Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The BBC’s Sporting Personality of the Year Election: Why I’
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The BBC’s Sporting Personality of the Year Election: Why I’m betting at an effective 33-1 that Andy Murray won’t do it
Betfair makes Andy Murray a 97%+ chance to be Sports Personality of the Year
Odds too tight and I'm betting against
pic.twitter.com/cjO1tq4EHG
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
But I expect Andy Murray will still win.
But Froome is is making a big bid for the World Championship in Florence in September. This will be covered live by the BBC. If he takes that it will add to his appeal.
The Labour Party's biggest individual donor calls on Ed Miliband to match Cameron's EU referendum pledge or risk losing the General Election.
John Mills, the opera-loving, multilingual businessman who regularly relaxes at his holiday home in the South of France said today:
"Ignoring voters' calls for a plebiscite would damage Labour's election hopes.
"Not having a commitment in the next Labour manifesto of some sort is going to prejudice the Labour chances," Mills told Reuters in a telephone interview on Monday.
"I can understand why the Labour leadership don't want to have a referendum, but I think they are going to have to weigh that up against the likelihood that a firm commitment not to have one would have a negative effect on the Labour vote."
Reporters were unable to locate Ed Miliband who is also believed to be enjoying a continental holiday.
Link: http://reut.rs/13JKEPt
Murray doesn't need to win either as winning Wimbledon is enough to justify the vote. All he needs to do is pull in the viewers and get headline news coverage.
His price may be too short but surely this is more of a reason to keep out of the market rather than lay.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/politics/8990371/is-the-eu-stopping-britains-shale-revolution/
The EU and environmental NGOs are conspiring to stop Britain fracking, apparently.
http://www.cityam.com/article/why-governor-s-monetary-revolution-will-eventually-backfire
On the substantive, Labour's position is, as I understand it, exactly the same as that of the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in that they are opposed to a referendum on EU membership before the next GE. This is fair enough.
What has explicitly NOT been ruled out is a referendum in the next Parliament. Now, you may take the view that, as a pro-EU party, Labour may have no interest in holding a referendum on which they may well finish up on the losing side but that hasn't stopped David Cameron.
Until we hear Ed Miliband say categorically he will not support a referendum on EU membership in the next Parliament, then we can't make an assumption one way or the other.
There seems a huge impatience on the part of many for Labour to come up with detailed policies and programmes. Unlikely every other Opposition, Labour has the huge advantage of knowing when the next election will be and when it won't. One might argue that since nature abhors a vacuum, we are likely to see a blizzard of policies and proposals but much nearer the time of the campaign. Promoting a good idea now won't win Labour any credit but it will help the Coalition if they can steal it and implement it.
http://order-order.com/2013/08/08/labour-in-retreat-on-zero-hours/
Indeed an interesting article by Heath. Do you concur with his view that the economy has little spare capacity and that interest rates should be rising already? How does this square with Balls call for a fiscal stimulus yesterday?
It was his personality that did it.
Or Sheffield.
I don't know if you saw Allister Heath's critique on Carney's interest rate policy but it makes interesting reading.
Bonum vespere, Stodgius.
I read your morning comment and the Heath article.
I am not sure it adds to the greater sum of human knowledge, but, unlike most commentaries on the BoE inflation report and new Monetary Policy, it does summarise the internal BoE arguments accurately.
Were I do a count of word use in the Inflation Report, "unclear" would almost certainly win.
In particular, Carney takes great pains to state that the MPC (and wider economic commentariat) is "unclear" on the extent to which spare capacity exists in the economy today. The MPC is also "unclear" on the degree to which productivity in the economy will increase as growth sets in and the extent to which both spare capacity utilisation and productivity growth will boost real earnings and avoid inflationary pressures. These are the clearly stated 'known unknowns'.
Heath, acknowledging he is in a minority, is not unclear. His opinion is as follows:
I don’t think there is much spare capacity that would be put to use even if demand were to be buoyant, especially in our open economy. Much capital – human and physical – isn’t lying idle but has been destroyed. There is a mismatch between people and jobs. The lost output and potential growth is gone forever. The supply-side of the economy will be unable to respond to the level of demand we will see over the next few years, fuelling imports and pushing up consumer and asset prices. Unemployment is not a great measure of spare capacity; over time, employment is determined by supply-side factors.
