& Are you up long term on political bets ? It wasn't impossible to see Overall Maj, but I'd like to know the reasoning through the fog of war so to speak.
I shifted onto it on the night personally, this graph gave me food for thought:
In short I'd like to know if people spotted it through luck or reasoning.
I made a lot of money on Brexit which was equal parts @Andy_JS and equal parts a hedge against shareprice/currency moves. I made money on Trump because I thought the US was in the mood, and that also informed my Lab OM bet: I thought "here we go again", even though the maths were bonkers for it.
"first brexit sowed division then it made it ungovernable"
New York Times.
Roger, it grieves me immensely, but I'm coming round to the idea that Brexit is going to turn into a clusterfuck. I still believe it would have been the right thing for us, full EU was never a good fit for us, but due to the sheer incompetence of politicians on all sides, it's just undeliverable. We're governed by aresholes.
I don't want to score points. I am genuinely baffled by how so many intelligent people fail to see obvious clusterfucks coming their way. Brexit is the same as Iraq. It was clear from the off they were both going to be fiascos. No special insight or knowledge required. Simply if people put forward projects on demonstrably false premises, it's not going to turn out well.
It didn't have to be a clusterfuck. It just needed semi competent politicians on all sides working out what was best. That is clearly naive thinking, I know, but was it really wrong to think that our elected politicians were not this bad?
Deciding the EU isn't for us is a perfectly logical view to take IMO. It may ultimately be vindicated. It comes with the understanding that we would disconnect ourselves from our neighbours and there is a cost to that,which is likely to be permanent. If that's the route you choose, you aim to disconnect gradually with the least upheaval. Instead of which, campaigners promised no cost, lots of opportunities, countries falling over themselves to do business with us, end to austerity, more hospitals, no immigration. The point is, if campaigners had not made those false claims, the referendum would never have been won.
The mantra holds; if it's too good to be true, it probably is.
The politicians are now having to deal with their own contradictions. They can't turn round and say, we lied, Brexit will be crap. But as long as they keep denying reality, it makes that reality worse.
Perhaps now they will finally stop building these death traps
Those "events" coming thick and fast!
I grew up in a tower block (in Denmark), lived there for about 15 years. Never experienced better maintenance and always felt safe. Clearly more people are exposed to risk than in a single family house, so high standards are needed, but there's nothing wrong with the idea per se.
(the number of high-rise buildings in HK) x (the incidence of such incidents) = trivial
There is also the fact that, having suffered such a tragic event, HK tightened up their regulations and procedures.
Incidentally, from what I've been told Mainland China has not.
There are fires in tower blocks up and down the country everyday. When I worked in Leicester, we probably got one everyday. Most were nothing, burnt toast or a dropped cigarette, but even a fully involved flat fire was usually contained to the compartment it started in.That the London fire has spread so rapidly does point to catastrophic failings in the fabric of the building.
& Are you up long term on political bets ? It wasn't impossible to see Overall Maj, but I'd like to know the reasoning through the fog of war so to speak.
I shifted onto it on the night personally, this graph gave me food for thought:
In short I'd like to know if people spotted it through luck or reasoning.
I made a lot of money on Brexit which was equal parts @Andy_JS and equal parts a hedge against shareprice/currency moves. I made money on Trump because I thought the US was in the mood, and that also informed my Lab OM bet: I thought "here we go again", even though the maths were bonkers for it.
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Yeah but predicting 2022 with certainty seems "optimistic"
Indeed. Predicting what will happen in 6 months looks tricky to me.
It is the nature of any prediction that it takes current facts and trends, and extrapolates them, and that anyone who challenges the fundamentals looks very much out on a limb.
This tower block fire is going to be very bad for the Conservative government...
Tragically it may well be the defining moment that the establishments mistreatment of the people is writ large. Everything that is wrong with the UK in one awful conflagration. Civil unrest a real possibility if criminal negligence by those who should protect us is shown. Very very dangerous times.
Yep I can see riots by the mistreated populace and riots by people having their Brexit vote's stolen from them.
A period of civil unrest does seem very likely.
And then, when people have got their anger our of their system, they will all go out and vote Jezza into Downing St. at the next available opportunity just to punish the establishment on last time.
It's not inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It's nice to see some cool heads giving a rational and measured appraisal of events today.....
I predict some extreme shrieking and intense butthurt as the realisation slowly dawns on some that Labour lost, Brexit is still happening and that there wont be an election for a fair while..
Given the woeful verification rate of your predictions these past few weeks, why should anyone give this latest forecast any credence?
So not just malcolmg that has forgotten about my SNP seats bet ?
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Laughable. Won't he be around 72 in 2022? People predicting next month have no idea let alone landslides potentially years down the line.
Jezza is in rude health, and no way will this government survive 5 years.
I think we'll see a reverse 1992 effect. Then Labour were shocked into getting their act together, now they're looking dangerously complacent in defeat.
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Laughable. Won't he be around 72 in 2022? People predicting next month have no idea let alone landslides potentially years down the line.
Jezza is in rude health, and no way will this government survive 5 years.
If he does fight an election he'll face someone other than Mrs May. If he can't come close to beating her then he best hope he's facing a complete dud in better circumstances.
