The way law is done has changed out of all recognition over the last 30 years. One of my first jobs, whilst still a student, was inputting the cash room data on to the firm's first computer. Urgent communications were sent by fax and no one was sure if that was legally binding or not. The staff, and there were so many compared with the modern office, had electronic typewriters with no memory so every mistake had to be changed by hand. Finding out what the current state of a complex statutory instrument could take the best part of a day and the Opinion of counsel was often sought because they were aware of unreported decisions in the last couple of years that had not been published yet.
Now secretaries are an endangered (and seriously undervalued) species. Databases mean the skill is narrowing down the relevant law to something manageable and the speed of correspondence is frequently exasperating. Much of the work, particularly in things like conveyancing, personal injury and debt collection has been deskilled. The job of a lawyer is more often that of managing unqualified staff than doing it themselves (advocates and barristers are thankfully an exception). Intelligent systems have yet to make much of a mark but no doubt they will. Change will continue but I don't see a quantum leap even vaguely comparable to the internet at the moment.
Unfortunately the size of the bills doesn't seem to have shrunk to reflect all this increased efficiency!
Maybe you use the wrong lawyers. The fee for buying or selling a house in Dundee is about the same as you paid in 1983. My old firm went into administration on Friday after 250 years. Times, they are a changing.
A surprising number of firms have gone out of business in recent years.
The survival of high-street estate agents is a true mystery to me.
Maybe you use the wrong lawyers. The fee for buying or selling a house in Dundee is about the same as you paid in 1983. My old firm went into administration on Friday after 250 years. Times, they are a changing.
To be fair it is true that basic conveyancing costs have come down a lot. But anything to do with litigation or preparing commercial contracts doesn't seem to have got any cheaper.
The cost of litigation is fearful. I'm acting for one of the Defendants in a probate dispute, and my costs to date are £42,000. The costs of the solicitors acting for the Claimant (who has mainly been pursuing the other Defendants, rather than my client) are c.£400,000.
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
Maybe you use the wrong lawyers. The fee for buying or selling a house in Dundee is about the same as you paid in 1983. My old firm went into administration on Friday after 250 years. Times, they are a changing.
To be fair it is true that basic conveyancing costs have come down a lot. But anything to do with litigation or preparing commercial contracts doesn't seem to have got any cheaper.
The cost of litigation is fearful. I'm acting for one of the Defendants in a probate dispute, and my costs to date are £42,000. The costs of the solicitors acting for the Claimant (who has mainly been pursuing the other Defendants, rather than my client) are c.£400,000.
How much is the inheritance as its sounds like its going to disappear? Mind you I suspect that could be the aim of the Claimant - if I'm not getting the money no one will...
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
Maybe you use the wrong lawyers. The fee for buying or selling a house in Dundee is about the same as you paid in 1983. My old firm went into administration on Friday after 250 years. Times, they are a changing.
To be fair it is true that basic conveyancing costs have come down a lot. But anything to do with litigation or preparing commercial contracts doesn't seem to have got any cheaper.
The cost of litigation is fearful. I'm acting for one of the Defendants in a probate dispute, and my costs to date are £42,000. The costs of the solicitors acting for the Claimant (who has mainly been pursuing the other Defendants, rather than my client) are c.£400,000.
How much is the inheritance as its sounds like its going to disappear? Mind you I suspect that could be the aim of the Claimant - if I'm not getting the money no one will...
From the headline, you'd think "Just how pathetic is Hillary if she still cannot accept responsibility for her own performance?" The actual story is a little more nuanced. She does, at least ostensibly, take blame for those things in her control that she got wrong and shows vulnerability in doing so.
But that leaves an awful lot she still blames on others or on circumstances. And there I was thinking that the ability to deal with circumstances was one of the most important things in a leader ...
Actually I do have time to draft something on the German election - a one-hour gap between a Brussels meeting and my train home. I was looking to see the Betfair markets, bt apparently Betfair is illegal in Belgium (I get a big warning that the site I have attempted to access is contrary to Belgian law), so I'll need to add anything on those later!
From the headline, you'd think "Just how pathetic is Hillary if she still cannot accept responsibility for her own performance?" The actual story is a little more nuanced. She does, at least ostensibly, take blame for those things in her control that she got wrong and shows vulnerability in doing so.
But that leaves an awful lot she still blames on others or on circumstances. And there I was thinking that the ability to deal with circumstances was one of the most important things in a leader ...
