So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
Electorally speaking: - assume the 600 seats deal is dead, if nothing else because it's terrible for the DUP - the DUP is out of unionists in Belfast N and almost out in Belfast S. S is very vulnerable next time and N is vulnerable if SF/SDLP agree a pact to split the two seats. I would bravely say surely -1 DUP, maybe -2 DUP - the longer the deal goes on, the more tail risks emerge, like losing N Antrim - on the other side, Foyle would probably eject the abstentionists to elect an MP who would actually oppose the government
Will the DUP suffer from supporting the Tories as the LibDems did?
Not if they can show benefits for Northern Irish voters.
Conversely if the DUP appear to be tainted by an unpopular Conservative government then Arlene will dump on the Theresa quicker than you can say Mark Oaten.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
The ideal scenario for Labour is that the Tories put together some sort of grubby deal with the No Surrender bigots and that government limps on for a few months until the inevitable byelection defeats and rebellions from the Tory europhiles and, possibly, the DUP themselves cripple it. There will have to be another general election at some point, how the government crawls on until 2019 I do not know.
Of course you don't know; you don't want it to happen! I'm sure the government will manage parliamentary business to minimise opportunities for the rebels. Moreover, it will never be in the DUP's interest to be rebellious. They have no need to differentiate themselves a la Lib Dems, and a record of consistently delivering more money for Ulster over several years will serve them well with their constituents.
I think the clearout of older MPs has reduced the opportunities for by-elections in Tory seats.
Is there any word on whether they are trying to get Lady Hermon's support for the confidence / supply deal.
May seem trivial point but I think it would be well worthwhile.
With a majority of 13 they can only really afford to lose 3 by-elections which would take it down to a majority of 7. A 4th loss would take it to 5 and I think that's the tipping point where it becomes unsustainable as literally every vote becomes hold your breath.
So if they want this to last say two years (and possibly longer) then every vote is going to matter. If there is any chance they can get Lady Hermon onside they should make every effort to do so.
Lady Hermon left the UUP because they allied with the Conservatives.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
At one point I heard someone, it may have been Vince Cable, saying that the ability to pay it all off in one go was not progressive. Maybe he was outlining a future policy rather than the current one
EDIT Aha!
"The system was designed as a form of “graduate tax” so that those benefiting most from a university education would repay most.
But to stop wealthier graduates, or those assisted by their parents, from opting out of the “progressive” system, it was planned that they would face a levy of five per cent of the value of early repayments.
Someone repaying a £40,000 loan early could have had to pay a penalty of £2,000. The Government has said previously: “It is important that those on the higher incomes are not able unfairly to buy themselves out of the progressive mechanism.” "
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
RochdalePioneers has been more on the money re this GE than most on this site. While many of us thought Conservative majority was certain and at the very least likely, he/she knew about the discontent that many in this country had regarding the status quo and how that could impact the GE result.
were probably the most astute posts during the campaign.
And that David Herdson post, obviously. But while that was a ground report, RochdalePioneers pretty much nailed the analysis.
+2
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
I know he got millions more votes and a fair few more seats, but he was only up against the useless May. Miliband had to face The Squealing Eagles' heroes.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Since my kids were born I have been putting money into savings to either cover their tuition fees at University or to pay something towards a deposit on a house if they decide not to go the Uni route.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
This is true. Governments of both colours hid behind "can't do that because of EU rules"
One of the many beauties of Brexit it that it strips away that excuse. Governments will be, for the first time in decades, genuinely sovereign - and you will have your wish.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
RochdalePioneers has been more on the money re this GE than most on this site. While many of us thought Conservative majority was certain and at the very least likely, he/she knew about the discontent that many in this country had regarding the status quo and how that could impact the GE result.
were probably the most astute posts during the campaign.
And that David Herdson post, obviously. But while that was a ground report, RochdalePioneers pretty much nailed the analysis.
+2
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
Rochale's posts were excellent, as were David's and MM's.
Is there any word on whether they are trying to get Lady Hermon's support for the confidence / supply deal.
May seem trivial point but I think it would be well worthwhile.
With a majority of 13 they can only really afford to lose 3 by-elections which would take it down to a majority of 7. A 4th loss would take it to 5 and I think that's the tipping point where it becomes unsustainable as literally every vote becomes hold your breath.
So if they want this to last say two years (and possibly longer) then every vote is going to matter. If there is any chance they can get Lady Hermon onside they should make every effort to do so.
Lady Hermon left the UUP because they allied with the Conservatives.
If only Wollaston and Soubry would do the same. And the Swiss woman.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
I've said before that I think the only way Jezz will be stopped is in office. I do think after the Tories have done Brexit we'll have a Corbyn government.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
On the current election timetable, 2027 sees a big boost in newly eligible 18-23 y/o voters.
This election was actually against the young-voter-demographic-tide.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
At one point I heard someone, it may have been Vince Cable, saying that the ability to pay it all off in one go was not progressive. Maybe he was outlining a future policy rather than the current one
EDIT Aha!
"The system was designed as a form of “graduate tax” so that those benefiting most from a university education would repay most.
But to stop wealthier graduates, or those assisted by their parents, from opting out of the “progressive” system, it was planned that they would face a levy of five per cent of the value of early repayments.
Someone repaying a £40,000 loan early could have had to pay a penalty of £2,000. The Government has said previously: “It is important that those on the higher incomes are not able unfairly to buy themselves out of the progressive mechanism.” "
RochdalePioneers has been more on the money re this GE than most on this site. While many of us thought Conservative majority was certain and at the very least likely, he/she knew about the discontent that many in this country had regarding the status quo and how that could impact the GE result.
were probably the most astute posts during the campaign.