Carney would no doubt agree that Heath is expressing the known downside risks and a possible scenario of outcomes, but it is not the consensus view of either the MPC nor of the wider economics world, nor, all things considered, does it represent the most likely state of affairs or most probable development.
So my view of Heath's article is that it is intelligent and the case presented arguable, but not a sound basis for establishing official national policy. The BoE arguments are more plausible and more widely supported.
That is an interesting article.
Expect strongish growth, persistent inflation, a worsening current account deficit and a housing and gilts bubble that eventually ends in tears and a severe rate hike in 3-4 years. That’s no different to what we would have had under the old regime; the new rules merely turn a de facto policy into a de jure one. Great for George Osborne’s 2015 election prospects, sure, but not a sustainable way forward for the UK. - See more at: http://www.cityam.com/article/why-governor-s-monetary-revolution-will-eventually-backfire#sthash.2VVE1kMJ.dpuf
With the other policies designed to stoke another unsustainable housing bubble, it does almost make me start to wonder whether Osborne is deliberately salting the earth so the incoming Labour Government gets the blame when it goes pear shaped.
Interesting pice, all aimed at the objective of: "You have to get people off one plane and on to another in 40 minutes. That is what Schiphol and Dubai do."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23612511
I missed the announcement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TOgB3Smvro
F1: not entirely unexpected, but Mercedes are moving into a seemingly prolonged transition period, with Lowe to (someday) replace Brawn as team principal:
http://www.espn.co.uk/mercedes/motorsport/story/120029.html
It still seems daft to me, unless Brawn's indicated he wants to retire in the foreseeable future. He's been involved in 8 title victories.
The Serious Fraud Office has acted on just three out of nearly 5,600 tip-offs it has received, it can be revealed.
With the City of London fighting off scandals such as the fixing of the interbank lending rate Libor, the Serious Fraud Office has admitted that they have not launched a single formal investigation as a result of the 5,582 tips it has received since its confidential whistleblowing service was set up in November 2011.
The Serious Fraud Office revealed it has only followed up three cases for consideration in a future investigation.
Two of the reports, referred in September 2012 and January 2013, were taken forward as ‘projects’, and one referred in 2012, was taken up as a ‘pre-project’, which both mean the SFO will consider them after further review and research.
The figures were released after a Freedom of Information Request by the Huffington Post UK.
Tory MP Steve Barclay, member of the Public Accounts Committee told the Huffington Post UK: “It is unacceptable that the SFO has followed up as few as 3 cases out a potential 5,500 from its tip-off service. This is letting down those who come forward with information, and also the taxpayer who is funding a body that is failing to perform as it should. > http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/08/08/serious-fraud-office-investigations_n_3725012.html?1375974994&just_reloaded=1
Now account for housing starts and manufacturing capacity 1997-2010.
'Oh dear... idiot lefties in a bubble meet the real world:
http://order-order.com/2013/08/08/labour-in-retreat-on-zero-hours/
Labour say something at last and it's a massive own goal,what a surprise,at least it keeps us laughing.
It is not just that there is no evidence to support a view that a bubble is developing but, of all asset prices currently inflating, housing is not the place to be looking.
First, on house prices. Here is an extract from yesterday's BoE Inflation Report:
Alongside increases in housing market activity, house prices have continued to rise since the May Report. The Halifax and Nationwide house price indices reported respective rises of
2.1% and 0.4% in the three months to June compared to the previous three months. The rises seen to date have, however, been modest relative to falls seen during the recession: the
house price to earnings ratio remains well below levels reached in 2007
And now on the riskier investment assets, equities.
The FTSE All Share Index over the past year has increased from a low of 2,932.72 to a high of 3,621.90, a 23.5% increase with it currently trading at 3,464.72. That is an increase of nearly ten times CPI (or 6.25 times CPI if you take the current trading level).