Only a few weeks ago we were being told that May was a political colossus expecting 120+ seats majority.
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Laughable. Won't he be around 72 in 2022? People predicting next month have no idea let alone landslides potentially years down the line.
Jezza is in rude health, and no way will this government survive 5 years.
I'm with you on that. May ain't gonna last a full term, and when the Tories slot her and we get an "unelected" PM, there'll be an unstoppable wave of public outcry to have a GE. Then it's a massive payrise for me. Jeremy loves the FBU.
Twistedfirestopper. They need you today in Kensington.
"first brexit sowed division then it made it ungovernable"
New York Times.
Roger, it grieves me immensely, but I'm coming round to the idea that Brexit is going to turn into a clusterfuck. I still believe it would have been the right thing for us, full EU was never a good fit for us, but due to the sheer incompetence of politicians on all sides, it's just undeliverable. We're governed by aresholes.
I don't want to score points. I am genuinely baffled by how so many intelligent people fail to see obvious clusterfucks coming their way. Brexit is the same as Iraq. It was clear from the off they were both going to be fiascos. No special insight or knowledge required. Simply if people put forward projects on demonstrably false premises, it's not going to turn out well.
For 50 odd years the public have wanted controls on immigration while governments of all stripes have increased it. Then they got a referendum on it
The fault lies with the politicians who refused to listen. If you keep having to ask someone to stop flicking your ear, eventually you have to hit them
In general, I believe one should never blame the voters.
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Laughable. Won't he be around 72 in 2022? People predicting next month have no idea let alone landslides potentially years down the line.
Jezza is in rude health, and no way will this government survive 5 years.
If he does fight an election he'll face someone other than Mrs May. If he can't come close to beating her then he best hope he's facing a complete dud in better circumstances.
Only a few weeks ago we were being told that May was a political colossus expecting 120+ seats majority.
Clearly she is not. But she was a better leader than campaigner, all depends how she reacts with her back firmly against the wall. Corbyn is a fine campaigner and protester, but perhaps not such a good leader.
... It's [not] inconceivable Corbyn could win a landslide at the next election, IMO.
It is becoming inconceivable Corbyn could not win a landslide at the next election.
Labour GAIN Chelsea and Fulham.
Majority 8,000. Would require 10% swing. So possible if the citizens of nowhere are angry enough.
No one has a clue what is going to happen. But there is more than a whiff of the 1970s in air. What worries me is that the centre is not holding.
William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
THE SECOND COMING
Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand. The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand; A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know That twenty centuries of stony sleep Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
"first brexit sowed division then it made it ungovernable"
New York Times.
Roger, it grieves me immensely, but I'm coming round to the idea that Brexit is going to turn into a clusterfuck. I still believe it would have been the right thing for us, full EU was never a good fit for us, but due to the sheer incompetence of politicians on all sides, it's just undeliverable. We're governed by aresholes.
I don't want to score points. I am genuinely baffled by how so many intelligent people fail to see obvious clusterfucks coming their way. Brexit is the same as Iraq. It was clear from the off they were both going to be fiascos. No special insight or knowledge required. Simply if people put forward projects on demonstrably false premises, it's not going to turn out well.
It didn't have to be a clusterfuck. It just needed semi competent politicians on all sides working out what was best. That is clearly naive thinking, I know, but was it really wrong to think that our elected politicians were not this bad?
Right now, I expect talks to break-down over the Summer.
May will be blamed, and leave office in the Autumn following a leadership contest. Trump won't come.
The new leader will agree to pay ~£40bn or so to the EU and accept ECJ oversight of EU citizens for a time-limited period.
A deal will be struck by March 2019 that keeps the UK in both the customs union/single market for 3 years as a transition. Possibly a more permanent arrangement for goods. For a price. Because a lot of the civil servants and Remainers will work behind the scenes for it.
The aim will be to leave the balance of the customs union by GE2022, and possibly the single market too. But EFTA-EEA may be more likely.
The economy may enter a technical recession during this time. HMG Brexit bills will be heavily amended and regularly defeated at report/committee stage. Some of the legislation will end up not making much sense. HMG will manage to line-up some new arrangements during this time on trade and regulation.
But, Corbyn or his successor will win GE2022 handily, which could become a bit of a de-facto referendum on the above. I don't know what his position will be, but I'd be inclined to think he'd want to use the new powers.
There is a risk talks break down entirely, and we crash out. With a decent deal being done subsequently once tempers have calmed down.
There is also a risk that we get taken back "all in" to the EU in the 2020s on standard accession terms off the back of younger voters, and resigned older voters.
The Leave/Remain argument will probably continue. Indefinitely. The UK will probably survive as a geopolitical unit, indefinitely.
The Tories are lucky that this year's local elections are out of the way already.
London ones coming in 2018. Labour should GAIN Wandsworth Which would be symbolic. No doubt some pb'ers on here will still be underestimating Cobyn even then.
Sad to see the pictures this morning of the fire and thoughts go out to those caught up in this.
Whilst extremely tragic I don't see why it should delay the Con/DUP deal or its announcement. If I am being a tad heartless in saying that then I genuinely mean no offence.
"first brexit sowed division then it made it ungovernable"
New York Times.
