I can still remember the first 10 lines or so of Pushkin's The Bronze Horseman - in Russian - which got an A level Grade A in. It's quite rhymey / song lyricy, but most of all it's about founding St.Petersburg so Peter the Great can smash the crap out of Sweden! My teenage self could relate to that.
I think I'm down to 1/3 Goth now.
There's a musicality about good poetry which is why some of the best song lyrics could be read as poetry just as much as they can be sung. Not long ago on R4 a poet read out "You'll never walk alone" and it sounded like the very good poem it is and it was only until near the end that it was recognisable as the football anthem.
So many people speaking English have such a tin ear for the language's rythm and sound and cadences. Hearing poetry - whether limericks or lyrics - would immeasurably improve how people write and speak, quite apart from the pleasure of the content.
I can still remember the first 10 lines or so of Pushkin's The Bronze Horseman - in Russian - which got an A level Grade A in. It's quite rhymey / song lyricy, but most of all it's about founding St.Petersburg so Peter the Great can smash the crap out of Sweden! My teenage self could relate to that.
I think I'm down to 1/3 Goth now.
Shame on you, Patrick .You come from the school which gave us John Betjeman, Siegfried Sassoon, Charles Sorley and Louis MacNeice.
And though Byron went to Harrow, surely you were taught his topical "The Destruction of Sennacherib":
The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold, And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold; And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea, When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
The Assyrian was obviously a kipper. No wonder Farage is opposed to intervention.
Only bettered when the MCC led by W.G Grace were defeated at Lords on 27 May 1878 by the first Australian team to tour England:
The Australians came down like a wolf on the fold, The Marylebone cracks for a trifle were bowled; Our Grace before dinner was very soon done, And Grace after dinner did not get a run.
@DavidL (2:45pm) Your assumptions (q-o-q growth: Q3 +0.7% and Q4 0.6%) indeed result in y-o-y growth of 1.38% if applied to the the levels of GDP given in ONS table A2, GDP at constant market prices, chained volume measure, page 36 in http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_322665.pdf.
The YouGov question on the 59:29 No/Yes split on Scottish independence:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
I do hope that if we ever meet aliens from outer space we will not embarrass ourselves (and them!) by showing them some of the poetry we have made . Give them a brass band recital of the floral dance , or the turkish march maybe but no Kipling or Tennyson etc
Really strong figures suggesting that July was not some kind of a freak.
I am still bemused as to how the growth forecasts for this year are around the 1.3% level. We had 0.3% in Q1, 0.7% in Q2, we look like we are going to have at least 0.7% in Q3 and prehaps 0.6% in Q4. Why does that not amount to 0.3+0.7+0.7 +.0.6 = 2.3% growth? I really don't understand how the annual figure can be a full 1% less than the quarterly figures. Logic seems to indicate that it should in fact be more because the growth is on a slightly higher base each quarter.
The calculation that you quote would give annual growth of 2.32%, because of the effect of compounding - which is a smaller effect then you could get from rounding - which would give a range of approximately 2.1% - 2.5% annual growth.
This is all by-the-by, really. The reason for the caution from the economic forecasters is that they just don't believe the figures, partly because they were confounded in the last couple of years when good quarters were followed by surprisingly bad quarters. If Q4 in your extrapolation ends up as -0.5, then growth for the year would be about 1.2%.
If consumers are suddenly frightened off borrowing, Osborne's housing bubble doesn't come off the ground, and there is a mild external shock to the economy - or a bit of snow - then this could easily come to pass.
So, it's as you were, basically. If that persists with Populus and other polls then the "OH noes!" drama of the frontpages will look a little bit hysterical.
"Three officers from the Syrian armed forces were trained in Britain from 2005 to 2010, and a further two were enrolled in 2003 at Sandhurst, the army officer training college in Surrey, and at the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth. The data was released following a freedom of information request by the Guardian."
@DavidL (2:45pm) Your assumptions (q-o-q growth: Q3 +0.7% and Q4 0.6%) indeed result in y-o-y growth of 1.38% if applied to the the levels of GDP given in ONS table A2, GDP at constant market prices, chained volume measure, page 36 in http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_322665.pdf.
Yesss...can you do that again in English?
Is it as simple as the quarterly figures are nominal and the annual figures are deflated? Or are they somehow being deflated in a different way?
"Three officers from the Syrian armed forces were trained in Britain from 2005 to 2010, and a further two were enrolled in 2003 at Sandhurst, the army officer training college in Surrey, and at the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth. The data was released following a freedom of information request by the Guardian."
Yes - but presumably they weren't being trained in how to use chemical weapons on civilians....