Now there are arguments for and against the equity markets's increase being a concern, but why oh why are you focussing on house prices which have not risen at anywhere near the rate of inflation since 2007 when other asset prices are racing at multiple times inflation?
Dumb, just plain dumb.
In other news, Carney and his men rejected out of hand the suggestion that the Help to Buy scheme is starting another unsustainable housing boom, which will please Osborne no end. However, it is worth noting that suppliers to construction firms are reporting spikes in demand for materials used in residential housing of about 25 per cent since the scheme was introduced
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/08/interest-rates-set-to-stay-low-for-the-foreseeable-future/
Theres a political lesson in there for everyone
Avery, if you count 4.25pm as "Vespere" fine, you must start even earlier than I do.
I note your comments and, as you've said before, Heath is probably more a "glass half-empty" man than many but he writes from the viewpoint of the unreconstructed Thatcherite and I've come over the years to have some sympathy with his view of macro-economic policy. I was and remain hugely sceptical of the bank bailouts and of QE.
I accept that without them the downturn would have been more severe but I think the resulting recovery would have been stronger and more soundly based.
My fear is that Carney's comments represent the re-politicisation of monetary policy in that keeping rates low is seen as a political rather than economic imperative. Heath argues for the normalisation of monetary policy and that means rising interest rates in the face of a recovering economy. There seems a curious paradox between a host of commentators using terms like "nearing escape velocity" and the much more cautious MPC and others.
If all we are going to do is stoke another consumption-fuelled debt binge which serves only to get a Conservative majority Government, that's just bad policy for which we will all pay when (not if) rates rise. Far better to begin the process of monetary policy normalisation with small rates now to prepare the ground rather than endure the shock of sharper rises later.
1. labour spent too much, add in all your off balance sheet financing
2. it spent it on the wrong things - benefits not infrastructure
3. it let the productive economy wither as it bought any crap fad sold by consultants
4. it built it's tax base on a mirage of retail sales and housing
5. it let rip consumer debt to make up for stagnant wages.
You can't face up to it.
It is not more profitable building of private sector dwellings for first time occupation by striving young mortgaged aspirants that tim wants.
It is ugly high rise council tower blocks, built at an unrecoverable and taxpayer subsidised cost, to house the massive rump of benefit claiming immigrants, shirkers and sofa potatoes who vote Labour.
My problem is that I would support tim's house building plans if he could make an economic case for them.
But tim is not very good with numbers and I am still waiting.
What you don't seem to have quite understood is the starting position, which was falling prices (except for London) and a complete seize-up of the housing market, which has massive knock-on effects for lots of other sectors of the economy, as well as affecting housing availability.
Of course, like any economic measure, if continued too long or carried out to excess, this modest stimulus could eventually lead to a bubble which would harm the economy. Osborne won't make that silly mistake; I can't vouch for a future Balls, of course.
And that's part of your problem:
1. labour spent too much, add in all your off balance sheet financing
2. it spent it on the wrong things - benefits not infrastructure
3. it let the productive economy wither as it bought any crap fad sold by consultants
4. it built it's tax base on a mirage of retail sales and housing
5. it let rip consumer debt to make up for stagnant wages.
You can't face up to it
The previous Labour Govt certainly made huge economic mistakes, stoking bubbles, deregulation, worship of finance, failing to address housing supply, and all the rest of it.
But I'd say that Labour, of the three main parties, are the ones who have learned the lesson of the crash most.
The Lib Dems seem to sort of know what went wrong, but are hamstrung by the Tories who have learned entirely the wrong lessons, are using the crisis as an excuse to ideologically (try to) shrink the State, and repeating Labour's mistakes many times over.
so not just spending too much but spending it on the wrong things to boot.
It's getting towards evening so the red mysogonists should be coming out soon..I wonder who will be their target tonight..
Thanks for that one.
It is life affirming to read of the true family life that lies hidden behind the political façade.
I remember my own family's pancake making with great warmth and affection.
'Anyone betting on marginal seats where the Tory machine is dying would find the numbers useful'
Don't know why you keep getting so worked up about it as according to your daily reminders a Labour win is just a formality.