Roger, it grieves me immensely, but I'm coming round to the idea that Brexit is going to turn into a clusterfuck. I still believe it would have been the right thing for us, full EU was never a good fit for us, but due to the sheer incompetence of politicians on all sides, it's just undeliverable. We're governed by aresholes.
I don't want to score points. I am genuinely baffled by how so many intelligent people fail to see obvious clusterfucks coming their way. Brexit is the same as Iraq. It was clear from the off they were both going to be fiascos. No special insight or knowledge required. Simply if people put forward projects on demonstrably false premises, it's not going to turn out well.
Presumably a lot of the 'North Sea job losses' don't show up in Scotland as many of the workers have returned to their homes elsewhere in the UK/Europe?
Oil workers in general tend to be quite mobile - English is the common working language in the industry, which removes the usual block against UK citizens moving abroad. The culture in the industry is very much to move to where the work is....
The big issue has not just been the direct job losses in the oil industry per se but the knock on effects on every aspect of life in Aberdeen. The biggest job losses in Aberdeen city itself last year were amongst women aged 18-24. Fewer visiting oil workers means fewer cafes, restaurants, shops, bars and hotel rooms (although perversely they are still building more and more hotels even though the price of rooms has dropped by around 2/3rds.)
In 2010, Labour increased their majority in the local elections in Southwark.
I'm not suggesting it will be because of this fire, it will be because of Euro trading etc leaving London and if the rhetoric from May doesn't change moderate Tory remainers will switch en masse.
Perhaps now they will finally stop building these death traps
Those "events" coming thick and fast!
I grew up in a tower block (in Denmark), lived there for about 15 years. Never experienced better maintenance and always felt safe. Clearly more people are exposed to risk than in a single family house, so high standards are needed, but there's nothing wrong with the idea per se.
(the number of high-rise buildings in HK) x (the incidence of such incidents) = trivial
There is also the fact that, having suffered such a tragic event, HK tightened up their regulations and procedures.
Incidentally, from what I've been told Mainland China has not.
There are fires in tower blocks up and down the country everyday. When I worked in Leicester, we probably got one everyday. Most were nothing, burnt toast or a dropped cigarette, but even a fully involved flat fire was usually contained to the compartment it started in.That the London fire has spread so rapidly does point to catastrophic failings in the fabric of the building.
There does seem to have been a very strong assumption that any fire would be contained.
From the links I posted earlier (note, these are from the KCTMO board meetings minutes from last year) : Grenfell Tower refurbishment – close liaison with LFB and Fire Risk Assessor throughout the duration of the project. At the conclusion of the work some of the operational firefighters from the local Fire Station attended an onsite briefing where the contractor demonstrated the fire safety features of the building...
...We have provided a range of ongoing publicity to residents, particularly in relation to: the “stay put” fire strategy and procedures residents should follow in event of a fire in their flat...
"They think like housewives managing a weekly budget."
Exactly, so you need to explain clearly. Here's an example ...
"We'll borrow £50 billion to nationalise a privatised company, every year, we'll pay £1 billion in interest but make £2 billion in profit."
Housewife ... "But you'll increase the payroll by 50%, lose £2 billion a year, and increase the debt overall. We've seen it before."
In its five years as East Coast, the state-run firm returned a little more than £1bn in premiums, as well as several million in profits, to the Treasury. Detailed financial analysis from the Office of Rail Regulation shows it was one of two firms to make a net contribution to government coffers over the last two years, paying in more than it received in subsidy or indirect grants, along with Southwest Trains (run by Stagecoach).
Sad to see the pictures this morning of the fire and thoughts go out to those caught up in this.
Whilst extremely tragic I don't see why it should delay the Con/DUP deal or its announcement. If I am being a tad heartless in saying that then I genuinely mean no offence.
I like your avatar, jonny. B'anana Torres, one of my favourite gals!!
"They think like housewives managing a weekly budget."
Exactly, so you need to explain clearly. Here's an example ...
"We'll borrow £50 billion to nationalise a privatised company, every year, we'll pay £1 billion in interest but make £2 billion in profit."
Housewife ... "But you'll increase the payroll by 50%, lose £2 billion a year, and increase the debt overall. We've seen it before."
In its five years as East Coast, the state-run firm returned a little more than £1bn in premiums, as well as several million in profits, to the Treasury. Detailed financial analysis from the Office of Rail Regulation shows it was one of two firms to make a net contribution to government coffers over the last two years, paying in more than it received in subsidy or indirect grants, along with Southwest Trains (run by Stagecoach).
Your opinions seem to be driven entirely by ideology not by evidence.
No they are driven by use. Week in, week out.
The east coast line is almost always fantastic. A first class trip to Edinburgh, meanwhile, is an absolute pleasure.
The only thing that I think people would prefer, is for them to bring forward the off-peak time of the first train north. 6.19pm means that train is full with no spare seats while the two earlier trains are around half/three quarters full.
Sad to see the pictures this morning of the fire and thoughts go out to those caught up in this.
Whilst extremely tragic I don't see why it should delay the Con/DUP deal or its announcement. If I am being a tad heartless in saying that then I genuinely mean no offence.
I like your avatar, jonny. B'anana Torres, one of my favourite gals!!