The more I read about the 2016 US election, the more I’m convinced that the upper echelons of the Democratic Party don’t have a clue what happpened or why.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Actually I do have time to draft something on the German election - a one-hour gap between a Brussels meeting and my train home. I was looking to see the Betfair markets, bt apparently Betfair is illegal in Belgium (I get a big warning that the site I have attempted to access is contrary to Belgian law), so I'll need to add anything on those later!
Wait! What about the single market in services???
Additive goods are also regulated differently in different parts of the single market, so it's not only services.
No it doesn't Brexit talks make another general election almost certain not to happen until 2019 and she won't be leader after then anyway. Not to mention without a 10 point poll lead there would be no political purpose in risking one anyway
Making losing MPs resubmit for re-selection is par for the course if they lost
From the headline, you'd think "Just how pathetic is Hillary if she still cannot accept responsibility for her own performance?" The actual story is a little more nuanced. She does, at least ostensibly, take blame for those things in her control that she got wrong and shows vulnerability in doing so.
But that leaves an awful lot she still blames on others or on circumstances. And there I was thinking that the ability to deal with circumstances was one of the most important things in a leader ...
The more I read about the 2016 US election, the more I’m convinced that the upper echelons of the Democratic Party don’t have a clue what happpened or why.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Sanders could actually win some Deplorables while losing centrists in California who voted for Hillary
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Actually I do have time to draft something on the German election - a one-hour gap between a Brussels meeting and my train home. I was looking to see the Betfair markets, bt apparently Betfair is illegal in Belgium (I get a big warning that the site I have attempted to access is contrary to Belgian law), so I'll need to add anything on those later!
Wait! What about the single market in services???
Additive goods are also regulated differently in different parts of the single market, so it's not only services.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
It will be a populist left liberal either Sanders or Warren, probably the latter
After Hillary's defeat there is zero chance the Democrats will pick another centrist in 2020 and with polls showing Sanders and Warren beating Trump and the Democrats likely to pick up at least the House next year most will think 'why should we?'
Sanders and Warren comfortably lead the field in most early 2020 Democratic primary polls. Biden is ahead in a few but behind Sanders and Warren combined
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
Sanders lost Iowa by less than 0.5% to Hillary in 2016, had he won he would almost certainly have been nominee given he comfortably won the New Hampshire primary.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
Sanders lost Iowa by less than 0.5% to Hillary in 2016, had he won he would almost certainly have been nominee given he comfortably won the New Hampshire primary.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
Or someone who can go some way to unite both wings of the party - which would suggest someone without too much baggage. Someone from the next generation (Harris ? Gillibrand ?) might fit the bill.
And on the day Corbyn leads PMQs on workers’ rights, Unite put out a job ad for a local branch manager - on a self employed rolling six month contract!
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
Sanders lost Iowa by less than 0.5% to Hillary in 2016, had he won he would almost certainly have been nominee given he comfortably won the New Hampshire primary.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
Or someone who can go some way to unite both wings of the party - which would suggest someone without too much baggage. Someone from the next generation (Harris ? Gillibrand ?) might fit the bill.
Both the two mentioned are still too centrist for the base in its current mood, both are barely more than an asterisk in current polls
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
China has shot down missiles today near the North Korean border in a defensive show of force. It does make you wonder how concerned China may well be as Beijing is within range and Kim Jung Un is unstable.
I would not be surprised to hear breaking news that Kim Jung Un had passed away unexpectedly
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
That would be good, but who would do it? A direct comparison would require the public to rise up, and an issue with that is they don't know how much in the sh*t they're in (*). In comparison, a Romanian friend tells me they were well aware in the late 1980s how relatively 'backwards' and corrupt Romania had become.
And as in Romania, it would be down to the generals. And why would they do it? They are central in the present NK regime, and a change to anything like democracy might imperil that.
(*) Kim Hyon-hui is worth studying to see the mindset of the NK population.
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
China has shot down missiles today near the North Korean border in a defensive show of force. It does make you wonder how concerned China may well be as Beijing is within range and Kim Jung Un is unstable.
I would not be surprised to hear breaking news that Kim Jung Un had passed away unexpectedly
NK has directly threatened China in the past, including a couple of months ago. Make no mistake: China are threatened, both by the regime directly and the consequences of it falling.
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
China has shot down missiles today near the North Korean border in a defensive show of force. It does make you wonder how concerned China may well be as Beijing is within range and Kim Jung Un is unstable.
