politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The French ban on opinion polls came into effect at midnight with Macron still ahead
France has some very tight laws on opinion polls including a complete ban on then being published on the day before an election. So the Wikipedia chart above represents all the polling that we will see until we get the exit polls tomorrow evening.
@SO there should be an email service from the Gov.uk pages for the DVLA.
Definitely contact the cabinet member. And if there is any sniff if it going beyond the appeal process (which I still think you'll win) contact the local Camden papers. It's always a good human interest story when people get fined despite being many miles away, and the council refuses to be sensible.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
If it is Macron vs Le Pen in the second round, then she has a 5% chance of winning. (That 20+ percentage point gap won't be closed easily.)
If it's Fillon vs Le Pen, then I'd give her a 15% chance. She's really closed the gap, but she still trails significantly. (And I suspect a lot of French voters who currently say they'd abstain in a second round would come out and vote for Fillon.)
If it's Melachon vs Le Pen, then I'd give her a 60% chance. Yes, the polls put Melachon in the lead, but I think he'd struggle under the scrutiny of the second round.
So, what's the chance that Le Pen doesn't make the second round? Shall we say 10%? The odds of Macron being her opponent have to be 60%, and let's make Fillon and Melachon 15% each.
@SO there should be an email service from the Gov.uk pages for the DVLA.
Definitely contact the cabinet member. And if there is any sniff if it going beyond the appeal process (which I still think you'll win) contact the local Camden papers. It's always a good human interest story when people get fined despite being many miles away, and the council refuses to be sensible.
Also send them a copy of the police report about the cloned plate. Most people won't lay themselves open to a charge of wasting police time or fraudulent misreprentation over a parking ticket.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour accuse a company of a tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existant vat on milk.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
The car crashes continue. If this is what it's like now, imagine when the campaign turns to things like Trident, immigration, national security...
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour accuse a company of a tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existant vat on milk.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
The car crashes continue. If this is what it's like now, imagine when the campaign turns to things like Trident, immigration, national security...
Is there VAT on Trident? It makes a real difference to whether I'll chose it as my home defence system.
I thought the Tories were pretty bloody useless under IDS, but the current labour mob are in premier league of numptyness. Has there ever been a worse opposition?
Totally off topic, but does anyone know the best route to challenge a private parking charge (other than an appeal to the private company, which I am sure are rejected as a matter of course)? Got slapped with an £80 fine for staying 2 minutes over for a hospital appointment.
You dont expect the traffic wardens on here to have any sympathy do you?!
Rules is rules
The rules may allow some flexibility in such situations for all I know.
Now is the time to reveal you are Paul Nuttall! Watch that sympathetic tone change
I thought the Tories were pretty bloody useless under IDS, but the current labour mob are in premier league of numptyness. Has there ever been a worse opposition?
Serious note on VAT and food items. If I was in charge I would look to do a serious review. Anybody who shops at somewhere like CostCo where they show you price with and without VAT will know some of the crazy disparities that these days make no logical sense.
I thought the Tories were pretty bloody useless under IDS, but the current labour mob are in premier league of numptyness. Has there ever been a worse opposition?
I thought the Tories were pretty bloody useless under IDS, but the current labour mob are in premier league of numptyness. Has there ever been a worse opposition?
I have tried, but I really cannot think of one. Tory opposition to the Liberals from 1910 - 1914, perhaps?
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
Normally choosing between a labour and Tory government is one between feeling if you want the country to go a little bit further to the left or right from the centre. This GE it is between continuing with the uninspiring adults and letting a load of toddlers loose to run the country.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
but hte point is VAT is not even applied to many everyday items like milk and bread. and the wealthy pay much more VAT then the poor in any case.
Wow, so the four biggest items on the budget, accounting for 69% of government spending, are *all* underestimated by the public. Only the fifth item, debt interest at 7%, is accurately known. All the smaller items, accounting for only 24% in total, are overestimated in their significance.