Thanks! Yeah just finished a Voyager re-watch, B'Elanna is one of my favorite characters on that series
You've got a Tory PM with a Labour mayor with a Tory council but in a Labour ward. Both parties need to look at stopping disasters like this happening. I thought we had left them behind in the 1980s.
Perhaps now they will finally stop building these death traps
Those "events" coming thick and fast!
I grew up in a tower block (in Denmark), lived there for about 15 years. Never experienced better maintenance and always felt safe. Clearly more people are exposed to risk than in a single family house, so high standards are needed, but there's nothing wrong with the idea per se.
(the number of high-rise buildings in HK) x (the incidence of such incidents) = trivial
There is also the fact that, having suffered such a tragic event, HK tightened up their regulations and procedures.
Incidentally, from what I've been told Mainland China has not.
There are fires in tower blocks up and down the country everyday. When I worked in Leicester, we probably got one everyday. Most were nothing, burnt toast or a dropped cigarette, but even a fully involved flat fire was usually contained to the compartment it started in.That the London fire has spread so rapidly does point to catastrophic failings in the fabric of the building.
Yet your response below was to blame cuts?
Something went seriously wrong last night, and there will be many causal factors. It's pure guesswork, but the cladding might have caught fire and either the new windows were not fireproof, or the residents had windows open due to the hot weather and fire got in that way. Or there were problems with cavities acting as channels for fires. Or any other number of potential factors.
The most important causal factors will probably not have been in the response, but in how the fire caught hold so quickly where, as you say, most fires do not. Here, I reckon the renovation will have played a part as competing factors of aesthetics, insulation, price, weight and general performance will all turn out to have aided the fire's spread. Of perhaps not. That's just a guess.
You guys and gals in the fire and rescue service do a brilliant job. But I would rather you be sitting twiddling your thumbs in the station rather than out on a call, for a callout means a whole host of other things have failed. You also play an important role in fire prevention, and I reckon if cuts are to be found to be partially to blame, that might be the reason rather than the response last night.
Oh, and thanks for all the emergency services involved. It must still be a horrific job.
Mr. 83, "Seven of Nine, to make you feel more comfortable integrating with a human crew after being part of the Borg Collective, we've provided you with a catsuit. And some stilettos."
"But, captain, everyone else appears to be wearing-"
& Are you up long term on political bets ? It wasn't impossible to see Overall Maj, but I'd like to know the reasoning through the fog of war so to speak.
I shifted onto it on the night personally, this graph gave me food for thought:
In short I'd like to know if people spotted it through luck or reasoning.
Reasoning based on luck that an unknown pb-er posted a tweet linking to academic research on self-reported likelihood to vote. Looking at the polls which respected this and ignoring those that massively downweighted responses in line with the population led to Survation and Yougov (and maybe Survey Monkey) whose polls showed a very close election and NOM (and its variants) overpriced. Without the tweet being posted here, I'd have been as wrong as CCHQ.
I'm amazed at how quickly some posters can confidently diagnose the underlying causes while this awful fire is still burning.
To be even more cynical, until things become clearer, I'd stay out of any betting markets involving Boris or Sadiq, the former and current mayors of London. Meanwhile we can only hope for successful rescues.
Pepys in March 1663: “..my Lord Mayor I find to be a talking, bragging Bufflehead…”
Has much changed in the intervening centuries ?
Isn't the Lord Mayor the mayor of the City of London?
Mr. 83, "Seven of Nine, to make you feel more comfortable integrating with a human crew after being part of the Borg Collective, we've provided you with a catsuit. And some stilettos."
"But, captain, everyone else appears to be wearing-"
Mr. L, to be fair, self-reporting is notorious for not necessarily bearing any relation to reality (give 400 men the checklist for psychopathological symptoms and instead of the 1 accurate self-diagnosis you might expect, you'll have at least dozens).
"They think like housewives managing a weekly budget."
Exactly, so you need to explain clearly. Here's an example ...
"We'll borrow £50 billion to nationalise a privatised company, every year, we'll pay £1 billion in interest but make £2 billion in profit."
Housewife ... "But you'll increase the payroll by 50%, lose £2 billion a year, and increase the debt overall. We've seen it before."
In its five years as East Coast, the state-run firm returned a little more than £1bn in premiums, as well as several million in profits, to the Treasury. Detailed financial analysis from the Office of Rail Regulation shows it was one of two firms to make a net contribution to government coffers over the last two years, paying in more than it received in subsidy or indirect grants, along with Southwest Trains (run by Stagecoach).
Your opinions seem to be driven entirely by ideology not by evidence.
No they are driven by use. Week in, week out.
The east coast line is almost always fantastic. A first class trip to Edinburgh, meanwhile, is an absolute pleasure.
The only thing that I think people would prefer, is for them to bring forward the off-peak time of the first train north. 6.19pm means that train is full with no spare seats while the two earlier trains are around half/three quarters full.
Actually now it is back in private hands with Virgin it is even worse than it was in public hands. It really is an atrocious service in terms of delays and the quality of service on board compared to a few years ago.
I'm amazed at how quickly some posters can confidently diagnose the underlying causes while this awful fire is still burning.
To be even more cynical, until things become clearer, I'd stay out of any betting markets involving Boris or Sadiq, the former and current mayors of London. Meanwhile we can only hope for successful rescues.