The British Army has been training officers from Middle Eastern states for some time now - and both governments have been keen to sell arms to their governments. Not sure that this is a party political point, really.
Not sure Morris but the profit and loss accounts of football teams i think they treat transfers in and out as revenue items rather than capital items. It may therefore mean they are taxed as part of a profit (or loss) .
"Three officers from the Syrian armed forces were trained in Britain from 2005 to 2010, and a further two were enrolled in 2003 at Sandhurst, the army officer training college in Surrey, and at the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth. The data was released following a freedom of information request by the Guardian."
Yes - but presumably they weren't being trained in how to use chemical weapons on civilians....
The British Army has been training officers from Middle Eastern states for some time now - and both governments have been keen to sell arms to their governments. Not sure that this is a party political point, really.
It does explain why the SNP, and not Labour brought it up.....
@DavidL (2:45pm) Your assumptions (q-o-q growth: Q3 +0.7% and Q4 0.6%) indeed result in y-o-y growth of 1.38% if applied to the the levels of GDP given in ONS table A2, GDP at constant market prices, chained volume measure, page 36 in http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_322665.pdf.
Yesss...can you do that again in English?
Is it as simple as the quarterly figures are nominal and the annual figures are deflated? Or are they somehow being deflated in a different way?
David
In the context of media commentary, GDP figures are Quarter on previous Quarter growth and are nominal.
Year on Year growth (both quarter on quarter and rolling 12 month on 12 month) are also published but not discussed widely in the media.
Real Term GDP growth figures are mainly used by economists retrospectively rather than at the time they are announced. The OECD and Eurostat publish inter-country comparative tables of real term GDP growth.
geoffw is stretching it a bit to say that the sum (or product) of four quarter on previous quarter nominal growth figures computes to an annual real GDP figure (after the application of implied deflators). A clever argument, but not one which reflects general media usage.
@DavidL (2:45pm) Your assumptions (q-o-q growth: Q3 +0.7% and Q4 0.6%) indeed result in y-o-y growth of 1.38% if applied to the the levels of GDP given in ONS table A2, GDP at constant market prices, chained volume measure, page 36 in http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_322665.pdf.
Ah, I understand the mistake I was making now. I was calculating the annual growth from Q4 2012 to Q4 2013, which will be higher than the annual growth from 2012 to 2013, because growth was flat during 2012, and so Q1 2013 is only 0.3% up on Q1 2012.
What this means is that there is more inertia in the annual growth figures then you would get from looking at the annual rate of growth of each quarter.
I do hope that if we ever meet aliens from outer space we will not embarrass ourselves (and them!) by showing them some of the poetry we have made . Give them a brass band recital of the floral dance , or the turkish march maybe but no Kipling or Tennyson etc
Vogon poetry is particularly bad. I think we are safe.
Clearly I am comparing apples and oranges but I am still having trouble in telling them apart.
Let me look at it from a different angle. When Osborne does his autumn report will he be doubling the growth forecast from 0.6 to 1.2 or trebling it to 1.8?
Edit. And did we just export Gareth Bale improving our balance of payments?
NPXMP ..I said they were threatening to boycott..In protest against the Falkirk two still being suspended. I never gamble with money. It would only take one Unite member to walk through the door and the bet would be won.. Try tim ,he's stupid enough to bet
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Who paid for this "poll" ?
The SNP, curiously enough....
Shocked I tells ya.
Still it allows them to use the "some polls show yes winning" line in interview - that's what it's all about really - just a crutch for awkward "you are going to lose" type questions.
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Who paid for this "poll" ?
This "story" is the entire front page of the Dundee Courier today but they seemed to have missed this little detail, funnily enough. They don't even mention who paid for it.
Clearly I am comparing apples and oranges but I am still having trouble in telling them apart.
Let me look at it from a different angle. When Osborne does his autumn report will he be doubling the growth forecast from 0.6 to 1.2 or trebling it to 1.8?
Edit. And did we just export Gareth Bale improving our balance of payments?
He will double the growth forecast to 1.2%.
Take a hypothetical example. In 2012 there is no growth at all in any quarter, so GDP is constant in each quarter. In 2013, each quarter sees 1% growth on the quarter before. What is the annual growth rate?
The annual growth rate is 2.5%*, but the year-on-year growth rate for Q4 is 4%.
When you calculate your growth rate of 2.3%, you are calculating the year-on-year growth rate for Q4, and not the annual growth rate.
Interestingly, in my hypothetical example if the growth rate continues at 1% a quarter then annual growth in 2014 increases to 4%, even though the quarterly rate of growth is unchanged.