TL:DR; spending isn't coming down until the welfare bill does.
It's sensible: DfID does a heck of a lot of good, and it's a shame you don't see that.
It's idiotic and anti-Conservative. Foreign aid should be a matter of individual conscience, not state compulsion. There are any number of perfectly good charities in this area to give one's money to. I do not see why the state needs to get involved at all.
And that's aside from the question of how much of our aid budget is wasted, and whether the money could be better spent at home.
I was going to go out canvassing for the Conservatives today, but I don't think I'll bother, despite being in a tight Tory/Labour marginal.
Because state aid is a strategic geo political tool. Build schools and provide teachers with a pro British view point and you raise a generation of children to think favourably to us rather than suicide bomb us.
Realistically, I don't see how we could produce such an effect, even with spending at its current rate.
Given UK is hated or derided across the world, we are wasting our money.
Your usual level of hate-filled splenetic garbage:
Normally choosing between a labour and Tory government is one between feeling if you want the country to go a little bit further to the left or right from the centre. This GE it is between continuing with the uninspiring adults and letting a load of toddlers loose to run the country.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
It is and it isn't. When looked at from the perspective of its application to individual products it clearly is (everyone buying a VATable product pays the same, regardless of wealth). But it's less obvious when looked at as an overall revenue raising measure - because 1) those who spend the most pay the most 2) a greater proportion of the spend of the rich will likely be on VATable products.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour accuse a company of a tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existant vat on milk.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
The car crashes continue. If this is what it's like now, imagine when the campaign turns to things like Trident, immigration, national security...
Is there VAT on Trident? It makes a real difference to whether I'll chose it as my home defence system.
It depends on whether you are buying the missiles to nuke someone in the shop, or as a takeway...
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Wow, so the four biggest items on the budget, accounting for 69% of government spending, are *all* underestimated by the public. Only the fifth item, debt interest at 7%, is accurately known. All the smaller items, accounting for only 24% in total, are overestimated in their significance.
TL:DR; spending isn't coming down until the welfare bill does.
I'm surprised so many people wanted to continue paying interest on the debt!
Shocking fact in the France article posted earlier. It's not just the United States.
"In January 2016, the national statistical institute Insée announced that life expectancy had fallen for both sexes in France for the first time since World War II, and it’s the native French working class that is likely driving the decline."
It's obviously going to be working class people, and those with less community are hit worse.
Demand for the labour-power of working class people who expect to live in houses they've borrowed money to buy, who are accustomed to having maybe 20 square metres each of housing, to having their own front door, to being able to afford three meals a day and some paid-for leisure, is falling. It's falling through the floor. Many PBers don't need to be told how the market works.
It would be weird if the 2015 drop was caused by globalization or demand for labour-power or whatever, because these have been ongoing trends for decades, and I don't think there's even an obvious correlation with recessions in there.
If you google it up the issue seems to be a combination of a really bad flu outbreak and a hot summer, both of which clobbered a lot of elderly people.
Experts at Insee explained that 2015 was more of a "one-off" than a trend to be worried about, explaining the higher number of deaths by a huge influenza virus that ravaged France through the first three months of the year, claiming the lives of many over 65s.
So as commentators we have the Charles Murrayites (such as, it seems, Christophe Guilluy) and on the other side, we have the paid "don't panic" hacks at the French government's statistics department. That's not a nice choice at all. As for "globalisation", capital has been global since the 15th century. The big picture is that Keynesianism as a class relation topped out a while ago. Increases in productivity led to a reduction in the working day and an increase in working class living standards. They also led to an increase in the number of days worked by a working class in their lifetime. The working day is now increasing again, living standards are falling, and the tendency is for the number of days worked in a working class lifetime to decrease. Whether influenza plays a role is a detail You suggest that I use Google. The right way to get a handle on all of this is to use Karl Marx. I suspect that actuaries and the more cerebral among the bankers have known that for a long time.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
but hte point is VAT is not even applied to many everyday items like milk and bread. and the wealthy pay much more VAT then the poor in any case.