Pepys in March 1663: “..my Lord Mayor I find to be a talking, bragging Bufflehead…”
Has much changed in the intervening centuries ?
Isn't the Lord Mayor the mayor of the City of London?
Perhaps now they will finally stop building these death traps
Those "events" coming thick and fast!
I grew up in a tower block (in Denmark), lived there for about 15 years. Never experienced better maintenance and always felt safe. Clearly more people are exposed to risk than in a single family house, so high standards are needed, but there's nothing wrong with the idea per se.
(the number of high-rise buildings in HK) x (the incidence of such incidents) = trivial
There is also the fact that, having suffered such a tragic event, HK tightened up their regulations and procedures.
Incidentally, from what I've been told Mainland China has not.
There are fires in tower blocks up and down the country everyday. When I worked in Leicester, we probably got one everyday. Most were nothing, burnt toast or a dropped cigarette, but even a fully involved flat fire was usually contained to the compartment it started in.That the London fire has spread so rapidly does point to catastrophic failings in the fabric of the building.
Yet your response below was to blame cuts?
Something went seriously wrong last night, and there will be many causal factors. It's pure guesswork, but the cladding might have caught fire and either the new windows were not fireproof, or the residents had windows open due to the hot weather and fire got in that way. Or there were problems with cavities acting as channels for fires. Or any other number of potential factors.
Th
You guys and gals in the fire and rescue service do a brilliant job. But I would rather you be sitting twiddling your thumbs in the station rather than out on a call, for a callout means a whole host of other things have failed. You also play an important role in fire prevention, and I reckon if cuts are to be found to be partially to blame, that might be the reason rather than the response last night.
Oh, and thanks for all the emergency services involved. It must still be a horrific job.
Slow the fuck down, man. I never blamed the cuts for this, I was commenting on the fact that there have been cuts to frontline operational firefighting, but said that LFB would probably have enough resources to cope!
If a building has just had an 8.7million pound refurbishment, I don't see how "cuts" are too blame.
For 8.7 million pounds, wisely spent, I'd expect a building that was reasonably resistant to fire, & had fire alarms & included fire safety precautions.
It's not really a surprise when you consider what you're trying to model:
- You have a country which has dramatic regional, local, demographic, ideological variation. - You cut it into 650 artificial districts based not on communities or commonalities, but on population size and geographical proximity only (while then endeavouring to make some sort of community basis, but at a far lower priority) - and only for the purpose of making it so you have single member constituencies. - You then have national parties and national party leaders with ideologies and policies that appeal to or repel demographics and localities in multiple varying ways. - You then poll for the overall national voting intent and get that as a comparison to last time - How do you adjust each one of those artificial constituencies? Bearing in mind that the only votes that count for your purposes are the ones that just elect a candidate (the number of votes for the second placed candidate and the identical-plus-one number of votes for the winning candidate; the ones for any other candidate and the ones for the winning candidate beyond that level have nothing to do with your output, they go no further to anywhere or anything else, and are anything between irrelevant and a distraction). And that each such artificial constituency is individual and ever-changing. - Then you add up the number of these constituencies won in such a way and use that sum as the output.
Frankly, it's a miracle that such short-cuts as UNS sort-of worked in the past for as long as they did.
We have a system where the representation is not proportional or otherwise directly linked to the vote share; modelling the outcome is always going to be down to a large sum of assumptions, extrapolations, and simplifications - each of which may be only ever temporarily valid, if at all.
"They think like housewives managing a weekly budget."
Exactly, so you need to explain clearly. Here's an example ...
"We'll borrow £50 billion to nationalise a privatised company, every year, we'll pay £1 billion in interest but make £2 billion in profit."
Housewife ... "But you'll increase the payroll by 50%, lose £2 billion a year, and increase the debt overall. We've seen it before."
In its five years as East Coast, the state-run firm returned a little more than £1bn in premiums, as well as several million in profits, to the Treasury. Detailed financial analysis from the Office of Rail Regulation shows it was one of two firms to make a net contribution to government coffers over the last two years, paying in more than it received in subsidy or indirect grants, along with Southwest Trains (run by Stagecoach).
The government's spending on rail is going into the nationalised Network Rail, and (I think!) it is wiping its face on maintenance and renewals: the government's money is mainly going into improvements.
If a building has just had an 8.7million pound refurbishment, I don't see how "cuts" are too blame.
For 8.7 million pounds, wisely spent, I'd expect a building that was reasonably resistant to fire, & had fire alarms & included fire safety precautions.
Regardless of the size of the building? I mean, if it was twice the size, would that still be true because 8.7m is a lot of money?
We don't know the causes yet, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that government cuts are a direct reducer of spend on refurbishing the building. Concerns would include cuts that reduce effective regulation/enforcement of building standards, routine prevention activity by the emergency services, pressure on maintenance budgets and do on.
"They think like housewives managing a weekly budget."
Exactly, so you need to explain clearly. Here's an example ...
"We'll borrow £50 billion to nationalise a privatised company, every year, we'll pay £1 billion in interest but make £2 billion in profit."
Housewife ... "But you'll increase the payroll by 50%, lose £2 billion a year, and increase the debt overall. We've seen it before."