* 1.025 = 410/400 = (101 + 102 + 103 + 104) / (100 + 100 + 100 + 100) = GDP in 2013 / GDP in 2012
"Tony Parsons has made a shock move to Rupert Murdoch's Sun, days after penning his final column in an 18-year career with the Daily Mirror.
Parsons signed off from the Daily Mirror with a column on Saturday with warm words for his "beloved readers" and a "lump in my throat and tears in my eyes".
Nevertheless, the 59-year old, who fondly paid tribute to the Mirror as the "newspaper I grew up with", wasted no time in signing for the Sunday edition of arch-rival the Sun.
"I am thrilled to be joining the best-selling newspaper in the country," he said, adding a few barbs aimed squarely at his former employer Trinity Mirror."
Clearly I am comparing apples and oranges but I am still having trouble in telling them apart.
Let me look at it from a different angle. When Osborne does his autumn report will he be doubling the growth forecast from 0.6 to 1.2 or trebling it to 1.8?
Edit. And did we just export Gareth Bale improving our balance of payments?
The OBR Economic and Fiscal Outlook (EFO) which is published around the time of the Autumn Statement, contains tables and charts computed in both nominal and real GDP (although not simultaneously!).
A quick look through last year's December EFO seems to indicate that nominal GDP figures are used for intra year calculations and real for comparing the current year to prior years (which makes sense).
There is a section in the Dec 2012 EFO entitled "Nominal and Real GDP" but I founds myself neither wiser nor better informed after reading it (Section starts on p. 60).
Take this paragraph as an example:
Nominal GDP growth is weaker throughout the forecast than in March, reflecting both weaker real GDP growth and the downward adjustment to the growth of the GDP deflator. These changes to the forecast reduce the level of nominal GDP in 2016 by 5.1 per cent relative to our March forecast.27 Of this, 3.2 percentage points is accounted for by the downward adjustment to our forecast for real GDP growth, with the remainder due to lower GDP deflator growth.
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Who paid for this "poll" ?
The SNP, curiously enough....
Shocked I tells ya.
Still it allows them to use the "some polls show yes winning" line in interview - that's what it's all about really - just a crutch for awkward "you are going to lose" type questions.
But not among total base, where the split is 41:42 Yes/No - Panelbase exclude those less certain to vote.
Clearly I am comparing apples and oranges but I am still having trouble in telling them apart.
Let me look at it from a different angle. When Osborne does his autumn report will he be doubling the growth forecast from 0.6 to 1.2 or trebling it to 1.8?
Edit. And did we just export Gareth Bale improving our balance of payments?
He will double the growth forecast to 1.2%.
Take a hypothetical example. In 2012 there is no growth at all in any quarter, so GDP is constant in each quarter. In 2013, each quarter sees 1% growth on the quarter before. What is the annual growth rate?
The annual growth rate is 2.5%*, but the year-on-year growth rate for Q4 is 4%.
When you calculate your growth rate of 2.3%, you are calculating the year-on-year growth rate for Q4, and not the annual growth rate.
Interestingly, in my hypothetical example if the growth rate continues at 1% a quarter then annual growth in 2014 increases to 4%, even though the quarterly rate of growth is unchanged.
* 1.025 = 410/400 = (101 + 102 + 103 + 104) / (100 + 100 + 100 + 100) = GDP in 2013 / GDP in 2012
This simply doesn't make sense, Oblitus.
The headline figure for quarterly growth figures, as announced by the media, is for a quarter on previous quarter growth rate. This means that the Q2 2013 GDP growth rate of 0.7% showed growth over Q1 2013 not growth over Q1 2012 (although such a figure may be published in supplementary data).
If the Chancellor is making a statement which relates primarily to a single years figures he is almost certainly going to use nominal growth figures, as they will be consistent with other figures announced/published such as those for expenses and revenues.
If the Chancellor is comparing the current year to prior years he is likely to use real figures as this also makes sense: we are comparing like to like. An example are the PESA figures which are published in both real and nominal terms, facilitating both types of analysis. The real figures for the current year are computed/indexed to the month of publication, which is generally July.
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Who paid for this "poll" ?
The SNP, curiously enough....
Shocked I tells ya.
Still it allows them to use the "some polls show yes winning" line in interview - that's what it's all about really - just a crutch for awkward "you are going to lose" type questions.
But not among total base, where the split is 41:42 Yes/No - Panelbase exclude those less certain to vote.
Do you know anything about the origins and funding of Panelbase ?
If they did, they might get a Damascene conversion.