And that David Herdson post, obviously. But while that was a ground report, RochdalePioneers pretty much nailed the analysis.
+2
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
I thought it was 1.01 a wind up!
It was slightly tarnished by the fact he changed his mind the next day
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Since my kids were born I have been putting money into savings to either cover their tuition fees at University or to pay something towards a deposit on a house if they decide not to go the Uni route.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
Not compulsory at all, you'd just have to pay the fees in big lump sums as they came due. It's what foreign students would do.
The ideal scenario for Labour is that the Tories put together some sort of grubby deal with the No Surrender bigots and that government limps on for a few months until the inevitable byelection defeats and rebellions from the Tory europhiles and, possibly, the DUP themselves cripple it. There will have to be another general election at some point, how the government crawls on until 2019 I do not know.
I have come round to the opinion that the best outcome for the Tories would be as follows:
1. Invite Labour into a grand coalition to be dissolved immediately after Brexit. it's reading tea leaves, but this interpretation is somewhat close to the outcome of the general election. An electorate who wanted neither party to lead. A hard right government propped up by a fundamentalist Christian minority feels like the opposite of what people voted for. Plus, tying Labour to the Brexit negotiations would prevent them enjoying the best of both worlds by sitting on the fence and promising the moon on a stick.
2. Publicly appeal to the Lib Dems. Say, we as a moderate and socially liberal Conservative party that respects people of all genders, religions and persuasions, cannot seek the support of the DUP. We therefore urge you, for the sake of our country, to reconsider your refusal to enter into a coalition. The price, of course, would be a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal. But it is genuinely hard to see how the Lib Dems could refuse this offer. Their raison d'etre in 2017 was a second referendum and this is the only way they're getting it. It would also be democratic. The people had the first say in Brexit and they have the final say. Hard to argue against. If the Lib Dems refuse, it is the Tories who look both liberal and democratic.
3. Having failed in (1) and (2), the Tories should announce their decision to hold a second referendum, unilaterally. It utterly destroys the lib dems at the next election, would win back a swathe of remainer votes to the Tories and is also fittingly poetic: the British people 'took back control', it is only right that they legitimise the final deal. We keep on going round in circles endlessly interpreting who has a mandate for what. But it was 'the will of the people' that got us here so it should be the will of the people that sees it through. It would be hard, nay, impossible, for the electorate to hang the blame for Brexit if it goes wrong on the Tories in these circumstances, and it is entirely consistent with the democratic process that led us to this point.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
looks like the market is player performance. i cant see the rules but it is probs something like 1pt per run, 10 for a wicket, 5 for a catch etc. or something like that.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Since my kids were born I have been putting money into savings to either cover their tuition fees at University or to pay something towards a deposit on a house if they decide not to go the Uni route.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
I'm in the same boat as you, my understanding is there's no necessity to take out the loan, so long as you have the funds for the entirety of the course at the start of the course/application.
A few points about the absurd spectacle that is ZombieMay's Tory Party:
1. The convention is that a defeated government can try and get its programme through a Queens Speech. That May can't even write a QS acceptable to her new "friends" is not acceptable - she needs to go to the Commons and it will pass or fail. We need a government and can't wait for her to faff around with her homophobic misogynist terrorist friends.
2. This DUP deal is the shoddiest arrangement since Joachim von Ribbentrop got on the phone to Vyacheslav Molotov and proposed a coalition deal. Set aside the Good Friday Agreement which dictates that UK and ROI governments stand by impartially to guarantee the peace. Set aside the lack of a Northern Irish Assembly which failed because Arlene 'Red Hand' Foster got herself stuck into a cash for ash scheme. Set aside the anger that English voters have towards "foreign" parties having undue influence over their government.
And look at the reprehensible disgusting creatures that May and the Conservative Party think are suitable partners for government. Aside from being a party directly linked to terrorism - and we know how association with terrorism makes someone unfit to be PM - they have some offensively backwards views towards women, the gay community, minority religious groups and to modern society as a whole. I have many friends who possess a vagina, a rosary, 21st century morality, an interest in their own sex and many possess a combination of all four.
I myself am a bisexual man, my eldest son is gay, two close friends have finally had the confidence to get engaged and I look forward to my first gay wedding next year. It took me 15 years to publicly come out having lived in fear of how society would see me. I am not having my 16 year old son live in fear as I did because it becomes ok again to abuse anyone who isn't straight - the DUP represent all that we have left behind in GB and love Norn Iron as I do this is one area in which they are 20 years out of date.
A deal with the DUP is a deal too far. Is there no barrel that this PM won't scrape to cling to power?
Labour contemplated a deal with the DUP in 2010 and 2015. It's a well-scraped barrel.
That is no excuse for the Tories to follow suit.
Northern Irish MP's sit on Commons select committees, receive knighthoods and peerages, caucus and socialise with MP's from other parties. It's a bit late in the day to suddenly decide that they're pariahs.
That is part of the democratic process. The public have the right to vote for whoever they like however disreputable they might be. But would you suggest that the Tories do a similar deal with the BNP if they ever got seats at Westminster?
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Since my kids were born I have been putting money into savings to either cover their tuition fees at University or to pay something towards a deposit on a house if they decide not to go the Uni route.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
You would be a fool not to take the loan because when Corbyn is PM all the student debts will be written off.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
I've said before that I think the only way Jezz will be stopped is in office. I do think after the Tories have done Brexit we'll have a Corbyn government.
Is there any word on whether they are trying to get Lady Hermon's support for the confidence / supply deal.