In its five years as East Coast, the state-run firm returned a little more than £1bn in premiums, as well as several million in profits, to the Treasury. Detailed financial analysis from the Office of Rail Regulation shows it was one of two firms to make a net contribution to government coffers over the last two years, paying in more than it received in subsidy or indirect grants, along with Southwest Trains (run by Stagecoach).
Your opinions seem to be driven entirely by ideology not by evidence.
No they are driven by use. Week in, week out.
The east coast line is almost always fantastic. A first class trip to Edinburgh, meanwhile, is an absolute pleasure.
The only thing that I think people would prefer, is for them to bring forward the off-peak time of the first train north. 6.19pm means that train is full with no spare seats while the two earlier trains are around half/three quarters full.
Actually now it is back in private hands with Virgin it is even worse than it was in public hands. It really is an atrocious service in terms of delays and the quality of service on board compared to a few years ago.
I don't find that at all. It is very rarely delayed for no reason, and very rarely delayed at all; the service is provided by smiling and happy staff and the guards all are accommodating if, for example, you want to try to get on a train you're not booked on.
I quite like Guy Verhofstadt but I do think that at the moment he would be well-advised to be saying nothing.
GV has spent his entire political career picking fights and winning them. He was known as 'Baby Thatcher' in Belgium. He's not suddenly going to become an exemplar of rectitude.
I remember the Tories on here laughing at the Labour Party for saddling itself with an unelectable loon.
You're not laughing now!
Of course the best part is that many tories, backed by papers like the Telegraph, decided to try and game the system by voting for Corbyn as £3ers. What they have achieved is nearly putting the left into Downing Street, and even if not, shifting the Overton Window back towards a left wing direction far opposed to their own position.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
Slow the fuck down, man. I never blamed the cuts for this, I was commenting on the fact that there have been cuts to frontline operational firefighting, but said that LFB would probably have enough resources to cope!
Earlier in this thread, LadyBucket said: I'm ashamed to say this was one of my first thoughts that it would be blamed on "Tory cuts." Labour won't come out and say it directly but I see social media is well and truly up and running on this.
If a building has just had an 8.7million pound refurbishment, I don't see how "cuts" are too blame.
For 8.7 million pounds, wisely spent, I'd expect a building that was reasonably resistant to fire, & had fire alarms & included fire safety precautions.
Regardless of the size of the building? I mean, if it was twice the size, would that still be true because 8.7m is a lot of money?
We don't know the causes yet, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that government cuts are a direct reducer of spend on refurbishing the building. Concerns would include cuts that reduce effective regulation/enforcement of building standards, routine prevention activity by the emergency services, pressure on maintenance budgets and do on.
I think for a recent refurbishment of 8.7 million pounds, a building should not burn down in this way.
I think it is likely that the refurbishment actually made the building unsafe.
I don't really want to get into speculating as to the origin, but I do think that there are more likely causes than a failure of "routine prevention activity".
I remember the Tories on here laughing at the Labour Party for saddling itself with an unelectable loon.
You're not laughing now!
Of course the best part is that many tories, backed by papers like the Telegraph, decided to try and game the system by voting for Corbyn as £3ers. What they have achieved is nearly putting the left into Downing Street, and even if not, shifting the Overton Window back towards a left wing direction far opposed to their own position.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
The remarkable thing is how long it took the window to shift leftwards after the aftermath to 2008 financial crash generated so much inequality. I can only guess that people trusted the right to have the competence to sort it out, and are now realising that they have not.
Slow the fuck down, man. I never blamed the cuts for this, I was commenting on the fact that there have been cuts to frontline operational firefighting, but said that LFB would probably have enough resources to cope!
Earlier in this thread, LadyBucket said: I'm ashamed to say this was one of my first thoughts that it would be blamed on "Tory cuts." Labour won't come out and say it directly but I see social media is well and truly up and running on this.
You replied: Because it is true.
Or have I got the wrong end of t'stick?
I am on my phone and was skimming the thread, I meant it's true that there are cuts to operational firefighting, but not specifically related to this case, although that may turn out differently once the inquiry is done! The perils of a fast moving thread and using a phone to post, I guess. I can see how you interpreted that comment, though.
I remember the Tories on here laughing at the Labour Party for saddling itself with an unelectable loon.
You're not laughing now!
Of course the best part is that many tories, backed by papers like the Telegraph, decided to try and game the system by voting for Corbyn as £3ers. What they have achieved is nearly putting the left into Downing Street, and even if not, shifting the Overton Window back towards a left wing direction far opposed to their own position.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
PBTories love Corbyn, he's been very profitable for many here
I remember the Tories on here laughing at the Labour Party for saddling itself with an unelectable loon.
You're not laughing now!
Of course the best part is that many tories, backed by papers like the Telegraph, decided to try and game the system by voting for Corbyn as £3ers. What they have achieved is nearly putting the left into Downing Street, and even if not, shifting the Overton Window back towards a left wing direction far opposed to their own position.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
I never agreed with that at the time, and pointed out the foolishness of doing so to the few Tory friends of mine who did.
I quite like Guy Verhofstadt but I do think that at the moment he would be well-advised to be saying nothing.
GV has spent his entire political career picking fights and winning them. He was known as 'Baby Thatcher' in Belgium. He's not suddenly going to become an exemplar of rectitude.