(Further o/t: Mrs J's ancestral home was near Tarsus, birthplace of St Paul. Her mother used to go digging in their garden as a child and find gold Roman coins. Mrs J's always wanted a Turkish version of Time Team; their history is much richer than ours, going back beyond the Hittites and well past Greek civilisation. sadly, archaeology does not have the same importance as it does here in the UK, with some worthy exceptions)
IANAE on the military, but I can see potential advantages for both sides in such a limited arrangement.
(Edit: Carlotta beat me to it)
When in Cambodia about 5-6 years ago our guide complained that "England" had trained Pol Pot's troops. And went on to make pointed remarks about Mrs Thatcher.
IANAE on the military, but I can see potential advantages for both sides in such a limited arrangement.
(Edit: Carlotta beat me to it)
When in Cambodia about 5-6 years ago our guide complained that "England" had trained Pol Pot's troops. And went on to make pointed remarks about Mrs Thatcher.
That was a distinctly different and murker affair, with lessons that continue to this day. Including, it should be said, Syria. http://www.newstatesman.com/node/137397
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Who paid for this "poll" ?
The SNP, curiously enough....
Shocked I tells ya.
Still it allows them to use the "some polls show yes winning" line in interview - that's what it's all about really - just a crutch for awkward "you are going to lose" type questions.
But not among total base, where the split is 41:42 Yes/No - Panelbase exclude those less certain to vote.
Do you know anything about the origins and funding of Panelbase ?
Is it reputable ?
Excluding those less likely to vote, or weighting by voting intention is perfectly respectable. The issue I have with this poll was the run up questions to the independence one - laughably transparent.
In a sense I am disappointed that only 52% of my countrymen think Scotland could be a successful independent country and 37% do not. I think it could - just it will be better off remaining in the UK.
In no sense is the ex Mr Julie Birchill an 'excellent' or any other type of Old Labour writer. He's an ideal fit for the Sun. He writes complete crap like his ex wife
"All survey researchers are aware that the responses they get depend can not only depend on the exact wording of the question they get, but also on what questions have been asked immediately beforehand. There is good reason to believe that this proved important in this case. By prefacing the referendum voting intention poll with two questions that elicited a response favourable to the Yes side, some respondents could well have been cued into saying Yes when they otherwise would not have done so."
"All survey researchers are aware that the responses they get depend can not only depend on the exact wording of the question they get, but also on what questions have been asked immediately beforehand. There is good reason to believe that this proved important in this case. By prefacing the referendum voting intention poll with two questions that elicited a response favourable to the Yes side, some respondents could well have been cued into saying Yes when they otherwise would not have done so."
Peston on why Hodges (in trouble on PM when Mair pointed out that the law that enabled Vodaphone to escape tax on its sale to Verizon even if it had been based in the UK thanks to Labour legislation) is wrong to winge about no UK tax being paid:
"So possibly it would be wrong to carp and wring hands that Vodafone won't be paying a penny of tax to the British taxman on the tens of billions of pounds of profit it will make from the disposal.
Because if it had been obliged to pay very substantial tax on the sale, it would have turned down the offer from Verizon Communications - and a windfall for the British economy would have been lost."
Our guide was very aware that international politics is a very murky game. And I said I was Welsh, which was accepted as different from English.
Nobody said anything in Laos earlier this year, although there were some Soviet flags about; that means exactly what it says .... the Hammer and Sickle.
$58.9 billion cash coming across from the US, plus $60.2bn Verizon shares 'to Vodafone shareholders', quite a large proportion of which will be sold because not all UK investors in Vodafone will want to hold US shares.
That's enough to impact the UK economy as a whole.
$58.9 billion cash coming across from the US, plus $60.2bn Verizon shares 'to Vodafone shareholders', quite a large proportion of which will be sold because not all UK investors in Vodafone will want to hold US shares.
That's enough to impact the UK economy as a whole.
$58.9 billion cash coming across from the US, plus $60.2bn Verizon shares 'to Vodafone shareholders', quite a large proportion of which will be sold because not all UK investors in Vodafone will want to hold US shares.
That's enough to impact the UK economy as a whole.
The headline figure for quarterly growth figures, as announced by the media, is for a quarter on previous quarter growth rate. This means that the Q2 2013 GDP growth rate of 0.7% showed growth over Q1 2013 not growth over Q1 2012 (although such a figure may be published in supplementary data).
Avery, you've misunderstood what Oblitus had finally made clear.
The 2013 on 2012 growth rate will be much lower than the sum of the 2013 QoQ rates because we are getting virtually no carry forward from last year.