I would not be surprised to hear breaking news that Kim Jung Un had passed away unexpectedly
NK has directly threatened China in the past, including a couple of months ago. Make no mistake: China are threatened, both by the regime directly and the consequences of it falling.
Yes to be fair China has the biggest headache in this mess, more so than tbe US
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
I wonder when was the last time anyone in the region actually tested anti-missile defences in anger? Intercepting hostile missiles is something that appears to work in theory, more than it is actually seen in practice.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
That is indeed a very useful article. The mechanics of how any given situation might play out are very complex, I wonder at what point the UN is prepared to accept that a pre-emptive strike is now justified against NK?
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
Indeed. I read somewhere the other day that South Korea were training up some spooks for a covert ‘hit’ on Kim, which is most likely just propaganda to scare the NK elites into all questioning each other’s loyalty. Maybe that’s actually the most straightforward way to take care of the problem, by having the NK generals turn against the leader, knowing that if they carry on with what they’re doing they’ll all be victims of a very large bucket of sunshine.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
Indeed. I read somewhere the other day that South Korea were training up some spooks for a covert ‘hit’ on Kim, which is most likely just propaganda to scare the NK elites into all questioning each other’s loyalty. Maybe that’s actually the most straightforward way to take care of the problem, by having the NK generals turn against the leader, knowing that if they carry on with what they’re doing they’ll all be victims of a very large bucket of sunshine.
I really can't see that working. It's the same as in Iraq under Saddam and other despotic regimes: it doesn't matter if you're high-up in the military, or even a family member: if you anger the leader you're placed against a mortar before it is fired. Yet despite such treatment, they haven't risen up.
One of the secrets to being a despot is to make your friends fear you as much, if not more, than your enemies.
Yes, they might get a very large bucket of sunshine if they go with Kim. On the other hand, going against him means that you get killed by an anti-aircraft gun, or your relatives get billed for the bullet used to kill you. The latter is more certain death than the former.
20k deaths a day sounds optimistic to be frank when we're talking about the potential of Seoul being leveled let alone the grim risk of Tokyo being nuked etc
One nuke hits, you're into six-figure casualties easily IMHO.
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
Indeed. Easy to imagine seven figures are possible if NK goes scorched earth trying to inflict as much damage as possible.
The way law is done has changed out of all recognition over the last 30 years. One of my first jobs, whilst still a student, was inputting the cash room data on to the firm's first computer. Urgent communications were sent by fax and no one was sure if that was legally binding or not. The staff, and there were so many compared with the modern office, had electronic typewriters with no memory so every mistake had to be changed by hand. Finding out what the current state of a complex statutory instrument could take the best part of a day and the Opinion of counsel was often sought because they were aware of unreported decisions in the last couple of years that had not been published yet.
Now secretaries are an endangered (and seriously undervalued) species. Databases mean the skill is narrowing down the relevant law to something manageable and the speed of correspondence is frequently exasperating. Much of the work, particularly in things like conveyancing, personal injury and debt collection has been deskilled. The job of a lawyer is more often that of managing unqualified staff than doing it themselves (advocates and barristers are thankfully an exception). Intelligent systems have yet to make much of a mark but no doubt they will. Change will continue but I don't see a quantum leap even vaguely comparable to the internet at the moment.
Unfortunately the size of the bills doesn't seem to have shrunk to reflect all this increased efficiency!
Maybe you use the wrong lawyers. The fee for buying or selling a house in Dundee is about the same as you paid in 1983. My old firm went into administration on Friday after 250 years. Times, they are a changing.
A surprising number of firms have gone out of business in recent years.
Ever since lawyers were allowed limited liability...what a weird coincidence.
I blame the alternative business structure.
When I was deciding to shortlist what courses I might study at university, someone told me, you know what firms don't go bust? Bookmakers and Lawyers, that's what you should study. Alas I was unable to find any bookmaking degrees.
Back in 2011 I remember a former solicitor telling me how ABS will lead to the mass closure of high street law firms. I know things have been hard for high street firms but not heard anything about mass closures.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So labour addressing the real concerns of the Nation and silent on the one matter that does matter to many
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
From the headline, you'd think "Just how pathetic is Hillary if she still cannot accept responsibility for her own performance?" The actual story is a little more nuanced. She does, at least ostensibly, take blame for those things in her control that she got wrong and shows vulnerability in doing so.