May seem trivial point but I think it would be well worthwhile.
With a majority of 13 they can only really afford to lose 3 by-elections which would take it down to a majority of 7. A 4th loss would take it to 5 and I think that's the tipping point where it becomes unsustainable as literally every vote becomes hold your breath.
So if they want this to last say two years (and possibly longer) then every vote is going to matter. If there is any chance they can get Lady Hermon onside they should make every effort to do so.
I think they can get Lady Hermon to abstain. In other circumstances, she'd vote with Labour.
I am aware that in the past she has been much closer to Lab but thought that that was pre Corbyn.
I thought that with Lab under Corbyn, Con would have a fair chance of getting her support (ie supply / confidence support).
I hope she hasn't just been forgotten - they should be making every possible effort to engage with her.
RochdalePioneers has been more on the money re this GE than most on this site. While many of us thought Conservative majority was certain and at the very least likely, he/she knew about the discontent that many in this country had regarding the status quo and how that could impact the GE result.
were probably the most astute posts during the campaign.
And that David Herdson post, obviously. But while that was a ground report, RochdalePioneers pretty much nailed the analysis.
+2
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
I thought it was 1.01 a wind up!
It was slightly tarnished by the fact he changed his mind the next day
And by the fact that the Conservative vote went up a lot in Wakefield.
It was the increase in the Labour vote which beat them.
In other words DH was right but for the wrong reasons.
Well yes but he's a committed Unionist who ran to be deputy chair of the UUP in April. So he's not quite neutral. But I do think the hyperbole coming from some quarters is a bit much. I certainly would have problem with coalition as I have made clear to a couple of old friends in the Tory party
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
This is true. Governments of both colours hid behind "can't do that because of EU rules"
One of the many beauties of Brexit it that it strips away that excuse. Governments will be, for the first time in decades, genuinely sovereign - and you will have your wish.
Not surprisingly I hold a different view as no one, in my mind convinced me that the EU stopped us from doing what was required at the time for the best interests of the British people but it's not to late for me to be educated, but the argument will have to include the perched up and down sides
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
They wouldn't have time!
It's true, the Committee is swamped with work. The investigation of Jack's ARSE alone is consuming thousands of man hours, not to mention several jars of vaseline.
RochdalePioneers has been more on the money re this GE than most on this site. While many of us thought Conservative majority was certain and at the very least likely, he/she knew about the discontent that many in this country had regarding the status quo and how that could impact the GE result.
were probably the most astute posts during the campaign.
And that David Herdson post, obviously. But while that was a ground report, RochdalePioneers pretty much nailed the analysis.
+2
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
Rochale's posts were excellent, as were David's and MM's.
I've praised all of them on a previous thread. They deserve it. It's interesting that all three had very good insights, they all called it as they saw it, but to assemble the "Big Picture" at the national level required stitching together these snap shots and weighting them appropriately.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Anyone know Labour's policies on FOM and membership of the single market as there appears to be some confusion. I wonder if the army of new young Labour voters are any clearer than I am?
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
On the current election timetable, 2027 sees a big boost in newly eligible 18-23 y/o voters.
This election was actually against the young-voter-demographic-tide.
I am not sure I understand the GFA "British and Irish governments must be neutral with respect to NI parties" thing in full.
The way people are talking about it now sounds as if it bans people in NI from having a part electing the government, or parties active in NI from taking part in the government of either country.
But this can't be right, or can't be the interpretation that everyone sticks to at any rate. The Tories have post-GFA stood joint candidates in NI elections. And Sinn Fein are active in the North and still seek to govern in the South.
And it surely can't mean in the purest sense that the governments can't be influenced by NI parties. Both Ireland and the UK have political systems in which members of their respective parliaments, who come from parties active in NI (albeit not directly elected from the North, in the case of the the Dail) have the ability to support or oppose government legislation, and if the parliamentary arithmetic is tight, potentially bring down the government. This clearly means NI parties can hold some sway over the governments.
Can anyone give a brief explanation of how the whole "neutrality" idea is meant to work?
It is a tool for Sinn Fein to bash the British government with. Naturally, it won't apply if they ever seek to form a government in the Republic with Fianna Fáil.
And Fianna Fail might field candidates in the North.
They seem to have been promising that for aaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeees,
I seem to recall they have actually organised themselves up there - do they stand candidates in even local elections, yet?
Not yet. But they keep suggesting it's about to happen. 2019 is the date of the next locals. If they don't fight those they will never fight elections here.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
For all their mistakes, the Tories still got 13.6 m votes.
Against Corbyn, farron and sturgeon I don't think that is a good measure, what is the direction of travel? I don't know but I know that my 30 year old kids will desert dads lib dem views because 1. One daughter has just had her NHS job privatized under her 2. The youngest has seen her tab credits disappear and sees little future whilst local newspapers disappear, not a political point but can't see any decent jobss in the future. 3. One who grew up seeing the brutal approach that Tories take in local government so could never vote for them voting labour for her and her sons future.
I can't hold the tide back even with people who listen to me, I'll never vote Tory or labour because they both as corrupt as each other but can I suggest you start listening to the younger generation
Oh, there are big risks for the Conservatives of a left wing demographic tsunami coming their way.
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
But it can be avoided no matter my politics I can't stomach the idea of a Corbyn gov but all parties must wake up to the fact that people want them to look to theFUTURE not the past. This whole issue of brexit is hiding the real issues that need to be addressed.
I've said before that I think the only way Jezz will be stopped is in office. I do think after the Tories have done Brexit we'll have a Corbyn government.