And in any case, any number of members in marginal seats cannot compete against the awesome 'don't tread in the dog poo' Arnie Graf
Some more wise words from the Governor: an extract from yesterday's inflation report which caught my eye.
Dwellings Investment
Improved confidence may have encouraged greater spending on housing; private sector dwellings investment, which includes both purchases of newly built homes and improvements to existing homes, rose by 9% in 2013 Q1 but remains well below its pre-recession peak. Despite a share in GDP of around 3%, dwellings investment accounted for around 15% of the fall in output during the recession.
Dwellings investment is likely to rise gradually over the rest of 2013, supported by the declines in mortgage rates and improved mortgage availability, in part related to the Funding for Lending Scheme. In addition, the Government’s Help to Buy shared equity scheme was launched in April 2013 and is expected to provide some support for purchases of newly built homes.
The Housing Market is more volatile than the rest of the economy and prone to much bigger booms and busts. This makes it a good driver of recovery, hence the mortgage and housing market stimuli introduced by Osborne, but also makes it a greater deadweight when things go wrong: the 15% drag down on output caused by the Brown property boom before 2007.
The language of the BoE and the new powers of the FPC and PRA to regulate supply of credit to the housing market at least inspires some confidence that past lessons have now been learned. Carney was adamant in his answers to Conway that any over-heating of house price inflation can now be dealt with by throttling bank credit supply through the new regulatory structures.
A good argument can be made that the delinking of macro-economic policy from financial sector regulation in 1997 and onward was a contributory cause of the housing sector/ credit supply crash in the late noughties. Another Brown error for which we are still paying.
"There is a much quoted saying to the effect of "in government you wake up each morning and decide what you are going to do today, while in opposition you wake up each morning and decide what you are going to say today".
But in recent weeks, if there has been any governing going on, it has only been squeezed in between David Cameron and Nick Clegg's appearances on various phone-ins, press conferences, morning breakfast shows and Cameron Directs. "A lot said, a lot more to say" seems to be the coalition's slogan.
Farming Today, LBC, BBC Breakfast, Capital FM, Daybreak, XFM, Sunrise, Radio 5 Live, and any local radio show with a functioning microphone have been graced with our two leaders. Nurseries, hospital wards, mosques and a factory floor have provided the revolving backdrop. Never has the line between governing and campaigning seemed so porous. Britain long ago joined the era of the permanent campaign...
That brings the nation to Ed Miliband and his Trappist holiday in France. He has left his mobile phone at home, and has not been seen in public for some weeks. Nor has any member of the shadow cabinet. Search parties have been sent out.
One can only hope they remain lost and unfound." http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/08/david-cameron-nick-clegg-24-hour-news-machines?CMP=twt_gu
He is a bit of a contrarian. When things were really bad he whistled a happier tune than most but now things are turning better he is becoming somewhat grumpy, moving from the current uplift to focus on the underlying situation which is, let's face it, very far from good. Makes him worth reading though because contrarians can have a different perspective.
Personally, I think that we have had to run what in any other circumstance would have been an utterly reckless monetary policy for the last 5 years to offset the deflationary forces of the the credit crunch and the delveraging of the aftermath. If those forces are now depleted we will need to start thinking about a more appropriate monetary policy much quicker than the Bank seems to think. The lags in outcomes on monetary policy is why it is always much more of an art than a science and unpredictable. It may already be too late to avoid additional inflation.
•Chris Christie 21%
•Marco Rubio 18%
•Jeb Bush 16%
•Rand Paul 15%
•Paul Ryan 13%
•Scott Walker 6%
•Some other candidate 3%
•Undecided 8%
2016 Dem nomination
•Hillary Clinton 63%
•Joe Biden 12%
Come on Doody it's difficult enough to wade through threads of wall to wall Daily Mail without your vulgarities. Time to clean up your act
'You don't know anything about politics and I guess you don't bet, if you did then you'd be interested in how the Tory membership figures are standing up in the marginals.'