But that leaves an awful lot she still blames on others or on circumstances. And there I was thinking that the ability to deal with circumstances was one of the most important things in a leader ...
"Clinton makes frank admissions about the places she fell short. She acknowledges it was bad "optics" to deliver paid speeches to Wall Street banks after the financial meltdown last decade. She says her comment during a CNN town hall about putting coal miners out of business was the misstep "I regret the most." And, as she has before, Clinton calls her decision to use a private email server during her time at the State Department as "dumb." "
I would have thought this should have been obvious at the time and not in hindsight.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
I wasn't really advocating first strike, but that would be the military logic.
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
Indeed. I read somewhere the other day that South Korea were training up some spooks for a covert ‘hit’ on Kim, which is most likely just propaganda to scare the NK elites into all questioning each other’s loyalty. Maybe that’s actually the most straightforward way to take care of the problem, by having the NK generals turn against the leader, knowing that if they carry on with what they’re doing they’ll all be victims of a very large bucket of sunshine.
I really can't see that working. It's the same as in Iraq under Saddam and other despotic regimes: it doesn't matter if you're high-up in the military, or even a family member: if you anger the leader you're placed against a mortar before it is fired. Yet despite such treatment, they haven't risen up.
One of the secrets to being a despot is to make your friends fear you as much, if not more, than your enemies.
Yes, they might get a very large bucket of sunshine if they go with Kim. On the other hand, going against him means that you get killed by an anti-aircraft gun, or your relatives get billed for the bullet used to kill you. The latter is more certain death than the former.
Indeed, not an easy situation - and the people in NK are completely brainwashed. If China can’t stop the madman soon then things are going to get very interesting.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
Labour have had an active anti FOBT policy for years, and campaigned in the GE on a policy to reduce stakes to £2. Banning sponsorship of football clubs can quite reasonably form another part of a coherent betting policy, I would have thought. I don't see the Premier League wasting away from underfunding as a result of such a ban.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
Nepotism is alive and well in Brexit amateur hour. The FTSE letter that was given short shrift was organised by the son of Conservative party chairman Patrick McLoughlin.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
Choosing which of those three is craziest is a big ask, but I think Trump would be the loser. Not many groups in which Trump would be the least crazy, but this is one.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
Labour have had an active anti FOBT policy for years, and campaigned in the GE on a policy to reduce stakes to £2. Banning sponsorship of football clubs can quite reasonably form another part of a coherent betting policy, I would have thought. I don't see the Premier League wasting away from underfunding as a result of such a ban.
Ah okay, fair enough if that’s the case. I’d still have thought that getting rid of the machines and taking a good look at the bookies’ TV adverts would have been higher priorities than targeting football club sponsorship though, but as you say it’s coherent to be talking about several betting-related issues at once. Well done Labour - something I don’t say too often!
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
Labour have had an active anti FOBT policy for years, and campaigned in the GE on a policy to reduce stakes to £2. Banning sponsorship of football clubs can quite reasonably form another part of a coherent betting policy, I would have thought. I don't see the Premier League wasting away from underfunding as a result of such a ban.
Theresa May “suppressed” nine different reports that showed immigration had little impact on jobs or wages, Lib Dem leader Vince Cable has claimed.
Cable revealed that when May was Home Secretary she refused to allow the publication of the studies because their findings were “inconvenient” for her drive to get migrant numbers down.
The Lib Dem leader, who was Business Secretary under the Tory-LibDem Coalition, will now formally write to May to demand she publish the documents, HuffPost UK has learned.
Because when immigration is too high, when the pace of change is too fast, it’s impossible to build a cohesive society. It’s difficult for schools and hospitals and core infrastructure like housing and transport to cope. And we know that for people in low-paid jobs, wages are forced down even further while some people are forced out of work altogether.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
Labour have had an active anti FOBT policy for years, and campaigned in the GE on a policy to reduce stakes to £2. Banning sponsorship of football clubs can quite reasonably form another part of a coherent betting policy, I would have thought. I don't see the Premier League wasting away from underfunding as a result of such a ban.
Ah okay, fair enough if that’s the case. I’d still have thought that getting rid of the machines and taking a good look at the bookies’ TV adverts would have been higher priorities than targeting football club sponsorship though, but as you say it’s coherent to be talking about several betting-related issues at once. Well done Labour - something I don’t say too often!