Not sure what can stop it now...
Time, wherein many incidents may ensue.
Yeah but it's hard to see the governing party getting more popular from here. Meanwhile Corbyn's cult will just grow I suspect.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
They wouldn't have time!
It's true, the Committee is swamped with work. The investigation of Jack's ARSE alone is consuming thousands of man hours, not to mention several jars of vaseline.
Its a great regret that the old Jacobite is too honourable to name and shame his experts.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
Why would they want an election in October? And would they even be allowed one?
Can you not see Corbyn et al are busy trolling Mrs May?
The numbers just don't work for a rainbow coalition. It really is one of the following: Tory/DUP majority, Tory minority or another election!
If I am wrong, Corbyn is even more stupid than I suspected 7 weeks ago!
If the QS is defeated, then Corbyn gets the chance to form a minority government. I could see that government being frequently defeated, but it gives him the chance to establish Prime Ministerial credentials.
He would have to get his own Queen's speech through first. Without the direct support of the DUP or some Tories he would not succeed.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
It's as @paulyork64 says, they are player performances, so points are allocated for wickets, catches and runs. Bit off that the scoring system isn't shown
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Player Performance These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows: 1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players. In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
looks like the market is player performance. i cant see the rules but it is probs something like 1pt per run, 10 for a wicket, 5 for a catch etc. or something like that.
That makes sense but if so I think they should specify what 'player performance' is.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
They wouldn't have time!
It's true, the Committee is swamped with work. The investigation of Jack's ARSE alone is consuming thousands of man hours, not to mention several jars of vaseline.
Its a great regret that the old Jacobite is too honourable to name and shame his experts.
There are ways of making him talk. We could drop his wife off at Harrods, for starters.
Am I right in thinking that graduates are unable to pay them off with lump sums ?
Meaning that graduates are permanently locked into a debt which compounds at RPI+3% per year.
Wrong, you can make any ad hoc/lump sum payments at any time.
The monthly payment doesn't change though.
But if you paid it all off in one lump sum the monthly payment would reduce immediately to zero wouldn't it ?
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think we're at cross purposes.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
Since my kids were born I have been putting money into savings to either cover their tuition fees at University or to pay something towards a deposit on a house if they decide not to go the Uni route.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
You would be a fool not to take the loan because when Corbyn is PM all the student debts will be written off.
I'm afraid that unless your kids are really"sensible" then despite providing them with the means to go through uni they will still take out the loan. It only comes home to them that when at work they struggle to understand why the have less disposible income, but come on why shouldn't they enjoy themselves
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
looks like the market is player performance. i cant see the rules but it is probs something like 1pt per run, 10 for a wicket, 5 for a catch etc. or something like that.
That makes sense but if so I think they should specify what 'player performance' is.
if you ask quickly they may void your bets as the thing hasnt started yet.
It is a tool for Sinn Fein to bash the British government with. Naturally, it won't apply if they ever seek to form a government in the Republic with Fianna Fáil.
And Fianna Fail might field candidates in the North.
They seem to have been promising that for aaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeees,
I seem to recall they have actually organised themselves up there - do they stand candidates in even local elections, yet?
Not yet. But they keep suggesting it's about to happen. 2019 is the date of the next locals. If they don't fight those they will never fight elections here.
Cheers Lucian. You're a star. Did they have a councillor defection at one stage?
Any chance you could answer my original query about how the GFA is "meant" to work, with respect toe neutrality? Or does that go beyond your ken/available time to answer?
I am not sure I understand the GFA "British and Irish governments must be neutral with respect to NI parties" thing in full.
The way people are talking about it now sounds as if it bans people in NI from having a part electing the government, or parties active in NI from taking part in the government of either country.
But this can't be right, or can't be the interpretation that everyone sticks to at any rate. The Tories have post-GFA stood joint candidates in NI elections. And Sinn Fein are active in the North and still seek to govern in the South.
And it surely can't mean in the purest sense that the governments can't be influenced by NI parties. Both Ireland and the UK have political systems in which members of their respective parliaments, who come from parties active in NI (albeit not directly elected from the North, in the case of the the Dail) have the ability to support or oppose government legislation, and if the parliamentary arithmetic is tight, potentially bring down the government. This clearly means NI parties can hold some sway over the governments.
Can anyone give a brief explanation of how the whole "neutrality" idea is meant to work?
A few points about the absurd spectacle that is ZombieMay's Tory Party:
1. The convention is that a defeated government can try and get its programme through a Queens Speech. That May can't even write a QS acceptable to her new "friends" is not acceptable - she needs to go to the Commons and it will pass or fail. We need a government and can't wait for her to faff around with her homophobic misogynist terrorist friends.
2. This DUP deal is the shoddiest arrangement since Joachim von Ribbentrop got on the phone to Vyacheslav Molotov and proposed a coalition deal. Set aside the Good Friday Agreement which dictates that UK and ROI governments stand by impartially to guarantee the peace. Set aside the lack of a Northern Irish Assembly which failed because Arlene 'Red Hand' Foster got herself stuck into a cash for ash scheme. Set aside the anger that English voters have towards "foreign" parties having undue influence over their government.
And look at the I myself am a bisexual man, my eldest son is gay, two close friends have finally had the confidence to get engaged and I look forward to my first gay wedding next year. It took me 15 years to publicly come out having lived in fear of how society would see me. I am not having my 16 year old son live in fear as I did because it becomes ok again to abuse anyone who isn't straight - the DUP represent all that we have left behind in GB and love Norn Iron as I do this is one area in which they are 20 years out of date.