In Q1 of 2013, most of the growth vs the same period last year comes from the growth in 2012, rather than than the growth just vs Q4 2012. Because there was no real growth in 2012, there is no carry over.
By contrast, in Q4 2013 is likely to be significantly higher than Q4 2012 as there has been solid growth in each Quarter since Q4 2012. However, the average of Q4 and Q1 (and the other 2...) will be somewhere in the middle, hence 2013 on 2012 growth looks subdued vs the QoQ numbers. This will not be the case next year.
Next year's 2014 on 2013 growth would be solidly positive even with no quarter on quarter growth reported in 2014, as the positive growth this year carries over in to the total year calculation.
"She is being interviewed by Caron Keating for Blue Peter's 'Bring and Buy' appeal for Kampuchea (Cambodia)"
In 1988, the same year as Halabja.
Was she wrong?
The situation was complex. Cambodia was under Vietnamese control. If you believe that the Cambodian people deserve to be ruled by their own government, then you may need to talk to previous powerful regimes. In fact, you need to engage all the parties. Leaving any of them out can lead to utter failure.
And such an approach may actually have worked in Cambodia. Peace efforts started the next year, and a peace settlement was reached in 1991. Would it have been possible to reach this settlement without talking to the more moderate parts of the Khmer Rouge, however distasteful that was?
A parallel is with Northern Ireland: many found it distasteful that the British government talked and negotiated with senior member of Sinn Fein, and that member of terrorist groups of all sides were let out early. Yet few doubt that such moves created and lubricated the peace process.
One of the gravest mistakes the west made in Iraq was the policy of debathification. You have reams of civil servants who actually run the country, from junior NCOs in the army to the police. Many were immediately unemployed, and they were the ones who knew how to run the country. Better to leave most of them in place as long as they swear loyalty to a new government (or concept thereof), or until proof of crimes can be found against them. Lop the head off, but only do select surgery to the rest of the body.
Would the Cambodian peace treaty have been possible if we had shunned one of the most powerful and feared groups?
In a similar manner, we need to be talking to people in Assad's regime, and making sure that any solution involves them as well as the rebels. It's the only way to a workable peace.
OldKingCole - occupational hazard of being British or English and going on guided tours abroad. Like Thatcher everything is the fault of the English . Happened to me in Cyprus this year with a guide who said it wasn't personal (wow thanks mate still not getting a tip) but the English were to balme for the turkish invasion
"Peston on why Hodges (in trouble on PM when Mair pointed out that the law that enabled Vodaphone to escape tax on its sale to Verizon even if it had been based in the UK thanks to Labour legislation) is wrong to winge about no UK tax being paid:"
But it was Peston who has been driving this (as a tax avoidance story) despite the fact that no one was interested . It was only in the last few hours that he found anyone to grab the batton. Predictably it was Hodge because she's become 'rent-a-mouth' on all things tax and she doesn't mind sounding ignorant.
OldKingCole - occupational hazard of being British or English and going on guided tours abroad. Like Thatcher everything is the fault of the English . Happened to me in Cyprus this year with a guide who said it wasn't personal (wow thanks mate still not getting a tip) but the English were to balme for the turkish invasion
Don't need to be on a tour, State. Can happen when one is having a quiet beer or green tea and watching the world go by!
Mind, somewhere like Cambodia need some local info, given the number of mines still about. At least, so the taxi driver told us.
Looks like right-wing populist parties could enter government in both Austria and Norway within the next few weeks.
But I thought Norway was the wunderkind country that both left (social welfare state) and right (outside EU) worship? How can pseudo-fascist nationalism be taking hold when everything is perfect?
tim .. not having too good a day are you' I don't gamble with money. I dont save souls..no idea where you got that idea from.. I leave that to the liars in dog collars and pointy hats.. Chuckles and Hodge making prats of themselves..not unusual. Labour Ministers talking at cross purposes. whats a troll like you to do.. why dont you go and watch some Corrie, settle your nerves
Looks like right-wing populist parties could enter government in both Austria and Norway within the next few weeks.
But I thought Norway was the wunderkind country that both left (social welfare state) and right (outside EU) worship? How can pseudo-fascist nationalism be taking hold when everything is perfect?
The remaining 5% is split between political betting and trains.
I've studied all these phenomena greatly, and have come up with a website featuring Melinda Messenger carrying a cat on the footplate of an A4, whilst simultaneously waving a betting form at an MP.
I should soon overtake Google as the #1 website ...
Comments
So many people speaking English have such a tin ear for the language's rythm and sound and cadences. Hearing poetry - whether limericks or lyrics - would immeasurably improve how people write and speak, quite apart from the pleasure of the content.