Yes - while VAT is potentially regressive, the effects of the zero/lower rates on everyday items can be considered to create a progressive effect. Essentially poor people are *spending* proportionally more of their total expenditure on the low/zero rated items...
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
It is and it isn't. When looked at from the perspective of its application to individual products it clearly is (everyone buying a VATable product pays the same, regardless of wealth). But it's less obvious when looked at as an overall revenue raising measure - because 1) those who spend the most pay the most 2) a greater proportion of the spend of the rich will likely be on VATable products.
The reason that governments love VAT is that it raises huge sums and is easy to collect.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
In an attempt to be fair - perhaps she is thinking of VAT charged for milk deliveries. In some of the posh areas of London, you can get a reto milk delivery service, complete with returnable glass bottles....
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour accuse a company of a tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existant vat on milk.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
The car crashes continue. If this is what it's like now, imagine when the campaign turns to things like Trident, immigration, national security...
Is there VAT on Trident? It makes a real difference to whether I'll chose it as my home defence system.
It depends on whether you are buying the missiles to nuke someone in the shop, or as a takeway...
Also depends if you buy them hot or let them cool down first.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Clothing and sanitary products are VAT-able as well but yes, as a general rule essential products are exempt.
The abolition of VAT on fuel and sanitary products must form part of any post-Brexit budget.
If journalists are prone to asking silly questions like this (and we know they are) then every politician should get themselves something similar and learn the numbers by heart! I'd be surprised if CCHQ don't do this already.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Clothing and sanitary products are VAT-able as well, but yes- as a general rule, essential products are exempted.
The abolition of VAT on fuel and sanitary products must form part of any post-Brexit budget.
Why? Using the tax system to encourage people to bathe more seems like government overreach.
If journalists are prone to asking silly questions like this (and we know they are) then every politician should get themselves something similar and learn the numbers by heart! I'd be surprised if CCHQ don't do this already.
Well Jacob Rees-Mogg did well at guess the price of produce questions. So probably.
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Mr. Jim, unconfirmed and fictional excerpt of text sent from David Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn:
"I know what you're thinking. Did he get rejected by all six safe seats, or only five? In all the excitement, I lost count myself. But ask yourself this: do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"
Mr. F, take it you mean Flavius Phocas?
None did as much damage to their own side as Corbyn. Honorius may be an exception, but he was maintaining decline rather than causing and accelerating it.
Honorius' treatment of Stilicho was an act of self-harm akin to idiotic Labour MPs sticking Corbyn on the ballot.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Clothing and sanitary products are VAT-able as well, but yes- as a general rule, essential products are exempted.
The abolition of VAT on fuel and sanitary products must form part of any post-Brexit budget.
Why? Using the tax system to encourage people to bathe more seems like government overreach.
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Good point. Although I think we can safely say that FTPA will be junked in next Parliament.
Wow, so the four biggest items on the budget, accounting for 69% of government spending, are *all* underestimated by the public. Only the fifth item, debt interest at 7%, is accurately known. All the smaller items, accounting for only 24% in total, are overestimated in their significance.
TL:DR; spending isn't coming down until the welfare bill does.
I'm surprised so many people wanted to continue paying interest on the debt!
Presumably it's recognition that the debt is there and they don't want Paul Bohill to turn up.
If journalists are prone to asking silly questions like this (and we know they are) then every politician should get themselves something similar and learn the numbers by heart! I'd be surprised if CCHQ don't do this already.
Well Jacob Rees-Mogg did well at guess the price of produce questions. So probably.
Given that he probably sends his butler to Harrods food court, you may well be right
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Good point. Although I think we can safely say that FTPA will be junked in next Parliament.
Why? As seen if anyone wants an early election it is still possible, while ensuring that no one can complain that you are dragging things out if you decide to go for the full five years.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Clothing and sanitary products are VAT-able as well, but yes- as a general rule, essential products are exempted.