A deal with the DUP is a deal too far. Is there no barrel that this PM won't scrape to cling to power?
Labour contemplated a deal with the DUP in 2010 and 2015. It's a well-scraped barrel.
That is no excuse for the Tories to follow suit.
Northern Irish MP's sit on Commons select committees, receive knighthoods and peerages, caucus and socialise with MP's from other parties. It's a bit late in the day to suddenly decide that they're pariahs.
That is part of the democratic process. The public have the right to vote for whoever they like however disreputable they might be. But would you suggest that the Tories do a similar deal with the BNP if they ever got seats at Westminster?
I don't see the DUP (as it is presently) in the same light as the BNP. People like Jeffrey Donaldson, Arlene Foster, and Nigel Dodds would be Conservatives over here. Others like Ian Paisley jnr. would be Labour.
However, more generally, if we lived in the type of democracy which had PR, and in which hung Parliaments were the norm, then yes, one would have to cut deals with parties that are somewhat dubious.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Player Performance These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows: 1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players. In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
I can understand having an over restriction in case of inclement weather but does that mean that if a team gets bowled out in 39 overs that the bet is void? That doesn't sound right to me.
Electorally speaking: - assume the 600 seats deal is dead, if nothing else because it's terrible for the DUP - the DUP is out of unionists in Belfast N and almost out in Belfast S. S is very vulnerable next time and N is vulnerable if SF/SDLP agree a pact to split the two seats. I would bravely say surely -1 DUP, maybe -2 DUP - the longer the deal goes on, the more tail risks emerge, like losing N Antrim - on the other side, Foyle would probably eject the abstentionists to elect an MP who would actually oppose the government
I can't North Antrim being at risk.
I wish that more Unionists had been willing to vote SDLP in both South Down and Foyle.
Eastwood talking up a border poll cost Ritchie and Durkan their seats, definitely. That and Nationalist commentators adding up all the Nationalist votes together to suggest such a poll was coming. I know some Unionists in Nationalist areas who had voted SDLP lots of times wanted to see their vote in the 'right' column this time. The SDLP need Durkan to run again and they can take back Foyle as the SF MP is a bit of a nobody. I think Ritchie has a bigger job because Hazzard was a decent media performer as a minister at Stormont.
Is there any word on whether they are trying to get Lady Hermon's support for the confidence / supply deal.
May seem trivial point but I think it would be well worthwhile.
With a majority of 13 they can only really afford to lose 3 by-elections which would take it down to a majority of 7. A 4th loss would take it to 5 and I think that's the tipping point where it becomes unsustainable as literally every vote becomes hold your breath.
So if they want this to last say two years (and possibly longer) then every vote is going to matter. If there is any chance they can get Lady Hermon onside they should make every effort to do so.
Hermon's vote is a mix of 60 per cent unionists and 40 per cent tactical voters who otherwise go Alliance or Green. There was a lot of tactical unwind to those centrist, somewhat progressive parties in North Down this time, and a bit more would be the end of her career and a DUP gain. On the other hand, if she's done anyway, it's moot and simply an extremely likely DUP gain.
The Tories still making the same mistake putting up boring old farts who are in a different universe to most of us rather than someone with vision who can connect outside the Tory shires. The more they do it the more they appear to be "for the few not the many" can you imagine hoe she appeared to large parts of the electorate in twin set and pearls! We're in a different world and those younger than me want some hope for the future not the same old shit year after year
snip.
On the current election timetable, 2027 sees a big boost in newly eligible 18-23 y/o voters.
This election was actually against the young-voter-demographic-tide.
As has been noted on here before, the Conservative party will probably not worry too much about kids these days voting in their own self interest. It means they are just a job and a mortgage away from being Tory voters for three decades.
I know he got millions more votes and a fair few more seats, but he was only up against the useless May. Miliband had to face The Squealing Eagles' heroes.
EdM was up against Cameron planting a magic money tree forest and was associated with the last Labour government. EdM thus got out-promised.
Corbyn was up against May chopping down the magic money tree forest and wasn't associated with the last Labour government. Corbyn thus had unlimited scope for promises.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Player Performance These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows: 1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players. In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
I can understand having an over restriction in case of inclement weather but does that mean that if a team gets bowled out in 39 overs that the bet is void? That doesn't sound right to me.
I think the "unless settlement of bets is already determined" covers the match finishing.
Labour contemplated a deal with the DUP in 2010 and 2015. It's a well-scraped barrel.
We did? Thats news. Assuming other parties will vote against the Tories is one thing. Dispatching your chief whip to Belfast to negotiate a coalition, then announce a C&S deal, then unannounce it, then delay the QS whilst trying to do one - yeah, thats pretty much how 2010 went. Very creative of the BBC to substitute Ian Paisley Jr for Nick Clegg in the dramatisation of it.
+1 I'm gay but have no problems with a deal especially as it will have less than zero impact on gay rights in the rUK and may well help the slower journey of some in NI to a greater level of tolerance.
Is there any word on whether they are trying to get Lady Hermon's support for the confidence / supply deal.
May seem trivial point but I think it would be well worthwhile.
With a majority of 13 they can only really afford to lose 3 by-elections which would take it down to a majority of 7. A 4th loss would take it to 5 and I think that's the tipping point where it becomes unsustainable as literally every vote becomes hold your breath.
So if they want this to last say two years (and possibly longer) then every vote is going to matter. If there is any chance they can get Lady Hermon onside they should make every effort to do so.
I said the exact same thing to a work colleague today. They can take up to three by-election defeats and just about continue on, but a fourth would probably finish them off.