There were some complaints from supporters.a year or so ago when Essex Cricket signed up a bookie as a sponsor. 'Unsuitable for a professionals sports club". I don't think it was pursued after a year.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if the Democrats just manage to stand still in 2020 compared to last time they will probably win. Enough deplorables will have either become disillusioned with Trump or died. He's already lost a lot of the swing voters in states like PA and MI that carried him to victory
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
Sanders lost Iowa by less than 0.5% to Hillary in 2016, had he won he would almost certainly have been nominee given he comfortably won the New Hampshire primary.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
A bad general refights the last war. The next election will be in different circumstances so we can't just go off 2016.
Besides Sanders was lucky in his opponent. He was fighting one of the worst campaigners in decades. People assumed Hillary was good because of her husband and her name but she was rubbish. She lost to a relatively unknown black first term senator. She lost to an amateur, extremist tycoon who'd never been elected. She nearly lost to a septuagenarian socialist.
Its a shame no serious governor etc didn't fight 2016 as they'd have probably won.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
I think Kirsten Gillebrand is preparing for a run - I am suddenly getting regular (generic) emails from her asking views on all sorts of policy issues. God knows why me! But it is probably indicative of someone giving it consideration.
I don't think she'll get it, but she should be taken seriously.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
£1/minute is slow. Even a fruit machine goes more than £1/minute.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
Warren as POTUS, Moulton VPOTUS?
Both candidates from MA?! The Trumpites would have a field day with that!
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
Warren as POTUS, Moulton VPOTUS?
Both candidates from MA?! The Trumpites would have a field day with that!
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
£1/minute is slow. Even a fruit machine goes more than £1/minute.
£1 per spin/game would be better.
You can surprisingly burn through a lot of money at £1 a spin. I managed to build up a huge balance at an online bookie many years ago. Ended up messing around on a slot game and lost about £400 in a couple of hours.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
Yes I am an occasional punter the same.I have seen the addiction close up.My best friend as teenager started on horse racing , but because of addiction lost his job as a police officer and over the years lost his house.He is now in his fifties still gambling .His mother was an alcoholic so might be a personality issue ,. I always thought .
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
To be fair, if
Too many presidential candidates have come out of nowhere recently (Trump, Sanders, Obama) that forecasting this far out is pointless. This is a layer's market, with little reason to tie money up so long.
Sanders lost Iowa by less than 0.5% to Hillary in 2016, had he won he would almost certainly have been nominee given he comfortably won the New Hampshire primary.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
A bad general refights the last war. The next election will be in different circumstances so we can't just go off 2016.
Besides Sanders was lucky in his opponent. He was fighting one of the worst campaigners in decades. People assumed Hillary was good because of her husband and her name but she was rubbish. She lost to a relatively unknown black first term senator. She lost to an amateur, extremist tycoon who'd never been elected. She nearly lost to a septuagenarian socialist.
Its a shame no serious governor etc didn't fight 2016 as they'd have probably won.
The last war saw the Democrats put up a centrist who lost. The base who will decide the primaries do not want another 'electable' centrist next time they want someone with 'progressive' left/liberal policies especially with polling showing both Warren and Sanders would beat Trump anyway.
Unknown candidates rarely run against sitting Presidents, especially after only 1 term and often rerun candidates are likely, Romney, Dole, Reagan etc or established Senators, Kerry, McGovern, Goldwater etc
Which makes Sanders and Warren the ones to beat.
Your point about a governor applies equally to the GOP eg Kasich would likely have run the general but it was the primary he could not get past
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
Yes I am an occasional punter the same.I have seen the addiction close up.My best friend as teenager started on horse racing , but because of addiction lost his job as a police officer and over the years lost his house.He is now in his fifties still gambling .His mother was an alcoholic so might be a personality issue ,. I always thought .
One of my oldest friends went mad for fruit machines in the Eighties, referring the higher stakes ones in snooker clubs. Each week he would get his wages, buy a hundred cigarettes, pay a few debts, but the rest would be in the machine by closing time on a Friday night. He would then live off his girlfriend and cadge off us mates until the cycle repeated the following week. He was a good mate otherwise so we tolerated it. It went on for years like this, and while he was teetotal, his Dad was an alcoholic. Addictions are strange and destructive things.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
So they go for the tokenism and bandwagon jumping, rather than address geniune issues like people working alone in shops that get smashed up by those who’ve lost thousands on the machines.