Slow the fuck down, man. I never blamed the cuts for this, I was commenting on the fact that there have been cuts to frontline operational firefighting, but said that LFB would probably have enough resources to cope!
Earlier in this thread, LadyBucket said: I'm ashamed to say this was one of my first thoughts that it would be blamed on "Tory cuts." Labour won't come out and say it directly but I see social media is well and truly up and running on this.
You replied: Because it is true.
Or have I got the wrong end of t'stick?
I am on my phone and was skimming the thread, I meant it's true that there are cuts to operational firefighting, but not specifically related to this case, although that may turn out differently once the inquiry is done! The perils of a fast moving thread and using a phone to post, I guess. I can see how you interpreted that comment, though.
I remember the Tories on here laughing at the Labour Party for saddling itself with an unelectable loon.
You're not laughing now!
Of course the best part is that many tories, backed by papers like the Telegraph, decided to try and game the system by voting for Corbyn as £3ers. What they have achieved is nearly putting the left into Downing Street, and even if not, shifting the Overton Window back towards a left wing direction far opposed to their own position.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
Tories4Corbyn were indeed foolish but surely theirs was not a decisive influence. Corbyn would still have happened without them.
I quite like Guy Verhofstadt but I do think that at the moment he would be well-advised to be saying nothing.
GV has spent his entire political career picking fights and winning them. He was known as 'Baby Thatcher' in Belgium. He's not suddenly going to become an exemplar of rectitude.
Mr. Eagles, if we're outside the EU, how can the EU forcibly remove business from the UK?
Not making a political point, genuinely unclear on this. The story was covered [I use the term loosely] on the news last night but in such a superficial way the actual legality or mechanism involved was never specified.
Also, the EU has always wanted to harm the city or tax it for its own purposes.
The clearing houses for derivatives will remain in London (for now) but under EU regulations and EU control. This means Brussels could withdraw them at any time, which would be hugely damaging for the City, lock in instability, and trigger the loss of tens of thousands of jobs. And before the PB Provincial Paleo Tories pipe up and implore us all to move to their new Jerusalem, Mansfield, these jobs include thousands of sweet girls from Essex and Kent working in back offices, not just financial services big dogs.
Vote Leave. Take back control.
And it could have been moved anytime the EU wished to relocate it to the Eurozone.
What's home ownership levels in Ealing Central these days ? Is it below 40% yet ?
Mansfield: The Tories' vision for Britain.
I have no idea what home ownership levels are in Ealing. I am sure they are much lower than in Mansfield because prices are high in west London, because people want to live there and they don't much want to live in Mansfield.
I sent you a ONS report on disposable income levels the other night which completely undermined your case. Don't keep digging.
Hard data vs PB Provincial Paleo Tory anecdote.
Home ownership levels in your constituency of Ealing Central are now probably lower than 40% and still falling.
Hard data.
Now perhaps you prefer a future where an ever increasing majority of people rent, where home ownership is dependent upon inheritance and where teachers and nurses have to go to food banks because they are spending so much of their income on property costs (thereby enriching the rich still further).
I don't.
I prefer a country where the person on average earnings can afford to buy the average house in their town.
That applies to Mansfield, it doesn't apply to Ealing.
And I demolished your disposable income argument - a few rich people don't make the average person any more affluent, they merely expose the inequality.
You're just another London Labour supporter of increasing inequality.
Comments
The mantra holds; if it's too good to be true, it probably is.
The politicians are now having to deal with their own contradictions. They can't turn round and say, we lied, Brexit will be crap. But as long as they keep denying reality, it makes that reality worse.
In 2010, Labour increased their majority in the local elections in Southwark.
William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
THE SECOND COMING
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
365 was amazingly generous this time round.
May will be blamed, and leave office in the Autumn following a leadership contest. Trump won't come.
The new leader will agree to pay ~£40bn or so to the EU and accept ECJ oversight of EU citizens for a time-limited period.
A deal will be struck by March 2019 that keeps the UK in both the customs union/single market for 3 years as a transition. Possibly a more permanent arrangement for goods.
For a price. Because a lot of the civil servants and Remainers will work behind the scenes for it.
The aim will be to leave the balance of the customs union by GE2022, and possibly the single market too. But EFTA-EEA may be more likely.
The economy may enter a technical recession during this time. HMG Brexit bills will be heavily amended and regularly defeated at report/committee stage. Some of the legislation will end up not making much sense. HMG will manage to line-up some new arrangements during this time on trade and regulation.
But, Corbyn or his successor will win GE2022 handily, which could become a bit of a de-facto referendum on the above. I don't know what his position will be, but I'd be inclined to think he'd want to use the new powers.
There is a risk talks break down entirely, and we crash out. With a decent deal being done subsequently once tempers have calmed down.
There is also a risk that we get taken back "all in" to the EU in the 2020s on standard accession terms off the back of younger voters, and resigned older voters.
The Leave/Remain argument will probably continue. Indefinitely. The UK will probably survive as a geopolitical unit, indefinitely.
And all I've just written is probably wrong, too.
Which would be symbolic. No doubt some pb'ers on here will still be underestimating Cobyn even then.