As to those saying that the older MPs are now mostly gone, it's not just age that can trigger by-elections, aren't I right Craig MacKinley?
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Player Performance These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows: 1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players. In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
I can understand having an over restriction in case of inclement weather but does that mean that if a team gets bowled out in 39 overs that the bet is void? That doesn't sound right to me.
I think the "unless settlement of bets is already determined" covers the match finishing.
+1 I'm gay but have no problems with a deal especially as it will have less than zero impact on gay rights in the rUK and may well help the slower journey of some in NI to a greater level of tolerance.
That is the one good thing about the DUP taking some responsibility for this government, it might help in some small way to normalise Northern Ireland politics, which in the long run would be quite a prize.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
looks like the market is player performance. i cant see the rules but it is probs something like 1pt per run, 10 for a wicket, 5 for a catch etc. or something like that.
That makes sense but if so I think they should specify what 'player performance' is.
if you ask quickly they may void your bets as the thing hasnt started yet.
Thanks, but I'll let them roll as they're only a few quid.
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
If it isn't void if he doesn't bat it is the greatest bet of all time
There's plenty of others - Indian tailenders to get less than 30.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Player Performance These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows: 1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players. In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
I can understand having an over restriction in case of inclement weather but does that mean that if a team gets bowled out in 39 overs that the bet is void? That doesn't sound right to me.
I think the "unless settlement of bets is already determined" covers the match finishing.
Right, that bit confused me.
I couldn't even find the rules on their website. I had to google it from a new tab. not v helpful IMO
@Richard_Tyndall The danger with paying your kids tuition fees upfront is this: if they were to go into a very low paying profession (or, God forbid, died or become severely disabled) then you would have wasted the £27k or whatever is then. This is because if your income is below the £21k threshold for the entire 30 years then you don't have to pay anything back so the interest is irrelevant.
It is a tool for Sinn Fein to bash the British government with. Naturally, it won't apply if they ever seek to form a government in the Republic with Fianna Fáil.
And Fianna Fail might field candidates in the North.
They seem to have been promising that for aaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeees,
I seem to recall they have actually organised themselves up there - do they stand candidates in even local elections, yet?
Not yet. But they keep suggesting it's about to happen. 2019 is the date of the next locals. If they don't fight those they will never fight elections here.
Cheers Lucian. You're a star. Did they have a councillor defection at one stage?
Any chance you could answer my original query about how the GFA is "meant" to work, with respect toe neutrality? Or does that go beyond your ken/available time to answer?
I am not sure I understand the GFA "British and Irish governments must be neutral with respect to NI parties" thing in full.
The way people are talking about it now sounds as if it bans people in NI from having a part electing the government, or parties active in NI from taking part in the government of either country.
But this can't be right, or can't be the interpretation that everyone sticks to at any rate. The Tories have post-GFA stood joint candidates in NI elections. And Sinn Fein are active in the North and still seek to govern in the South.
And it surely can't mean in the purest sense that the governments can't be influenced by NI parties. Both Ireland and the UK have political systems in which members of their respective parliaments, who come from parties active in NI (albeit not directly elected from the North, in the case of the the Dail) have the ability to support or oppose government legislation, and if the parliamentary arithmetic is tight, potentially bring down the government. This clearly means NI parties can hold some sway over the governments.
Can anyone give a brief explanation of how the whole "neutrality" idea is meant to work?
I don't know. That's the simple answer. Nobody is truly neutral on such a fundamental. Issue. But I really believe that it just means the GB government doesn't keep NI against the will of the people and ROI doesn't claim NI against the will of the people.
Having said that I believe Reg put it best over the weekend. The GFA was set up by the SDLP and UUP leaderships who respected each other. The situation now is trying to use the same framework with two parties that loathe each other and seek nothing more than to rub the other side noses in it.
@Richard_Tyndall The danger with paying your kids tuition fees upfront is this: if they were to go into a very low paying profession (or, God forbid, died or become severely disabled) then you would have wasted the £27k or whatever is then. If your income is below £21k for the entire 30 years then you don't have to pay anything back so the interest is irrelevant.
But if he keeps the money and gets dementia, the government will take it. Might as well free his kids from debt.
It is a tool for Sinn Fein to bash the British government with. Naturally, it won't apply if they ever seek to form a government in the Republic with Fianna Fáil.
And Fianna Fail might field candidates in the North.
They seem to have been promising that for aaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggeeeeeeeeeeees,
I seem to recall they have actually organised themselves up there - do they stand candidates in even local elections, yet?
Not yet. But they keep suggesting it's about to happen. 2019 is the date of the next locals. If they don't fight those they will never fight elections here.
Cheers Lucian. You're a star. Did they have a councillor defection at one stage?
Any chance you could answer my original query about how the GFA is "meant" to work, with respect toe neutrality? Or does that go beyond your ken/available time to answer?
I don't know. That's the simple answer. Nobody is truly neutral on such a fundamental. Issue. But I really believe that it just means the GB government doesn't keep NI against the will of the people and ROI doesn't claim NI against the will of the people.
Having said that I believe Reg put it best over the weekend. The GFA was set up by the SDLP and UUP leaderships who respected each other. The situation now is trying to use the same framework with two parties that loathe each other and seek nothing more than to rub the other side noses in it.
That's a great (and rather depressing!) way of putting it! Cheers.
@Richard_Tyndall The danger with paying your kids tuition fees upfront is this: if they were to go into a very low paying profession (or, God forbid, died or become severely disabled) then you would have wasted the £27k or whatever is then. If your income is below £21k for the entire 30 years then you don't have to pay anything back so the interest is irrelevant.