Labour have had an active anti FOBT policy for years, and campaigned in the GE on a policy to reduce stakes to £2. Banning sponsorship of football clubs can quite reasonably form another part of a coherent betting policy, I would have thought. I don't see the Premier League wasting away from underfunding as a result of such a ban.
Stoke City might be screwed by such a ban though.
I don't think Bet365 have that any shops - its been an online only business for years.
Banning TV Adverts would kill them but banning machines won't harm them at all...
I'm no apologist for FOBTs and agree the stakes should be lowered, but really what is the point when punters can already gamble far more heavily in online casinos many of which are already run by big UK bookmakers? And as for suggesting 1 pound a minute.. one can lose more money than that on the 10p machines on the pier. A tenner a spin, one spin every minute would be ample. At some point we have to take responsibility for our own actions.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
£1/minute is slow. Even a fruit machine goes more than £1/minute.
£1 per spin/game would be better.
You can surprisingly burn through a lot of money at £1 a spin. I managed to build up a huge balance at an online bookie many years ago. Ended up messing around on a slot game and lost about £400 in a couple of hours.
I'm sorry but I have little sympathy with someone who loses £400 in a couple of hours. The issue with FOBT is that you could lose that much in minutes.
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
Tom Wolf, PA.
Seth Moulton from the House. War hero. Physics degree from Harvard, socially progressive but bipartisan. The question is, could he get past the Sanders wing of the party who are sure to demand a nominee who doesn't deviate from ideological purity. He may stand more of a chance than other centre-left Democrats as he's outside the party establishment and so wouldn't be tainted by the residue of Cliton's loss.
Seth's a mate. He's a really good guy, but not ready. Yet.
Agreed, it seems to early for him. I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
I think Kirsten Gillebrand is preparing for a run - I am suddenly getting regular (generic) emails from her asking views on all sorts of policy issues. God knows why me! But it is probably indicative of someone giving it consideration.
I don't think she'll get it, but she should be taken seriously.
I think at least a dozen Democrats are preparing for a run... some more seriously than others.
I'm not sure there's much to loose at this stage, and if lightning doesn't strike then they'll quietly withdraw. There is a real chance of one of the barely knowns making it ... it's just a matter of knowing which one (which is frankly impossible at this stage). The midterms should throw up some clues.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
Yes I am an occasional punter the same.I have seen the addiction close up.My best friend as teenager started on horse racing , but because of addiction lost his job as a police officer and over the years lost his house.He is now in his fifties still gambling .His mother was an alcoholic so might be a personality issue ,. I always thought .
Some of the research guys I talk to believe that addiction is a genetically driven disease - the form it takes is just a question of social norms/happenstance
"Several FTSE 100 executives expressed incredulity at the approach from Downing Street, with one saying: "There is no way we could sign this given the current state of chaos surrounding the (Brexit) talks.""
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
£1/minute is slow. Even a fruit machine goes more than £1/minute.
£1 per spin/game would be better.
You can surprisingly burn through a lot of money at £1 a spin. I managed to build up a huge balance at an online bookie many years ago. Ended up messing around on a slot game and lost about £400 in a couple of hours.
I'm sorry but I have little sympathy with someone who loses £400 in a couple of hours. The issue with FOBT is that you could lose that much in minutes.
A few hours/minutes, it does not matter, very few people could afford to lose that on a regular basis.
Keep an eye on Catalonia. It's really starting to kick off there now. Big vote in the Catalonian Parliament today paving the way for the secession referendum and a real escalation in conflict with Madrid. It will get very nasty, mark my words.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
Yes I am an occasional punter the same.I have seen the addiction close up.My best friend as teenager started on horse racing , but because of addiction lost his job as a police officer and over the years lost his house.He is now in his fifties still gambling .His mother was an alcoholic so might be a personality issue ,. I always thought .
Some of the research guys I talk to believe that addiction is a genetically driven disease - the form it takes is just a question of social norms/happenstance
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Do they?
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
It will be a populist left liberal either Sanders or Warren, probably the latter
After Hillary's defeat there is zero chance the Democrats will pick another centrist in 2020 and with polls showing Sanders and Warren beating Trump and the Democrats likely to pick up at least the House next year most will think 'why should we?'
Sanders and Warren comfortably lead the field in most early 2020 Democratic primary polls. Biden is ahead in a few but behind Sanders and Warren combined
While I agree it's likely to be someone from the populist wing of the Democratic party, you seem to forget how old Sanders and Warren will be. Both will be in their 70s, and Bernie will be pushing 80. The odds on either (or both) having some kind of medical issue is not insubstantial.
