politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : November 9th 2017

SystemSystem Posts: 12,413
edited November 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : November 9th 2017

Limestone Peak on High Peak (Con defence) Result: Con 261 (54% +4% on last time), Lab 133 (27% unchanged on last time), Lib Dem 58 (12% no candidate last time), Green 34 (7% no candidate last time) (No UKIP candidate this time -23%) Conservative HOLD with a majority of 128 (27%) on a swing of 2% from Labour to Conservative

Read the full story here


Comments

  • RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    First?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Second?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,850
    FPT
    rcs1000 said:


    The cognitive dissonance on both sides is staggering.

    From Remainers:
    If we'd got a good deal easily: see, it shows how reasonable the EU are and that we should have stayed
    Or: see, it goes to show that staying in would have been better. it was always obvious that leaving would land us with a bad deal

    From Leavers:
    we said we're too important, and we'd get a good deal. shows we were right to leave
    or
    see how unreasonable they are. proof, as ever, that leaving was right

    ------

    @Nigelb: Take your point, but I'm not sure that qualifies as cognitive dissonance - if anything quite the opposite.

    It's neither. The EU and UK interests aren't aligned for this deal. The UK wants continuity while the EU wants the UK out with the least damage possible and for any subsequent arrangement to be less good than membership. The only deal that works for both is where the outcome is worse than what we had before but worth it for the UK for other reasons. That would only ever appeal to Leavers, not Remainers, and is problematic for Leavers too given Brexit was sold on no no cost.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,195
    Sandpit said:

    Second?

    Like Labour & remain :D
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,772
    Its not about how far down the pecking order we get pushed. Its more important that we are away from the evil clutches of the ECJ
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Pulpstar said:

    show previous quotes
    Like Labour & remain :D
    LOL at your new avatar!
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    These Locals appear to be telling us the Tories are still doing quite well in the north Midlands, not so well in the south and the voters of Fareham have away cast their Leaver credentials and embraced the home of Remoanerdom (or not as the case may be0)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,223
    edited November 2017
    Rhubarb said:

    show previous quotes
    "The Euro however is the time bomb that will likely blow up the European institutions in a single cataclysmic event. I am convinced it will do so during the next German government’s term in office."

    Whatever you're position that's absolutely terrifying.
    I must admit to being pretty unimpressed by the speech.

    He starts by arguing that the bailout of the EU member states was illegal, as was the temporary suspension of Schengen around the refugee crisis.

    The second one in particular is just plain wrong. The original Schengen Treaty specifically deals with countries being about to temporarily restate border controls when they were necessary, for internal security or other reasons. Not allowing countries to impose temporary controls would have been far more in breach of the treaties than allowing them.

    Anyway, back to that paragraph.

    I very much doubt that the Eurozone will blow up this electoral cycle.

    Why? Because in 2007, there were staggering, astonishing, astronomical imbalances in the Eurozone. I'm sure everyone's read Matthew Lynn's excellent Bust, about Greece.

    On the eve of the GFC, the worst of the PIIGS - Spain, Portugal and Greece - were running staggering current account deficits. Household debt in Spain and Portugal had increased ten-fold in the previous decade, as house prices had soared and people had levered up to spend their new found "wealth" on imported German cars. The economies of these countries were almost entirely centered around building houses, in the hope they'd be sold as second homes to Germans, Brits and Swedes.

    The economies of almost all the PIIGS are now pretty well balanced: these countries now all export more than they import, have put through dramatic labour market reforms, cut government spending, private sector debt has come down dramatically, insolvent banks have been wound up, and government debt is falling. (Greece is the remaining problem child, but even there there has been progress.)

    Now, these do not solve the inherent structural flaws in the Eurozone. But they do make an imminent crisis increasingly unlikely. My guess is that we probably need to look out an economic cycle and a half, when all the good lessons learnt in the Eurozone crisis have been forgotten, for there to be a serious existential threat to the Eurozone.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,223
    HYUFD said:

    show previous quotes
    According to this report Zurich is the number 2 financial centre in Europe, Geneva is 3rd, Frankfurt 4th and Luxembourg 5th.
    http://www.cityam.com/224938/london-top-world
    The authors of that study have no idea what they're talking about.

    The fact that Luxembourg is in the top 5 demonstrates the absurdity of the study. Here is a full list of the big investment banks with a presence in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the big institutional asset managers in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the major commercial banks in Luxembourg:

    Now, there are lots of Luxembourg listed assets. But there are lots of Jersey and Guernsey listed funds. That doesn't make them financial centres, it makes them places with light regulatory structures.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,830
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/25/poll-blow-nicola-sturgeon-scottish-independence-support-drops/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,830
    rcs1000 said:

    show previous quotes
    The authors of that study have no idea what they're talking about.

    The fact that Luxembourg is in the top 5 demonstrates the absurdity of the study. Here is a full list of the big investment banks with a presence in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the big institutional asset managers in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the major commercial banks in Luxembourg:

    Now, there are lots of Luxembourg listed assets. But there are lots of Jersey and Guernsey listed funds. That doesn't make them financial centres, it makes them places with light regulatory structures.
    Take it up with Z/Yen then and not me.

    I am only the messenger.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,830
    Norm said:

    These Locals appear to be telling us the Tories are still doing quite well in the north Midlands, not so well in the south and the voters of Fareham have away cast their Leaver credentials and embraced the home of Remoanerdom (or not as the case may be0)

    According to Yougov today the Tories are over 50% in the South and they held the Wandsworth seat in London.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,995
    New thread
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,186
    edited November 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    show previous quotes
    The authors of that study have no idea what they're talking about.

    The fact that Luxembourg is in the top 5 demonstrates the absurdity of the study. Here is a full list of the big investment banks with a presence in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the big institutional asset managers in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the major commercial banks in Luxembourg:

    Now, there are lots of Luxembourg listed assets. But there are lots of Jersey and Guernsey listed funds. That doesn't make them financial centres, it makes them places with light regulatory structures.
    CA is really benefitting your list making faculties :)

    I don't think I'd ever get any work done, 'cos of the Pinot.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,453
    rcs1000 said:

    show previous quotes
    The authors of that study have no idea what they're talking about.

    The fact that Luxembourg is in the top 5 demonstrates the absurdity of the study. Here is a full list of the big investment banks with a presence in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the big institutional asset managers in Luxembourg:

    Here is a list of the major commercial banks in Luxembourg:

    Now, there are lots of Luxembourg listed assets. But there are lots of Jersey and Guernsey listed funds. That doesn't make them financial centres, it makes them places with light regulatory structures.
    I agree with your theme, but almost every commercial bank has a branch in Luxembourg.

    Stockholm, Berlin, and Milan might all feature ahead of Dublin depending on the sector. Edinburgh probably has claims over Dublin too.

    London, Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam, Milan, Stockholm, Zurich would I think be my list.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,186
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    New thread

    Eh? This one is but seconds old....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,073
    Twelfth!
  • NHantsNHants Posts: 8
    So Labour vote up, but not massively; Con vote holding up and a big UKIP --> LD swing!
This discussion has been closed.