But if he keeps the money and gets dementia, the government will take it. Might as well free his kids from debt.
Not if he spends it all on backing the "free money" Con Maj @ 1.19 ;-)
@Richard_Tyndall The danger with paying your kids tuition fees upfront is this: if they were to go into a very low paying profession (or, God forbid, died or become severely disabled) then you would have wasted the £27k or whatever is then. This is because if your income is below the £21k threshold for the entire 30 years then you don't have to pay anything back so the interest is irrelevant.
I have had this conversation with Fox jr, and on the one hand his debt does accumulate, but on the other hand at present he pays nothing at present, and there is always the chance of the debt being written off.
When I retire in a few years he will probably have started repaying, and I was going to give him a substantial chunk of my lump sum. He can then put it to pay the student debt off or to use as a deposit on a house, or spend it on beer and holidays. The choice would be his.
So the Tory party has consigned itself to electoral oblivion. Clinging onto power like a desperate Plantagenet as Europe eyes the prize and moves in for the kill. They are utterly clueless and Strategically inept.
What are they supposed to do? Promise to abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech?
It should be patently obvious that the electorate have thrown a hospital pass. A party with a modicum of strategic nouse would see that you don't want to be the one holding the ball. They should have let Corbyn form a government and vote him out on a whim once he has sacrificed all the gain he made in the 7 week campaign. That is of course also entirely in their self interest, but has the added advantage of being the sensible approach to avoiding catastrophe next time.
Nonsense.
What's nonsense about it? they'll be crying into their champers in October when they go sub 200 seats again after screwing Brexit, the Northern Irish and themselves.
There isn't going to be an election until either YG says the Cons can win - or 2021.
This from the man who was telling all and sundry to shovel the farm on the "free money" of a Tory majority at 1.19
In fairness, a lot of us thought it was, even if we did manage to trade out in time.
Saying something is an absolute certainty then backing the other side is surely de rigeur?
Well, if that's what someone did, Isam.....
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
They wouldn't have time!
It's true, the Committee is swamped with work. The investigation of Jack's ARSE alone is consuming thousands of man hours, not to mention several jars of vaseline.
I did tell all and sundry not to back Tories in Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock as they had no chance (backed up by another knowledgeable poster) only to find out I had actually put a fiver on them.
Other countries didn't have Brexit though - which has created its own dynamics that help make Corbyn far more electable than he otherwise would be. Firstly May's decision to focus on a harsh Brexit as an adversarial poker game - citizens of nowhere, Crush the Saboteurs etc, has united the liberal part of the left in what they're against and made it a lot easier to vote Corbyn with a nosepeg. Even as Home Secretary May used to virtue signal at the more strident parts of the right, and as Osborne often pointed out on election night it really annoys exactly the people who he and Cameron saw as necessary to a Tory electoral coalition. That doesn't mean Brexit itself (it of course can mean anything from EEA membership, to Faragism or buccaneering free trade) - but the way it was portrayed by May and allies as middle-England thumping Stoke Newington into line. Coupled with the dismal Tory campaign meaning they failed to eat into pro-leave Labour heartlands as much as expected, it left us with a pretty evenly split nation as in 2016.
Second, the up-in-the-air nature of Brexit, and the real possibility it could be ruinous, meant that the "trust us, Labour's sums don't add up - don't let them wreck the economy" approach that won in 2015 was totally ineffective - and won't be again unless Brexit is a big success. There's been some guff about young people voting for free stuff - well what do you expect when the Foreign Secretary went around on a bus proclaiming £350 million for the NHS? The way the Brexit referendum was fought, on promissory notes of a brighter future, arguably broke the notion that politicians have to make the sums add up in the here and now. It benefited the leavers, now it's helping Corbyn.
If you're 30, you likely graduated in 2008-2010 and have had a decade earning less than you thought you would in less secure jobs, struggling to save to buy and it's a similar feeling that no doubt many leave voters had - that the implausible is worth the gamble. I finally got this when talking to a pal in the run-up to the vote - financially and politically literate, not badly off for his age (late 20s) - knows Corbyn's sums are ludicrous but couldn't understand how anyone in his position could vote for May as it was an endorsement of a status quo he was deeply unhappy with and found just as, if not more unlikely to end well. It's something I missed in thinking Corbyn was done - the notion of Corbyn as PM isn't that mad if you regard the last two years of Tory governments as a chaotic horrorshow that have unnecessarily trashed your interests just when Cameron's deal with the nation - that we'd have tough times but emerge prosperous - was supposed to bear fruit.
Comments
But, I shouldn't write off their chances either.
I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand if you can make lump sum overpayments in the same way as you can make lump sum overpayments on a mortgage.
I just remember hearing from someone at work from someone he knows that you can't pay tuition fees off in lump sums.
I think the clearout of older MPs has reduced the opportunities for by-elections in Tory seats.
You can pay your loan off in full at anytime, without penalty.
You can make additional monthly or ad hoc payments at any time, that don't clear your balance off in full, but the monthly payment won't reduce, like it would with a mortgage.
EDIT Aha!
"The system was designed as a form of “graduate tax” so that those benefiting most from a university education would repay most.
But to stop wealthier graduates, or those assisted by their parents, from opting out of the “progressive” system, it was planned that they would face a levy of five per cent of the value of early repayments.
Someone repaying a £40,000 loan early could have had to pay a penalty of £2,000. The Government has said previously: “It is important that those on the higher incomes are not able unfairly to buy themselves out of the progressive mechanism.” "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9085390/Penalty-for-paying-off-student-loan-early-is-lifted.html
Bet365 have some markets which look good value to me on individual batting performances in the cricket.