The abolition of VAT on fuel and sanitary products must form part of any post-Brexit budget.
Why? Using the tax system to encourage people to bathe more seems like government overreach.
Tampons should be taxed?
I would minimise exceptions as much as possible. Taxes should aim for simplicity over perfection.
Wow, so the four biggest items on the budget, accounting for 69% of government spending, are *all* underestimated by the public. Only the fifth item, debt interest at 7%, is accurately known. All the smaller items, accounting for only 24% in total, are overestimated in their significance.
TL:DR; spending isn't coming down until the welfare bill does.
I'm surprised so many people wanted to continue paying interest on the debt!
Maybe they're not too keen to find out what happens if we stop paying it!
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Good point. Although I think we can safely say that FTPA will be junked in next Parliament.
Indeed - but I would doubt that any Repeal Act could be applied retospectively.
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Good point. Although I think we can safely say that FTPA will be junked in next Parliament.
Why? As seen if anyone wants an early election it is still possible, while ensuring that no one can complain that you are dragging things out if you decide to go for the full five years.
Anything that encourages longer term thinking is to be encouraged. Anyway, leaving aside current players, why should the PM of the day have the big advantage of deciding the timing of the election?
Labour’s structure means that even though Corbyn is leader, he doesn’t control the party. Before members elected him in 2015, he was a fringe figure in Labour and doesn’t have the headquarters staff’s deep knowledge of the battleground and years of experience fighting elections.
Although the 2010 and 2015 elections were defeats for Labour, the party’s Field Operations team can point to some individual successes. In 2010, they helped to stop David Cameron’s Conservatives from winning a majority and five years later the party gained seats in England, a result masked by its near-wipeout in Scotland.
It is now identifying a defensive line, according to people familiar with the plans, which one person said might mean targeting resources at seats with majorities of around 5,000 or more.
“I don’t think that this election is about changing the government,” Labour lawmaker Helen Goodman told ITV News on Thursday. “This election is about preventing the Tories from getting such an overwhelming majority that there is no possibility of dissent in this country.”
This is just an isolated report, and it will be interesting to hear if there are similar reports in coming weeks, but the suggestion made in this piece sounds reasonable. Essentially, Labour HQ would tell MPs in the most vulnerable marginals to look to their own defences, and try to rescue those vulnerable to a swing greater than about 5% or 6% - i.e. to keep losses down to around 50. This implies that they're preparing for a national vote share somewhere in the 23-25% range, with damage limitation through over-performance in the 30 or so seats vulnerable to a swing of around 5-8%. Although that much said, if the Ukip collapse continues then a lot of previously very safe Labour holds - Sedgefield, Huddersfield, Don Valley, Torfaen, even Durham North West - become potentially vulnerable.
Assuming that the Liberal Democrats only make gains against the Tories in the high single figures, a Labour loss of around 50 seats would keep May's majority down to somewhere in the 90-110 range.
One aspect that has received very little attention is that the effect of calling this early election will be to slightly reduce the length of the next Parliament.. To quote Section 1 of the FTPA 2011 : ‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Good point. Although I think we can safely say that FTPA will be junked in next Parliament.
Indeed - but I would doubt that any Repeal Act could be applied retospectively.
Don't see why not? Either because the effect of repeal automatically results in a reversion to previous arrangements or because a new law is written to that effect.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Cold pasties !
Scottish Police, only force in UK forced to pay VAT, just out of spite to take money off Scottish Government.
Mr. Jim, unconfirmed and fictional excerpt of text sent from David Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn:
"I know what you're thinking. Did he get rejected by all six safe seats, or only five? In all the excitement, I lost count myself. But ask yourself this: do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"
Mr. F, take it you mean Flavius Phocas?
None did as much damage to their own side as Corbyn. Honorius may be an exception, but he was maintaining decline rather than causing and accelerating it.