I also wouldn't forget "events". There is a little bit more than two years until the start of the next Democratic Primary season, and that's a lot of time for someone to shine. My money would be on a Governor, because after Trump demonstrating an ability to make government work is going to be a premium skill.
Remarkable sound and fury from BBC, Sky, Business, the London Mayor, and the elite about the leaked immigration papers and a perfect example of how far they have moved away from public opinion outside their own circles.
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
Labour are wanting a ban on Football clubs having betting firms sponsored on their shirts .They say this is due to gambling been addictive.
TBF gambling addiction is a major social problem in the UK. Speaking as an occasional punter on a betting site!
It is indeed.
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
£1/minute is slow. Even a fruit machine goes more than £1/minute.
£1 per spin/game would be better.
You can surprisingly burn through a lot of money at £1 a spin. I managed to build up a huge balance at an online bookie many years ago. Ended up messing around on a slot game and lost about £400 in a couple of hours.
I'm sorry but I have little sympathy with someone who loses £400 in a couple of hours. The issue with FOBT is that you could lose that much in minutes.
I spent a week in Vegas...and was more than happy on my first night on the slot machines to walk away with a 1.5 dollar profit....
Gambling is Orrible with a capital O....OK I gamble, on the betfair exchange on politics and the odd tenner on footie and tennis...
that said gambling is fucking corrosive and fucking profoundly awful for many human beings....It preys into our worst sensibilities.....
Comments
He's made lots of money - and I see a recent donor was one Adam Bolton...
https://twitter.com/jenniferjjacobs/status/905454016162918400
One has to pray NK targeting and weapons design isn't all that good, whilst Allied defence really is.
For what it's worth, I don't think we'll have a war there in the near future.
But that leaves an awful lot she still blames on others or on circumstances. And there I was thinking that the ability to deal with circumstances was one of the most important things in a leader ...
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened/index.html
They show every intention of doubling down on the identity politics campaign next time around, hoping that enough Deplorables will stay home to swing it for them.
Mr. Surbiton, has it caused you pericombobulation?
Making losing MPs resubmit for re-selection is par for the course if they lost
Probably just means there's a hole right through the middle.
I suspect that the next Democratic nominee will be a Governor, either of a swing state, like John Hickenlooper, or of a big state like Andrew Cuomo.
We all suffer a little bit too much from recency bias here. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were big noises in the last couple of years, and so there's a tendency to think that will continue. But Bernie will be too old, and Elizabeth Warren will also be in her 70s by the time of the next election.
I don't see a lot of talent among the Democrat Senatorial contingent. Chuck Schumer, anyone?
After Hillary's defeat there is zero chance the Democrats will pick another centrist in 2020 and with polls showing Sanders and Warren beating Trump and the Democrats likely to pick up at least the House next year most will think 'why should we?'
Sanders and Warren comfortably lead the field in most early 2020 Democratic primary polls. Biden is ahead in a few but behind Sanders and Warren combined
Quite a useful introduction to missile defence.
In practice the most effective method is good intelligence and a pre-emptive strike. The risk is missing a couple. Important to clobber the conventional forces too. That is the logic of winning a nuclear war. Strike first and obliterate.
A left liberal populist candidate therefore has to be the frontrunner in 2020
@LisaMascaro: Whoa. Big vote coming: WH/Congress agree to roll #Harvey #Debt #CR in one vote to Dec 15 , per Dem leadership https://twitter.com/LisaMascaro/status/905475594569134080/photo/1
I guess it’s up to China and if they can deal with Kim in a diplomatic fashion, before he unleashes hell on Seoul, Tokyo, Guam or the continental USA.
Someone from the next generation (Harris ? Gillibrand ?) might fit the bill.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChukaUmunna/status/905333284279914496
AKA Not Brexiting.
https://order-order.com/2017/09/06/unite-advertising-self-employed-branch-manager-job/
The policies as reported today will have massive public support, and to be fair to the BBC they did admit to it, but the best part of it today is not a word from the labour party
I would much rather see Kim Jung Un have a Ceaucesceu moment.
I would not be surprised to hear breaking news that Kim Jung Un had passed away unexpectedly
relatively 'backwards' and corrupt Romania had become.