And though Byron went to Harrow, surely you were taught his topical "The Destruction of Sennacherib":
The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
The Assyrian was obviously a kipper. No wonder Farage is opposed to intervention.
Only bettered when the MCC led by W.G Grace were defeated at Lords on 27 May 1878 by the first Australian team to tour England:
The Australians came down like a wolf on the fold,
The Marylebone cracks for a trifle were bowled;
Our Grace before dinner was very soon done,
And Grace after dinner did not get a run.
Just some of it is crap. And I reserve the right to not like that stuff.
The lyrics to Suspicious Minds knock that Irish chap into a cocked hat.
Who will be there if Unite doesn't turn up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_2013#Data_table
Your assumptions (q-o-q growth: Q3 +0.7% and Q4 0.6%) indeed result in y-o-y growth of 1.38% if applied to the the levels of GDP given in ONS table A2, GDP at constant market prices, chained volume measure, page 36 in
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_322665.pdf.
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/2rnh7dcu0g/YG-Archive-Devo-Plus-results-220813-Scottish-independence.pdf
Can't find the Panelbase poll/questions online.....
"The Scottish National Party has alleged that UK has provided training to top senior Syrian military officers from President Assad's regime."
This is all by-the-by, really. The reason for the caution from the economic forecasters is that they just don't believe the figures, partly because they were confounded in the last couple of years when good quarters were followed by surprisingly bad quarters. If Q4 in your extrapolation ends up as -0.5, then growth for the year would be about 1.2%.
If consumers are suddenly frightened off borrowing, Osborne's housing bubble doesn't come off the ground, and there is a mild external shock to the economy - or a bit of snow - then this could easily come to pass.
So, it's as you were, basically. If that persists with Populus and other polls then the "OH noes!" drama of the frontpages will look a little bit hysterical.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/27/syrian-officers-trained-in-britain
"Three officers from the Syrian armed forces were trained in Britain from 2005 to 2010, and a further two were enrolled in 2003 at Sandhurst, the army officer training college in Surrey, and at the Britannia Royal Naval College in Dartmouth. The data was released following a freedom of information request by the Guardian."
http://whatbaleearns.co.uk/
Andrew Bloch @AndrewBloch
Gareth Bale has now earned £6,055.46 since joining Real Madrid and can afford to buy 12,000 cans of Tango
(fx: Googles): ah yes,here:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/27/syrian-officers-trained-in-britain
The last one left in 2010.
IANAE on the military, but I can see potential advantages for both sides in such a limited arrangement.
(Edit: Carlotta beat me to it)
Is it as simple as the quarterly figures are nominal and the annual figures are deflated? Or are they somehow being deflated in a different way?
The British Army has been training officers from Middle Eastern states for some time now - and both governments have been keen to sell arms to their governments. Not sure that this is a party political point, really.
https://touch.betfair.com/#/market_2_100231558?ts=1378133318582
In the context of media commentary, GDP figures are Quarter on previous Quarter growth and are nominal.
Year on Year growth (both quarter on quarter and rolling 12 month on 12 month) are also published but not discussed widely in the media.
Real Term GDP growth figures are mainly used by economists retrospectively rather than at the time they are announced. The OECD and Eurostat publish inter-country comparative tables of real term GDP growth.
geoffw is stretching it a bit to say that the sum (or product) of four quarter on previous quarter nominal growth figures computes to an annual real GDP figure (after the application of implied deflators). A clever argument, but not one which reflects general media usage.
What this means is that there is more inertia in the annual growth figures then you would get from looking at the annual rate of growth of each quarter.
[Thanks geoffw]
That is the best argument against intervention that I have seen on PB.
Ed Miliband is certain to be there.
Let me look at it from a different angle. When Osborne does his autumn report will he be doubling the growth forecast from 0.6 to 1.2 or trebling it to 1.8?
Edit. And did we just export Gareth Bale improving our balance of payments?
I never gamble with money.
It would only take one Unite member to walk through the door and the bet would be won..
Try tim ,he's stupid enough to bet
http://www.panelbase.com/news/SNPPollTables020903.pdf
And the questions asked:
Q1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Scotland could be a successful, Independent country"
Q2. Who do you trust to take the best decisions for Scotland: the Scottish government or the Westminster government.
Q.3 There will be a referendum on an independent Scotland on the 18th of September 2014. How do you intend to vote in response to the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Leading, much?
Now compare with the "biased and loaded YouGov question" the Nats denounce:
"If there was a referendum tomorrow on Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and becoming an Independent Country and this was the question, how would you vote? Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Which part of "leaving the United Kingdom" are the Nats worried about?