Honorius' treatment of Stilicho was an act of self-harm akin to idiotic Labour MPs sticking Corbyn on the ballot.
Flavius Phocas almost destroyed the Roman Empire in just 8 years. Also, there was Valentinian who like Honorius, murdered his only capable general, Aetius.
Normally choosing between a labour and Tory government is one between feeling if you want the country to go a little bit further to the left or right from the centre. This GE it is between continuing with the uninspiring adults and letting a load of toddlers loose to run the country.
There's an early Werner Herzog film called Even Dwarves Started Small, which would be pretty much like a fly-on-the-wall documentary of Prime Minister Corbyn's tenure as Prime Minister.
From Wiki:
"During the filming, Herzog gave some strange direction to elicit particular performances from the actors. In directing one dwarf who continually struggles not to laugh, Herzog repeatedly told the actor that he must not laugh, but then made funny faces at him as soon as he started filming.
While filming the scene where a van drove in circles with no one at the wheel, one of the actors was run over, but immediately stood up uninjured. During the flower burning scene, the same actor caught fire and Werner Herzog raced over and beat the fire out. The actor only had minor injuries from the fire."
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Cold pasties !
Scottish Police, only force in UK forced to pay VAT, just out of spite to take money off Scottish Government.
In 2012 the Scottish Government made Scotland’s police and fire services national rather than regional bodies.
The UK government advised the Scottish government at the time that this change would take them out of the scope of the VAT refunds as they are now funded differently to other police and fire services in Great Britain.'
It's sensible: DfID does a heck of a lot of good, and it's a shame you don't see that.
It's idiotic and anti-Conservative. Foreign aid should be a matter of individual conscience, not state compulsion. There are any number of perfectly good charities in this area to give one's money to. I do not see why the state needs to get involved at all.
And that's aside from the question of how much of our aid budget is wasted, and whether the money could be better spent at home.
I was going to go out canvassing for the Conservatives today, but I don't think I'll bother, despite being in a tight Tory/Labour marginal.
Because state aid is a strategic geo political tool. Build schools and provide teachers with a pro British view point and you raise a generation of children to think favourably to us rather than suicide bomb us.
Realistically, I don't see how we could produce such an effect, even with spending at its current rate.
Given UK is hated or derided across the world, we are wasting our money.
Your usual level of hate-filled splenetic garbage:
It's sensible: DfID does a heck of a lot of good, and it's a shame you don't see that.
It's idiotic and anti-Conservative. Foreign aid should be a matter of individual conscience, not state compulsion. There are any number of perfectly good charities in this area to give one's money to. I do not see why the state needs to get involved at all.
And that's aside from the question of how much of our aid budget is wasted, and whether the money could be better spent at home.
I was going to go out canvassing for the Conservatives today, but I don't think I'll bother, despite being in a tight Tory/Labour marginal.
Because state aid is a strategic geo political tool. Build schools and provide teachers with a pro British view point and you raise a generation of children to think favourably to us rather than suicide bomb us.
Realistically, I don't see how we could produce such an effect, even with spending at its current rate.
Given UK is hated or derided across the world, we are wasting our money.
Your usual level of hate-filled splenetic garbage:
I also see Clive Lewis is defending is flow chart tweet - that only people who don;t care about others should vote Tory' as satire.
Sure it is, Clive, I believe you. That is, I believe you may well believe some Tories care about others, but you certainly want to encourage supporters to genuinely consider it in such simplistic, moral terms, because it helps you get elected. Pathetic.
Normally choosing between a labour and Tory government is one between feeling if you want the country to go a little bit further to the left or right from the centre. This GE it is between continuing with the uninspiring adults and letting a load of toddlers loose to run the country.
There's an early Werner Herzog film called Even Dwarves Started Small, which would be pretty much like a fly-on-the-wall documentary of Prime Minister Corbyn's tenure as Prime Minister.