And as in Romania, it would be down to the generals. And why would they do it? They are central in the present NK regime, and a change to anything like democracy might imperil that.
(*) Kim Hyon-hui is worth studying to see the mindset of the NK population.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Hyon-hui
One of the secrets to being a despot is to make your friends fear you as much, if not more, than your enemies.
Yes, they might get a very large bucket of sunshine if they go with Kim. On the other hand, going against him means that you get killed by an anti-aircraft gun, or your relatives get billed for the bullet used to kill you. The latter is more certain death than the former.
I would have thought this should have been obvious at the time and not in hindsight.
https://www.ft.com/content/78ea1adc-9315-11e7-a9e6-11d2f0ebb7f0
Capping FOBT at £1/minute would be a great policy.
Theresa May “suppressed” nine different reports that showed immigration had little impact on jobs or wages, Lib Dem leader Vince Cable has claimed.
Cable revealed that when May was Home Secretary she refused to allow the publication of the studies because their findings were “inconvenient” for her drive to get migrant numbers down.
The Lib Dem leader, who was Business Secretary under the Tory-LibDem Coalition, will now formally write to May to demand she publish the documents, HuffPost UK has learned.
Set this against a speech like her 2015 address to conference - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-s-speech-to-the-conservative-party-conference-in-full-a6681901.html
Because when immigration is too high, when the pace of change is too fast, it’s impossible to build a cohesive society. It’s difficult for schools and hospitals and core infrastructure like housing and transport to cope. And we know that for people in low-paid jobs, wages are forced down even further while some people are forced out of work altogether.
Undoubtedly made with self-raising flour. Or, if it's artesian, perhaps flow-er.
I think it's probably about 50/50 between the old generation (Sanders or Warren), and one of the as yet hardly knowns (any one of a dozen)...
Besides Sanders was lucky in his opponent. He was fighting one of the worst campaigners in decades. People assumed Hillary was good because of her husband and her name but she was rubbish. She lost to a relatively unknown black first term senator. She lost to an amateur, extremist tycoon who'd never been elected. She nearly lost to a septuagenarian socialist.
Its a shame no serious governor etc didn't fight 2016 as they'd have probably won.
I think Kirsten Gillebrand is preparing for a run - I am suddenly getting regular (generic) emails from her asking views on all sorts of policy issues. God knows why me! But it is probably indicative of someone giving it consideration.
I don't think she'll get it, but she should be taken seriously.
£1 per spin/game would be better.
Unknown candidates rarely run against sitting Presidents, especially after only 1 term and often rerun candidates are likely, Romney, Dole, Reagan etc or established Senators, Kerry, McGovern, Goldwater etc
Which makes Sanders and Warren the ones to beat.
Your point about a governor applies equally to the GOP eg Kasich would likely have run the general but it was the primary he could not get past
Banning TV Adverts would kill them but banning machines won't harm them at all...
https://twitter.com/ProfBrianCox/status/905388345018208256
DYOR obvs in the time allowed.
And as for suggesting 1 pound a minute.. one can lose more money than that on the 10p machines on the pier. A tenner a spin, one spin every minute would be ample. At some point we have to take responsibility for our own actions.
I'm not sure there's much to loose at this stage, and if lightning doesn't strike then they'll quietly withdraw. There is a real chance of one of the barely knowns making it ... it's just a matter of knowing which one (which is frankly impossible at this stage). The midterms should throw up some clues.
"Several FTSE 100 executives expressed incredulity at the approach from Downing Street, with one saying: "There is no way we could sign this given the current state of chaos surrounding the (Brexit) talks.""
http://news.sky.com/story/amp/ftse-100-chiefs-fury-at-no-10-letter-backing-ministers-on-brexit-11023229
https://news.paddypower.com/politics/2017/09/06/moggy-breakfast-tv/?AFF_ID=16562
but he's now 22/1
https://sports.paddypower.mobi/#sport/33/competition/10158/event/12405963
all his programmes are filmed in exotic locations, how would he know he had emigrated
I also wouldn't forget "events". There is a little bit more than two years until the start of the next Democratic Primary season, and that's a lot of time for someone to shine. My money would be on a Governor, because after Trump demonstrating an ability to make government work is going to be a premium skill.
Gambling is Orrible with a capital O....OK I gamble, on the betfair exchange on politics and the odd tenner on footie and tennis...
that said gambling is fucking corrosive and fucking profoundly awful for many human beings....It preys into our worst sensibilities.....