's wedding was morganatic (are you sure she is Princess of Wales - I've always called her the Duchess of Cornwall). That means there'd need to be an Act of Parliament to make her Queen.
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether the proposed marriage of HRH Prince of Wales to Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles is morganatic. [222341]
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
I agree. Living as I do every day with people in real poverty I have very little time for people whining about their lack of wide screen TV or not having a foreign holiday that year. It doesn't however stop it being a massive political issue, if the UK citizens feel they are worse off than Indian or Chinese citizens in the future, they are going to want to blame someone, and it won't be their own sense of entitlement or laziness that carries the can!
Well quite. Having an iPhone 6 when your friends have iPhone 7s doesn't mean you're living in poverty, no matter what some will try to make us believe.
I'm wondering if my generation (end of the boomers) will be the last to know the difference between wants and needs! If you get the two mixed up then disaster looms.
Growing up, my mother managed to feed a family of four with 4oz meat, and generous quantities of pearl barley and vegetables. Eating like that these days is seen as demeaning!
Indeed. One only needed to observe the reaction to the PM's comments about those who are 'Just About Managing', to see some of the people on 75-150k salaries who thought they were in that category because of large houses, school fees and multiple annual foreign holidays. Mrs May is going to have to convince them that they're not who she'll be targeting.
That is the very last thing she wants to do, it was deliberately vaguely worded to make the maximum number of people think she is going to help them!
Some of those statistics are quite shocking. 11% of Ohioans are prescribed opiates, one in eight American men has a felony conviction, the actual unemployment rate is four times the official rate and half of those missing are on some sort of disability benefit etc etc.
I used to dream of having pineapple on pizza. Would've been like a twelve course meal to us. But I had to make do without pineapple. Or pizza. I used to have to gnaw on what I could scavenge from the neighbour's dustbin.
Some of those statistics are quite shocking. 11% of Ohioans are prescribed opiates, one in eight American men has a felony conviction, the actual unemployment rate is four times the official rate and half of those missing are on some sort of disability benefit etc etc.
I find it staggering that Italy has generated more jobs since 1999 (percentage-wise!) than the US.
One of the more depressing PB spats of recent days was about migrants to Sweden, and someone posted a tweet showing employment rates for native born and migrants to Sweden. Migrants had a 62% employment rate, native born about 80%. A problem no doubt, but the US employment rate for native born Americans was just about the same as those migrants in Sweden.
More Americans die from opiate addiction (majority prescription) than from either guns or vehicles. America is a very sick society, with social and geographic mobility declining, drugged up on prescription, obese and staring at screens all day. Or at least part of it is, while the other part works multiple jobs to make ends meet.
Many parts of Britain are similar. I see a bit too much of it in my clinics. As individual patients, I sympathise and treat, but as a culture it worries me.
but isnt that the culture you have voted for ?
It's not as if this happened overnight, it's the cumulation of pretty much the same policies for the last 20 years or so, irrespective of which party was in government.
No, it isn't what I voted for. Over the 35 years since I reached voting age, I have had a government that I voted for for 10 years, the rest one I opposed.
Unfortunately, in a democracy there is no right to vote for a winner.
Which 10 years, incidentally? 1997-2007?
We would however have a better democracy if fewer votes were wasted, and if there were fewer places where voting is effectively pointless.
Nowhere is voting pointless. Every party starts on zero. If seats remain safe for one party, it's because that's what the voters there want (or, at least, because they can't agree on a better alternative).
That's disingenuous. There are many constituencies where the outcome is a foregone conclusion under FPTP.
I used to dream of having pineapple on pizza. Would've been like a twelve course meal to us. But I had to make do without pineapple. Or pizza. I used to have to gnaw on what I could scavenge from the neighbour's dustbin.
Our neighbours never ‘ad dustbins. They ate everything.
Comments
Charles will be supreme governor of the Church of England, the founding of which is not unconnected to multiple marriages.
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/834680546705940481
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2016/01/22/chinas-working-age-population-sees-biggest-ever-decline/
I wonder how UKIP will do in Stoke. If it's a close Lab-Con contest, they may get squeezed.
Unless the line had been drawn that he couldn't marry her, I don't see how sustained objection to what he calls her would work. That line was crossed, it's too late now.
https://twitter.com/SteveHiltonx/status/834587082307825664
I remember one coal power station in Yorkshire (forget the name, alas) being denied funding to convert to burning wood pellets and so being planned for closure. Not sure if it's still open.
Make Camilla the Empress of India instead of Queen.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drax_power_station
Huhne read PPE at Oxford. Davey read PPE at Oxford. Miliband read PPE at Oxford. The Three Science Dunces.
(The present minister read History at Edinburgh).
To be fair to the Chinese authorities, they seem to realise this. The question is whether they're willing to do more to address it.
The UK can compete, and we can do well. We don't do this be being overly negative or positive, but by realistically looking at our strengths and weaknesses and acting accordingly.