From Wiki:
"During the filming, Herzog gave some strange direction to elicit particular performances from the actors. In directing one dwarf who continually struggles not to laugh, Herzog repeatedly told the actor that he must not laugh, but then made funny faces at him as soon as he started filming.
While filming the scene where a van drove in circles with no one at the wheel, one of the actors was run over, but immediately stood up uninjured. During the flower burning scene, the same actor caught fire and Werner Herzog raced over and beat the fire out. The actor only had minor injuries from the fire."
It's sensible: DfID does a heck of a lot of good, and it's a shame you don't see that.
It's idiotic and anti-Conservative. Foreign aid should be a matter of individual conscience, not state compulsion. There are any number of perfectly good charities in this area to give one's money to. I do not see why the state needs to get involved at all.
And that's aside from the question of how much of our aid budget is wasted, and whether the money could be better spent at home.
I was going to go out canvassing for the Conservatives today, but I don't think I'll bother, despite being in a tight Tory/Labour marginal.
Because state aid is a strategic geo political tool. Build schools and provide teachers with a pro British view point and you raise a generation of children to think favourably to us rather than suicide bomb us.
Realistically, I don't see how we could produce such an effect, even with spending at its current rate.
Given UK is hated or derided across the world, we are wasting our money.
Your usual level of hate-filled splenetic garbage:
Oh look Mummy - a Nat and facts! Look away son, look away......
SOFT says it all, remember Iran beating our navy with a speedboat and our sailors crying for their ipods, chased out of Iraq , chased out of Afghanistan. Deluded re May and Trump only to find that he has chosen EU over his lapdog for trade, really SOFT comes to mind. Bully no mates.
Mr. Jim, unconfirmed and fictional excerpt of text sent from David Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn:
"I know what you're thinking. Did he get rejected by all six safe seats, or only five? In all the excitement, I lost count myself. But ask yourself this: do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"
Mr. F, take it you mean Flavius Phocas?
None did as much damage to their own side as Corbyn. Honorius may be an exception, but he was maintaining decline rather than causing and accelerating it.
Honorius' treatment of Stilicho was an act of self-harm akin to idiotic Labour MPs sticking Corbyn on the ballot.
Flavius Phocas almost destroyed the Roman Empire in just 8 years.
I see he wasn't all bad
From Wiki
The reign of Phocas is also marked by the change of Imperial fashion set by Constantine the Great. Constantine and all his successors, except Julian the Apostate, were beardless. Phocas again introduced the wearing of the beard
Labour’s structure means that even though Corbyn is leader, he doesn’t control the party. Before members elected him in 2015, he was a fringe figure in Labour and doesn’t have the headquarters staff’s deep knowledge of the battleground and years of experience fighting elections.
Although the 2010 and 2015 elections were defeats for Labour, the party’s Field Operations team can point to some individual successes. In 2010, they helped to stop David Cameron’s Conservatives from winning a majority and five years later the party gained seats in England, a result masked by its near-wipeout in Scotland.
It is now identifying a defensive line, according to people familiar with the plans, which one person said might mean targeting resources at seats with majorities of around 5,000 or more.
“I don’t think that this election is about changing the government,” Labour lawmaker Helen Goodman told ITV News on Thursday. “This election is about preventing the Tories from getting such an overwhelming majority that there is no possibility of dissent in this country.”
This is just an isolated report, and it will be interesting to hear if there are similar reports in coming weeks, but the suggestion made in this piece sounds reasonable. Essentially, Labour HQ would tell MPs in the most vulnerable marginals to look to their own defences, and try to rescue those vulnerable to a swing greater than about 5% or 6% - i.e. to keep losses down to around 50. This implies that they're preparing for a national vote share somewhere in the 23-25% range, with damage limitation through over-performance in the 30 or so seats vulnerable to a swing of around 5-8%. Although that much said, if the Ukip collapse continues then a lot of previously very safe Labour holds - Sedgefield, Huddersfield, Don Valley, Torfaen, even Durham North West - become potentially vulnerable.