For example 5/6 on Wood getting less than 33 runs in the England v Pakistan game.
Surely its very unlikely that a number 10 batsman is going to score that many - not just getting out first but never getting in to bat in the first place.
Am I missing something here, is it a void bet if he doesn't actually bat for example ?
The David Herdson post was one of the epic moments of PB not least for the reaction to it (though BJO's Tunisian hotel being attacked by terrorists was the most gripping and terrifying) but actually it would be a mistake to read too much into it, even though it turned out to be accurate. It was a very small sample, in one seat. MarqueeMark had a much more positive sample for the Tories in another seat. It just so happened that MM's one set the tone for his constituency against the national trend. David's subsequent encounters with the voters cause his to upgrade his previous gloomy prediction - incorrectly, as it turned out! Matter of luck whether you get a good sample or a bad one, and even then whether it tells you more about the constituency or the country as a whole. RochdalePioneer's posts went beyond a single sample - clearly it relied on an ear to the ground, but it produced an analysis that really should have been staring everyone in the face, but not enough of us were seeing.
I know he got millions more votes and a fair few more seats, but he was only up against the useless May. Miliband had to face The Squealing Eagles' heroes.
I had a sudden thought this evening reading the various discussions on tuition fees. Is there any necessity to take out the Government loan? If I am able to cover the kids' fees myself do they still have to have a loan of any sort? Is it compulsory?
One of the many beauties of Brexit it that it strips away that excuse. Governments will be, for the first time in decades, genuinely sovereign - and you will have your wish.
You want the PB Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter?
Not sure what can stop it now...
This election was actually against the young-voter-demographic-tide.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/population-estimates-for-uk--england-and-wales--scotland-and-northern-ireland/mid-2011-and-mid-2012/sty---uk-population-estimates.html
That was certainly an improvement which Cameron made over LibDem wishes.
It was slightly tarnished by the fact he changed his mind the next day
1. Invite Labour into a grand coalition to be dissolved immediately after Brexit. it's reading tea leaves, but this interpretation is somewhat close to the outcome of the general election. An electorate who wanted neither party to lead. A hard right government propped up by a fundamentalist Christian minority feels like the opposite of what people voted for. Plus, tying Labour to the Brexit negotiations would prevent them enjoying the best of both worlds by sitting on the fence and promising the moon on a stick.
2. Publicly appeal to the Lib Dems. Say, we as a moderate and socially liberal Conservative party that respects people of all genders, religions and persuasions, cannot seek the support of the DUP. We therefore urge you, for the sake of our country, to reconsider your refusal to enter into a coalition. The price, of course, would be a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal. But it is genuinely hard to see how the Lib Dems could refuse this offer. Their raison d'etre in 2017 was a second referendum and this is the only way they're getting it. It would also be democratic. The people had the first say in Brexit and they have the final say. Hard to argue against. If the Lib Dems refuse, it is the Tories who look both liberal and democratic.
3. Having failed in (1) and (2), the Tories should announce their decision to hold a second referendum, unilaterally. It utterly destroys the lib dems at the next election, would win back a swathe of remainer votes to the Tories and is also fittingly poetic: the British people 'took back control', it is only right that they legitimise the final deal. We keep on going round in circles endlessly interpreting who has a mandate for what. But it was 'the will of the people' that got us here so it should be the will of the people that sees it through. It would be hard, nay, impossible, for the electorate to hang the blame for Brexit if it goes wrong on the Tories in these circumstances, and it is entirely consistent with the democratic process that led us to this point.
I thought that with Lab under Corbyn, Con would have a fair chance of getting her support (ie supply / confidence support).
I hope she hasn't just been forgotten - they should be making every possible effort to engage with her.
It was the increase in the Labour vote which beat them.
In other words DH was right but for the wrong reasons.
I'm sure something must be wrong, but I've still put a few bets on.
Or so they hope!
https://twitter.com/montie/status/874341324295737344
These markets use a points based scoring system to determine their outcome. The point schedule is as follows:
1 point per run, 20 points per wicket, 10 points per catch, 25 points per stumping. Stakes refunded on non-selected players.
In One Day matches both teams must face at least 40 overs each, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Test and First Class matches, the whole match counts. In drawn games a minimum of 200 overs must be bowled, otherwise bets void, unless settlement of bets is already determined. In Twenty20 matches the match must be scheduled for the full 20 overs and there must be an official result unless settlement of bets is already determined. In matches where the number of overs has been reduced and the outcome has not already been determined then bets will be void.
Any chance you could answer my original query about how the GFA is "meant" to work, with respect toe neutrality? Or does that go beyond your ken/available time to answer?
However, more generally, if we lived in the type of democracy which had PR, and in which hung Parliaments were the norm, then yes, one would have to cut deals with parties that are somewhat dubious.
Corbyn was up against May chopping down the magic money tree forest and wasn't associated with the last Labour government. Corbyn thus had unlimited scope for promises.
As to those saying that the older MPs are now mostly gone, it's not just age that can trigger by-elections, aren't I right Craig MacKinley?
NEW THREAD
Having said that I believe Reg put it best over the weekend. The GFA was set up by the SDLP and UUP leaderships who respected each other. The situation now is trying to use the same framework with two parties that loathe each other and seek nothing more than to rub the other side noses in it.
When I retire in a few years he will probably have started repaying, and I was going to give him a substantial chunk of my lump sum. He can then put it to pay the student debt off or to use as a deposit on a house, or spend it on beer and holidays. The choice would be his.
I was a touch embarrassed when they won.