Still it allows them to use the "some polls show yes winning" line in interview - that's what it's all about really - just a crutch for awkward "you are going to lose" type questions.
Take a hypothetical example. In 2012 there is no growth at all in any quarter, so GDP is constant in each quarter. In 2013, each quarter sees 1% growth on the quarter before. What is the annual growth rate?
The annual growth rate is 2.5%*, but the year-on-year growth rate for Q4 is 4%.
When you calculate your growth rate of 2.3%, you are calculating the year-on-year growth rate for Q4, and not the annual growth rate.
Interestingly, in my hypothetical example if the growth rate continues at 1% a quarter then annual growth in 2014 increases to 4%, even though the quarterly rate of growth is unchanged.
* 1.025 = 410/400 = (101 + 102 + 103 + 104) / (100 + 100 + 100 + 100) = GDP in 2013 / GDP in 2012
"Tony Parsons has made a shock move to Rupert Murdoch's Sun, days after penning his final column in an 18-year career with the Daily Mirror.
Parsons signed off from the Daily Mirror with a column on Saturday with warm words for his "beloved readers" and a "lump in my throat and tears in my eyes".
Nevertheless, the 59-year old, who fondly paid tribute to the Mirror as the "newspaper I grew up with", wasted no time in signing for the Sunday edition of arch-rival the Sun.
"I am thrilled to be joining the best-selling newspaper in the country," he said, adding a few barbs aimed squarely at his former employer Trinity Mirror."
A quick look through last year's December EFO seems to indicate that nominal GDP figures are used for intra year calculations and real for comparing the current year to prior years (which makes sense).
There is a section in the Dec 2012 EFO entitled "Nominal and Real GDP" but I founds myself neither wiser nor better informed after reading it (Section starts on p. 60).
Take this paragraph as an example:
Nominal GDP growth is weaker throughout the forecast than in March, reflecting both weaker real GDP growth and the downward adjustment to the growth of the GDP deflator. These changes to the forecast reduce the level of nominal GDP in 2016 by 5.1 per cent relative to our March forecast.27 Of this, 3.2 percentage points is accounted for by the downward adjustment to our forecast for real GDP growth, with the remainder due to lower GDP deflator growth.
For proper poems, have you come across Harry Graham and the Little Willie collection?
eg
"Little Willie, from the mirror
Licked the mercury all off;
Thinking, in his childish error
It would cure the whooping cough.
At the funeral Willie's mother
Said to Mrs. Brown,
"'Twas a chilly day for Willie
When the mercury went down."
The headline figure for quarterly growth figures, as announced by the media, is for a quarter on previous quarter growth rate. This means that the Q2 2013 GDP growth rate of 0.7% showed growth over Q1 2013 not growth over Q1 2012 (although such a figure may be published in supplementary data).
If the Chancellor is making a statement which relates primarily to a single years figures he is almost certainly going to use nominal growth figures, as they will be consistent with other figures announced/published such as those for expenses and revenues.
If the Chancellor is comparing the current year to prior years he is likely to use real figures as this also makes sense: we are comparing like to like. An example are the PESA figures which are published in both real and nominal terms, facilitating both types of analysis. The real figures for the current year are computed/indexed to the month of publication, which is generally July.
Is it reputable ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-23926973
If they did, they might get a Damascene conversion.
(Further o/t: Mrs J's ancestral home was near Tarsus, birthplace of St Paul. Her mother used to go digging in their garden as a child and find gold Roman coins. Mrs J's always wanted a Turkish version of Time Team; their history is much richer than ours, going back beyond the Hittites and well past Greek civilisation. sadly, archaeology does not have the same importance as it does here in the UK, with some worthy exceptions)
And went on to make pointed remarks about Mrs Thatcher.
http://www.newstatesman.com/node/137397
In a sense I am disappointed that only 52% of my countrymen think Scotland could be a successful independent country and 37% do not. I think it could - just it will be better off remaining in the UK.
"All survey researchers are aware that the responses they get depend can not only depend on the exact wording of the question they get, but also on what questions have been asked immediately beforehand. There is good reason to believe that this proved important in this case. By prefacing the referendum voting intention poll with two questions that elicited a response favourable to the Yes side, some respondents could well have been cued into saying Yes when they otherwise would not have done so."
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2013/09/snppanelbase-poll-shows-one-point-yes-lead/
Any further transgressions, your posting privileges will be suspended.
Is that clear.
Please confirm that you understand.