Assuming that the Liberal Democrats only make gains against the Tories in the high single figures, a Labour loss of around 50 seats would keep May's majority down to somewhere in the 90-110 range.
Labour candidates struggling to defend their seats don't actually want Corbyn to come visiting, so he has to have a reason to go elsewhere. We were speculating about this on Thursday.
There is no vat on milk....the woman is f##king thick as shit and they want to run the country! So we have one leading labour slander a company over being tax dodgers when they aren't & now non-existent vat on milk. They really do live in a parallel universe.
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
VAT is regressive though.
Disagree. Except for domestic energy and fuel, it's possible to live a basic life paying almost no VAT at all on daily spending.
Cold pasties !
Scottish Police, only force in UK forced to pay VAT, just out of spite to take money off Scottish Government.
Comments
Second place looks tighter. I suspect Le Pen will get it, but wouldn't be surprised if Fillon beat her.
As long as Melenchon's not in the top two, I'll be content.
Definitely contact the cabinet member. And if there is any sniff if it going beyond the appeal process (which I still think you'll win) contact the local Camden papers. It's always a good human interest story when people get fined despite being many miles away, and the council refuses to be sensible.
This, I posted on previous thread without realising the new one.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/michelle-thomson-will-step-down-as-an-mp-after-the-snp?utm_term=.boeGVqMxz#.tiWn7MYLD
When asked the standard political question how much is a price of milk, does she reply with or without the VAT?
If it is Macron vs Le Pen in the second round, then she has a 5% chance of winning. (That 20+ percentage point gap won't be closed easily.)
If it's Fillon vs Le Pen, then I'd give her a 15% chance. She's really closed the gap, but she still trails significantly. (And I suspect a lot of French voters who currently say they'd abstain in a second round would come out and vote for Fillon.)
If it's Melachon vs Le Pen, then I'd give her a 60% chance. Yes, the polls put Melachon in the lead, but I think he'd struggle under the scrutiny of the second round.
So, what's the chance that Le Pen doesn't make the second round? Shall we say 10%? The odds of Macron being her opponent have to be 60%, and let's make Fillon and Melachon 15% each.
So 60% * 5% + 15% * 15% + 15% * 60% = 3% + 2% + 5% = 10%.
She's still too long. Sell.
On that basis, go Melanchon and Fillion.
Any politician I meet goes on to become the firm betting favourite and then loses.
Case 1: Hillary Clinton
Case 2: Emmanuel Macron (tbc)
Given she's been charged by the Polis, it would have been a fairly tough sell to the electorate.
Possibly Byzantium during the Angeli dynasty.
Mr. 1000, that's nothing compared to the Curse of Morris Dancer.
....
I have also backed Macron.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/11/09/public-attitudes-tax-distribution/
And I'm done trading until the first round is over, I think - I trust the polls to the extent that it's any two from four - but not which two.
But I still have a very nice green on NDA if he'd be so kind as to cause a huge upset
Rumours:
https://order-order.com/2017/04/22/david-miliband-phoning-around-veteran-labour-mps/
TL:DR; spending isn't coming down until the welfare bill does.
http://softpower30.portland-communications.com/ranking/
Oh look Mummy - a Nat and facts! Look away son, look away......
Also, strong commitment to the ongoing Greek tragedy that is the Labour Party.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12111507 is a rather well presented discussion of this.
The abolition of VAT on fuel and sanitary products must form part of any post-Brexit budget.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/12/camerons-sheet-on-prices-of-everyday-goods-revealed
If journalists are prone to asking silly questions like this (and we know they are) then every politician should get themselves something similar and learn the numbers by heart! I'd be surprised if CCHQ don't do this already.
‘polling days would be on the first Thursday in May in the fifth calendar year’
This will mean that the election due in 2022 would be held on May 5th that year with Parliament being dissolved at the end of March 2022. Effectively, therefore, on June 8th we will be electing a Parliament which will not last more than 4.75 years.