Whilst extremely tragic I don't see why it should delay the Con/DUP deal or its announcement. If I am being a tad heartless in saying that then I genuinely mean no offence.
and if the rhetoric from May doesn't change moderate Tory remainers will switch en masse.
From the links I posted earlier (note, these are from the KCTMO board meetings minutes from last year) :
Grenfell Tower refurbishment – close liaison with LFB and Fire Risk Assessor throughout the duration of the project. At the conclusion of the work some of the operational firefighters from the local Fire Station attended an onsite briefing where the contractor demonstrated the fire safety features of the building...
...We have provided a range of ongoing publicity to residents, particularly in relation to:
the “stay put” fire strategy and procedures residents should follow in event of a fire in their flat...
https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/874922065899474945
The only thing that I think people would prefer, is for them to bring forward the off-peak time of the first train north. 6.19pm means that train is full with no spare seats while the two earlier trains are around half/three quarters full.
I've updated it for you by adding two lines.
Tis Trotsky, and his scion with scruffy beard
That doth vex the common man.
You're not laughing now!
Something went seriously wrong last night, and there will be many causal factors. It's pure guesswork, but the cladding might have caught fire and either the new windows were not fireproof, or the residents had windows open due to the hot weather and fire got in that way. Or there were problems with cavities acting as channels for fires. Or any other number of potential factors.
The most important causal factors will probably not have been in the response, but in how the fire caught hold so quickly where, as you say, most fires do not. Here, I reckon the renovation will have played a part as competing factors of aesthetics, insulation, price, weight and general performance will all turn out to have aided the fire's spread. Of perhaps not. That's just a guess.
You guys and gals in the fire and rescue service do a brilliant job. But I would rather you be sitting twiddling your thumbs in the station rather than out on a call, for a callout means a whole host of other things have failed. You also play an important role in fire prevention, and I reckon if cuts are to be found to be partially to blame, that might be the reason rather than the response last night.
Oh, and thanks for all the emergency services involved. It must still be a horrific job.
"But, captain, everyone else appears to be wearing-"
"Shh, blondie."
Isn't the Lord Mayor the mayor of the City of London?
;-)
If a building has just had an 8.7million pound refurbishment, I don't see how "cuts" are too blame.
For 8.7 million pounds, wisely spent, I'd expect a building that was reasonably resistant to fire, & had fire alarms & included fire safety precautions.
https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/874683832523423746
An astonishing twitter thread.
- You have a country which has dramatic regional, local, demographic, ideological variation.
- You cut it into 650 artificial districts based not on communities or commonalities, but on population size and geographical proximity only (while then endeavouring to make some sort of community basis, but at a far lower priority) - and only for the purpose of making it so you have single member constituencies.
- You then have national parties and national party leaders with ideologies and policies that appeal to or repel demographics and localities in multiple varying ways.
- You then poll for the overall national voting intent and get that as a comparison to last time
- How do you adjust each one of those artificial constituencies? Bearing in mind that the only votes that count for your purposes are the ones that just elect a candidate (the number of votes for the second placed candidate and the identical-plus-one number of votes for the winning candidate; the ones for any other candidate and the ones for the winning candidate beyond that level have nothing to do with your output, they go no further to anywhere or anything else, and are anything between irrelevant and a distraction). And that each such artificial constituency is individual and ever-changing.
- Then you add up the number of these constituencies won in such a way and use that sum as the output.
Frankly, it's a miracle that such short-cuts as UNS sort-of worked in the past for as long as they did.
We have a system where the representation is not proportional or otherwise directly linked to the vote share; modelling the outcome is always going to be down to a large sum of assumptions, extrapolations, and simplifications - each of which may be only ever temporarily valid, if at all.
http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/22982/rail-finance-statistical-release-2015-16.pdf
The government's spending on rail is going into the nationalised Network Rail, and (I think!) it is wiping its face on maintenance and renewals: the government's money is mainly going into improvements.
We don't know the causes yet, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that government cuts are a direct reducer of spend on refurbishing the building. Concerns would include cuts that reduce effective regulation/enforcement of building standards, routine prevention activity by the emergency services, pressure on maintenance budgets and do on.
Perhaps it's you Richard.
Tories for Corbyn - a bigger own goal than Cameron's EUref gamble or May's election gamble.
I'm ashamed to say this was one of my first thoughts that it would be blamed on "Tory cuts." Labour won't come out and say it directly but I see social media is well and truly up and running on this.
You replied:
Because it is true.
Or have I got the wrong end of t'stick?
I think it is likely that the refurbishment actually made the building unsafe.
I don't really want to get into speculating as to the origin, but I do think that there are more likely causes than a failure of "routine prevention activity".
NEW THREAD
Personally, I think he's a bit of a twat.
https://youtu.be/NrQO6lXsvpA
Hard data.
Now perhaps you prefer a future where an ever increasing majority of people rent, where home ownership is dependent upon inheritance and where teachers and nurses have to go to food banks because they are spending so much of their income on property costs (thereby enriching the rich still further).
I don't.
I prefer a country where the person on average earnings can afford to buy the average house in their town.
That applies to Mansfield, it doesn't apply to Ealing.
And I demolished your disposable income argument - a few rich people don't make the average person any more affluent, they merely expose the inequality.
You're just another London Labour supporter of increasing inequality.