The son of the former Labour home secretary has been selected as Labour candidate for the Lancashire constituency next door to his dad's":
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/shortcuts/2013/sep/02/will-straw-follow-father-jack-straw
"So possibly it would be wrong to carp and wring hands that Vodafone won't be paying a penny of tax to the British taxman on the tens of billions of pounds of profit it will make from the disposal.
Because if it had been obliged to pay very substantial tax on the sale, it would have turned down the offer from Verizon Communications - and a windfall for the British economy would have been lost."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23926429
Nobody said anything in Laos earlier this year, although there were some Soviet flags about; that means exactly what it says .... the Hammer and Sickle.
$58.9 billion cash coming across from the US, plus $60.2bn Verizon shares 'to Vodafone shareholders', quite a large proportion of which will be sold because not all UK investors in Vodafone will want to hold US shares.
That's enough to impact the UK economy as a whole.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-02/verizon-agrees-to-130-billion-vodafone-deal.html
The 2013 on 2012 growth rate will be much lower than the sum of the 2013 QoQ rates because we are getting virtually no carry forward from last year.
In Q1 of 2013, most of the growth vs the same period last year comes from the growth in 2012, rather than than the growth just vs Q4 2012. Because there was no real growth in 2012, there is no carry over.
By contrast, in Q4 2013 is likely to be significantly higher than Q4 2012 as there has been solid growth in each Quarter since Q4 2012. However, the average of Q4 and Q1 (and the other 2...) will be somewhere in the middle, hence 2013 on 2012 growth looks subdued vs the QoQ numbers. This will not be the case next year.
Next year's 2014 on 2013 growth would be solidly positive even with no quarter on quarter growth reported in 2014, as the positive growth this year carries over in to the total year calculation.
The situation was complex. Cambodia was under Vietnamese control. If you believe that the Cambodian people deserve to be ruled by their own government, then you may need to talk to previous powerful regimes. In fact, you need to engage all the parties. Leaving any of them out can lead to utter failure.
And such an approach may actually have worked in Cambodia. Peace efforts started the next year, and a peace settlement was reached in 1991. Would it have been possible to reach this settlement without talking to the more moderate parts of the Khmer Rouge, however distasteful that was?
A parallel is with Northern Ireland: many found it distasteful that the British government talked and negotiated with senior member of Sinn Fein, and that member of terrorist groups of all sides were let out early. Yet few doubt that such moves created and lubricated the peace process.
One of the gravest mistakes the west made in Iraq was the policy of debathification. You have reams of civil servants who actually run the country, from junior NCOs in the army to the police. Many were immediately unemployed, and they were the ones who knew how to run the country. Better to leave most of them in place as long as they swear loyalty to a new government (or concept thereof), or until proof of crimes can be found against them. Lop the head off, but only do select surgery to the rest of the body.
Would the Cambodian peace treaty have been possible if we had shunned one of the most powerful and feared groups?
In a similar manner, we need to be talking to people in Assad's regime, and making sure that any solution involves them as well as the rebels. It's the only way to a workable peace.
"Peston on why Hodges (in trouble on PM when Mair pointed out that the law that enabled Vodaphone to escape tax on its sale to Verizon even if it had been based in the UK thanks to Labour legislation) is wrong to winge about no UK tax being paid:"
But it was Peston who has been driving this (as a tax avoidance story) despite the fact that no one was interested . It was only in the last few hours that he found anyone to grab the batton. Predictably it was Hodge because she's become 'rent-a-mouth' on all things tax and she doesn't mind sounding ignorant.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalratswahl_in_Österreich_2013#Umfragen
Looks like right-wing populist parties could enter government in both Austria and Norway within the next few weeks.
Mind, somewhere like Cambodia need some local info, given the number of mines still about. At least, so the taxi driver told us.
Since I made the biggest bet of my investing career on this (albeit one which didn't seem to have too much downside), I'm not dischuffed!
Special dividend ? Ferking hope so"
84p a share (rumoured)
I don't gamble with money.
I dont save souls..no idea where you got that idea from..
I leave that to the liars in dog collars and pointy hats..
Chuckles and Hodge making prats of themselves..not unusual.
Labour Ministers talking at cross purposes. whats a troll like you to do..
why dont you go and watch some Corrie, settle your nerves
15% of All Internet Traffic is Cat-Related
Halabja - 5k civilian deaths
Invasion of Iraq - far more than 5k civilian deaths
The remaining 5% is split between political betting and trains.
I've studied all these phenomena greatly, and have come up with a website featuring Melinda Messenger carrying a cat on the footplate of an A4, whilst simultaneously waving a betting form at an MP.
I should soon overtake Google as the #1 website ...