And your knowledge of politics is limited to the daily script you are given.
Do you seriously think that the Tories would go to the expense of hiring Crosby & Messina and miss out on foot soldiers in 80 marginals.Dream on.
The Bill separates off the Bank from the Treasury, and strips out a number of functions from the Bank, with no clear evidence that the consequences have been thought through.
How will the Government co-ordinate fiscal and monetary policy? ...
That is an example of the danger that Robert Chote, in his excellent pamphlet, presciently spelled out, when he wrote:... "One danger is that the economy will suffer if the Bank uses interests rate policy to pursue low inflation while the Government uses budgetary policy to pursue employment, growth and votes. This is a recipe for high interest rates, excessive Government borrowing and an overvalued exchange rate."
...
The Bill will hive off debt management to a new quango under the Treasury. We know that funding policy is an intrinsic part of monetary policy, and the Bill will leave the Bank as a one-club golfer without even a putter left in the bag. How will the Treasury, the Bank and the new board co-operate to handle monetary policy? If they need to get together, why is it necessary to separate them in the first place?
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmhansrd/vo971111/debtext/71111-11.htm
Has there ever been a Cassandra more unjustly and more stupidly ignored?
http://thepessimist.com/2013/08/07/how-to-be-outraged-on-the-internet/
A recession manifests in a collapse in demand. Households and enterprises stop buying.
Supply falls in response to the fall in demand. Workers are laid off, production and manufacturing is reduced.
An economy exiting a recession has capacity and infrastructure which can be utilised to ramp up supply quickly. This (oversimplifying) is known as the output gap. Shops that haven't shut can increase their sales, workers laid off can return to former employment etc.
So of course Osborne is "stoking demand" as a priority. If he doesn't he risks losing the under-utilised capacity in the economy for good. Factories and shops close forever, the unemployed emigrate etc.
The arguments downthread, say those between Alistair Heath and Carney are about the extent to which the output gap still exists. If, as Heath suggest, it doesn't and all the factories, shops and workers have disappeared forever, then stimulating demand without there being sufficient supply capacity to service it will cause inflation, as more money chases fewer goods.
A more reasonable view is that some capacity will have been lost forever (some factories won't reopen, the North Sea oil and gas fields are depleting unrenewable reserves etc), but that there is sufficient slack in the economy to satisfy increased demand with recovered supply.
The amount of supply capacity lost forever will need to be replaced with new investment. Up to now all sources of investment (foreign, government and private sector and supporting finance supply) have fallen in response to the recession. There is clearly a need to stimulate new investment, stabilise falls and renew growth. This is happening but is, for good reasons, has been a second priority to demand stimulus aimed at preserving existing investment and infrastructure.
The BoE has set a 7.0% unemployment rate as an indicator of when they believe the economy is nearing the point when the output gap nears closure. It is effectively a composite measure with the simplicity of a single easily understood target.
'Jacob Rees-Mogg 'shocked' by rightwing group's attack on Lawrence
A Tory MP has "dissociated" himself from the rightwing Traditional Britain Group after it suggested Doreen Lawrence and other black people should be "requested to return to their natural homelands".
Jacob Rees-Mogg, who was guest of honour at the group's annual dinner, expressed shock at the comments, which were posted on its Facebook site when the mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence was made a peer.
The site said it was a "monstrous disgrace that this Lawrence woman, who is no friend of Great Britain, and who is totally without merit, should be recognised like this or in any other way".
It added: "In fact she, along with millions of others, should be requested to return to their natural homelands. Of course the biggest disgrace is that any party calling itself 'conservative' could have been part of this."
In other comments, first reported by the LiberalConspiracy.org blog, the group praised Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right French Front National, describing her by-election win as "excellent".'
http://tinyurl.com/keym924
"British warships are to visit Gibraltar in a show of strength in the stand-off with Spain over control of The Rock.