Oh, and IMO 'relative living standards' is as irrelevant as 'relative poverty'.
The hypocrisy stinks. That simpleton Davey was in favour of the green levy, hiking fuel prices for the public, whilst himself using a small supplier that was exempt from the charge (on the basis of the business being small).
Edited extra bit: perhaps that was a shade intemperate of me. But there we are.
Ignore and move on
Is a lot like the Tories before Cameron became leader.
A policy became less popular with voters once they realised it was a Tory policy.
Personally I would hate to see JC go but if he does, RL-B has many of the qualities I like to see in a Labour leader.
Now they have several 3D printers of different types, plus two more engineers in the UK. They rapidly iterate, send different versions off to customers to see what they prefer, and can respond to customer's requirements much more quickly.
The result is better products, several less jobs in China, a couple more jobs in the UK, and a more responsive service to their customers. Also, information is kept much more internal for longer (and this matters when you find your designs on the Chinese grey market).
I was amazed at how much prototype cases would cost, and what was involved in making them. If you're mass producing then you still (currently) need all that expensive tooling, but prototypes are orders of magnitude cheaper.
The next big pool of cheap labour is Africa - the economic development and exploitation of that continent is well under way and will be the story of the 21st Century. The next big mega-cities will be Lagos, Khartoum and Kinshasa - Lagos is already larger than London and growing phenomenally fast.
It's a pretty good summary of Chinese history. I'd be a bit surprised if the empire divided, to be honest.
I don't understand the ongoing national dislike of Camilla. This is all such ancient history now, and as you say, it was a personal matter among them, and doesn't actually affect anyone else.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/02/22/labour-leadership-election-round-three-publics-vie/
Labour's problems mapped out. As for the net likeability measure all the leading lights in the summer's leadership contest scored between -30 and -40.
Going for POTY 2 years in a row ?
Papua New Guinea on the other hand...
Growing up, my mother managed to feed a family of four with 4oz meat, and generous quantities of pearl barley and vegetables. Eating like that these days is seen as demeaning!
1957-1966 2.46%
1967-1965 2.35%
1977-1986 2.25%
1987-1996 2.24%
1997-2006 2.54%
2007-2016 0.38%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/n3y6/pn2
1994 had growth per capita of 3.6%, only 2000 with 3.4% has been above 3.0% since then. From 2004 onwards every year has had growth in GDP per capita below 2.5%.
In most societies this evolution occurred with violence - I fear the same will happen in China but in the form of a protracted period of economic and political instability.
Rejoice!
Edited extra bit: ha, I spelt it wrong, initially. Damn you, typos...
It really was a year of favourites getting turned over
The best solution would be to give Camilla a title in her own right. Make Duchess of Slough, or wherever, with remainder to the lawful heirs male, by Charles.
Favourite is getting a disconcerting red line underneath.
The survey says!!
There are now concerns that the bi-modes won't have big enough fuel tanks to complete a round trip to Swansea.
The wires between Paddington and Airport Junction (12 miles) are limited to 90 mph
The bi modes are heavier meaning higher track access charges.
There are many constituencies where the outcome is a foregone conclusion under FPTP.
Also, beer was banned in Iceland between about 1920 and 1989. They tried to ban wine as well but Spain threatened a trade war if they didn't exchange wine for fish so the ban was repealed after a few years.
I never quite appreciated how many fecking weirdos pineapple on pizza fans were on PB.
Forget Brexit, this is the new dividing line on PB
Also wikipedia (fount of all knowledge, infallible, says she is Princess of Wales... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_of_Wales)
There was as many *non*-EU migrants as there were migrants *from* the EU:
+165,000 EU citizens
+164,000 non-EU citizens
I think the way the two of them behaved, scarcely bothering to disguise their relationship even during the Charles/Di engagement, was about as vile as it gets. Lots of people who have got to the age they are now have in our past incidents of behaviour in relationships of which are now deeply ashamed, but they were special.
And homeopathy, and this: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2736110/prince-charles-took-own-towels-to-official-engagement-amid-hand-dryer-germ-fears/
and we have heard too many similar incidents to disbelieve about the hand towels. The man is an arsehat.
An Act of Parliament signed off by new King will be required to formalize any other arrangement and would also require appropriate acts in Commonwealth parliaments that have the monarch as head of state.
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmhansrd/vo050317/text/50317w32.htm#50317w32.html_sbhd1
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether the proposed marriage of HRH Prince of Wales to Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles is morganatic. [222341]
Mr. Leslie: No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
It is a spellcheck in your browser, and applies to all web sites, not just PB.
You will have to check the instructions for which browser you use.
But anyway, WNBPM, but HSBLOTO.
In mine (Firefox on Mac) it's in Firefox>Preferences>Advanced>General> tick box "Check my spelling as I type"
I'd be pro Monarchy if the French honoured The Treaty of Troyes.