Mr. Jim, unconfirmed and fictional excerpt of text sent from David Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn:
"I know what you're thinking. Did he get rejected by all six safe seats, or only five? In all the excitement, I lost count myself. But ask yourself this: do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"
Mr. F, take it you mean Flavius Phocas?
None did as much damage to their own side as Corbyn. Honorius may be an exception, but he was maintaining decline rather than causing and accelerating it.
Honorius' treatment of Stilicho was an act of self-harm akin to idiotic Labour MPs sticking Corbyn on the ballot.
A little rambly blog about him, and the others, is here: http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/basil-iis-odd-childhood.html
Anyway, leaving aside current players, why should the PM of the day have the big advantage of deciding the timing of the election?
Labour’s structure means that even though Corbyn is leader, he doesn’t control the party. Before members elected him in 2015, he was a fringe figure in Labour and doesn’t have the headquarters staff’s deep knowledge of the battleground and years of experience fighting elections.
Although the 2010 and 2015 elections were defeats for Labour, the party’s Field Operations team can point to some individual successes. In 2010, they helped to stop David Cameron’s Conservatives from winning a majority and five years later the party gained seats in England, a result masked by its near-wipeout in Scotland.
It is now identifying a defensive line, according to people familiar with the plans, which one person said might mean targeting resources at seats with majorities of around 5,000 or more.
“I don’t think that this election is about changing the government,” Labour lawmaker Helen Goodman told ITV News on Thursday. “This election is about preventing the Tories from getting such an overwhelming majority that there is no possibility of dissent in this country.”
This is just an isolated report, and it will be interesting to hear if there are similar reports in coming weeks, but the suggestion made in this piece sounds reasonable. Essentially, Labour HQ would tell MPs in the most vulnerable marginals to look to their own defences, and try to rescue those vulnerable to a swing greater than about 5% or 6% - i.e. to keep losses down to around 50. This implies that they're preparing for a national vote share somewhere in the 23-25% range, with damage limitation through over-performance in the 30 or so seats vulnerable to a swing of around 5-8%. Although that much said, if the Ukip collapse continues then a lot of previously very safe Labour holds - Sedgefield, Huddersfield, Don Valley, Torfaen, even Durham North West - become potentially vulnerable.
Assuming that the Liberal Democrats only make gains against the Tories in the high single figures, a Labour loss of around 50 seats would keep May's majority down to somewhere in the 90-110 range.
From Wiki:
"During the filming, Herzog gave some strange direction to elicit particular performances from the actors. In directing one dwarf who continually struggles not to laugh, Herzog repeatedly told the actor that he must not laugh, but then made funny faces at him as soon as he started filming.
While filming the scene where a van drove in circles with no one at the wheel, one of the actors was run over, but immediately stood up uninjured. During the flower burning scene, the same actor caught fire and Werner Herzog raced over and beat the fire out. The actor only had minor injuries from the fire."
Etc...
£1,000 to the first major party candidate to tweet "Pretty disappointing reception on the doorstep this morning. Was expecting better".
£2,000 to the candidate who tweets "This election is about standing up for slovenly, dishonest families".
£3,000 to the candidate who tweets "This election is not too close to call. Every vote doesn't count. I've got it in the bag/lost".
The UK government advised the Scottish government at the time that this change would take them out of the scope of the VAT refunds as they are now funded differently to other police and fire services in Great Britain.'
https://www.cchdaily.co.uk/hmrc-warned-police-scotland-ps76m-vat-bill
Sure it is, Clive, I believe you. That is, I believe you may well believe some Tories care about others, but you certainly want to encourage supporters to genuinely consider it in such simplistic, moral terms, because it helps you get elected. Pathetic.
From Wiki
The reign of Phocas is also marked by the change of Imperial fashion set by Constantine the Great. Constantine and all his successors, except Julian the Apostate, were beardless. Phocas again introduced the wearing of the beard