Three ships including the frigate HMS Westminster will sail for the region on Monday even as the diplomatic row with Madrid escalates over plans for draconian border controls."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2386850/British-warships-set-sail-Gibraltar-strength-diplomatic-row-border-controls-deepens.html#ixzz2bOzJ76H6
'@johnvanreenen: Rather than stupid net #immigration targets, why not get #UKBA to do its job properly http://t.co/lGB00FI8uY'
Shouldn't he be focused on stupid degrees awarded to the likes of Saif Gaddafi.
" Israeli Ambassador: Jim, you have an airborne battalion on standby in Germany that is not now needed for the NATO exercise.
James Hacker: How do you know?
Israeli Ambassador: I know. Now, if you were to send it to St George's Island, it would frighten off East Yemen. They'd never dare invade. Of course, it's not for the Israeli ambassador to advise the British Prime Minister.
James Hacker: And he wouldn't take your advice anyway.
[picks up phone]
James Hacker: Get me the Foreign Secretary and then the Defence Secretary, please.
[hangs up]
James Hacker: A wonder the Foreign Office didn't cover themselves. Maybe they did. They gave me several boxes tonight. I've been through them all except this one. I wonder if this could be it, "Northern Indian Ocean Situation Report". 138 pages, it must be it.
[phone rings]
James Hacker: Hello? Yes, Ronnie. I want the president of St George's Island to extend an invitation to Britain to send an airborne battalion on a goodwill visit. No, just a friendly gesture. Goodwill. Yes, at once, please. Thank you.
[hangs up]
James Hacker: He seemed to think that 800 fully armed paratroopers was an awful lot to send on a goodwill visit.
Israeli Ambassador: No, it's just an awful lot of goodwill..."
What about the people actually doing the bullying?
Where are the police and the schools? Presumably these bullies were known personally to the girl who committed suicide?
Is there a criminal investigation going on?
It seems to me while all the focus and outrage is on the website we're letting the actual bullies off the hook?
Have ask.fm been particularly negligent or exhibited bad business practices compared to (say) Facebook?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/08/we-must-revisit-the-equality-act-to-stop-vexatious-court-cases/
"When money is cheap Govts borrow to build."
They have done historically and it's certainly been a mixed bag as to results. If you ask me to stump up £100 so that the government (of any flavour) can invest it wisely then I'm not really that enthusiastic. If you ask me to commit my children to paying the £100 for that purpose then it's even less appealing. The thing is that economics is changing. Noone ever really understood it properly before, and probably even less so now that money can move so quickly from one thing to the other. To be honest it worries me that the system in itself might necessarily have an end result in a big bust. (Much sought after though such things are online!) I'm 100% sure though that governments aren't the people to try to fathom that.
@Others
If the "Tory machine" is declining somewhere it's hardly a surprise. What the phrase translates to in reality isn't terribly machine-like, and certainly isn't the driver of the party's policies. The "Labour machine" similarly - the trade unions have had their day, although will no doubt remain important.
I'd stick the bullies in the cells for the weekend myself.
It just seems to me that day after day after day we're hearing about Ask.fm while the people that were using Ask.fm as a tool to bully this girl seem to get getting away with it.
Unless, like I say there some sort of police investigation going on that the media aren't talking about at the moment....
Rory McIlroy ............950/1
Wayne Rooney .........950/1
Bradley Wiggins .......950/1
Ronnie O'Sullivan .....950/1
Jessica Ennis-Hill .....950/1
etc.... etc....
How are the mighty fallen.
Pretty hard to read support for Ed in that isn't it?
(PS Good luck in your attempt to get the NPMP tag again. I don't want you to succeed, but I'd not like ill-fortune to hamper your path)
Trying to take 0.8% of the workforce of which 85%ish are happy with the terms [according to IIRC the ONS] and make it an issue was asking for it because well 85% of the workforce probably work for a wide cross section of the market - and that includes Labour councils and the Guardian.
Perhaps a spec of research would have been a good idea first for whichever bright SpUd came up with this line of attack.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BQLlbmYCMAMiQpL.jpg:large
When the eyes are green your cat is fully charged.
In the Guardian?????
Never!!!!
You can sense the outrage from the PB Burleys. Particularly after they made such a colossal twat of themselves over Godfrey Bloom. ;^ )