politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day of the husky?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day of the husky?
Picture credit : WWF
0
This discussion has been closed.
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day of the husky?
Comments
Certainly the route the French Socialists are taking to dig themselves out the mire. Not sure it's working. Not sure much could.
http://www.parti-socialiste.fr/
I can highly recommend to PB film buffs the new version of Journeys End. The original play in 1928 was alongside All Quiet on the Western Front as a critique of the conduct of WW1, written by a veteran. It is important in understanding the antiwar movement of the Thirties, and why appeasement was a popular policy. Very powerfully acted and directed:
https://youtu.be/tLpyaLNfudY
@YBarddCwsc, @Sandpit, you make bloody good points on the previous thread, but I don't know the solution.
Over the past five years my freelance jobs have taken a rather weird step regarding predictions and their measurement, and I have the scars on my back to tell you that models used to predict future events are rarely assessed by modellers for accuracy against the actual outcome[1], and that non-modelling-based predictions are discarded and forgotten as soon as the event occurs, with the predictor cherry-picking the correct ones to burnish his rep (Roger Bootle is a case in point, although he only stands out because Capital Economics made such an arse of predicting house prices in the Noughties: I think all predictors do this and it's not fair to single out him).
We only spot the weirdness because opinion-poll data is easily available. But in most other cases it is not. For example, tell me what Deutsche Bank predictions were in 2004 for the pound in 2005? Pantheon Macroeconomic's predictions for growth in 2014? Moody Analytics's predictions in December 2015 of the 2016 POTUS election? Ladbroke's odds on April 1st on a Conservative victory in March? This stuff is subscription only or listed on dynamic websites that change from moment-to-moment and is ('scuse my French) fucking difficult to capture.
Somebody on here (it might be @Philip_Thompson, but my memory is poor) insists that betting odds on Reagan and Bush the Elder being nominated as GOP Potus candidate were good predictors of the outcome. But I need sources to believe that and he does not provide them (he may be working from memory), which leaves me tearing my hair out in frustration.
We don't have widely available sources to predictions to measure their accuracy. If you (or others) were willing to pay me money for the subscriptions (and that's going to easily hit 5-10K) and were willing to sign off my CPD log then I'd happily build one for you. But until that time we'll have the same problem.
Rant over. You may now all return to slagging off Brexit or whatever this week's idee fixe is...
NOTE
[1] This needs explaining. Instead of the previous model being assessed, it's more a case of new models being built using up-to-date data: the previous model is effectively discarded. When you combine that with the tendency of modellers to use qualitative criteria (simplicity, plausibility, etc) to select models, and the tendency to use criteria that don't actually consider the dependent variable (smoothness of the weights thru the range, compatibility with the previous model, plausibility again), it becomes horribly apparent that accuracy is actually irrelevant.
And I know I have mentioned it before, but Ikarus is an outstanding - and astounding - documentary about Russian drug cheating in sport.
Personally I’m torn between wanting him to get a promotion to No.11, and the huge needs of his current department with the changes of the next couple of years.
He’s the sort of person who as Chancellor would get income tax and NI unified, and be prepared to think the unthinkable with regard to a whole load of problems that have been put in the too-difficult box by governments of all colours for decades.
An enlightened government would be preparing the population for the oncoming grand solar minimum in 2024 and mini ice age conditions to come, which are going to threaten global food supplies. There's as much chance of this happening under any government in the UK as Barnet winning the premiership by 2030.
Follow the money and see that our current government collects in the order of £45,000 million from CO2 based taxes, on a completely false prospectus. What a crazy world we live in.
A good, if depressing, thread Nick.
IMHO if the government hasn't got any big issues to sort out it should concentrate on doing what is does better, not looking for a New Big Thing to obsess about. The implementation of Universal Credit is a good theory being derailed by bad implementation, and that should be addressed with some urgency. I know animal welfare is an interest of yours (and speaks well of you) but it is really not a priority. One of the reasons why I prefer a smaller government (but not Parliament) is that it's always looking to do something new: I really wish it'd stop.
Because they are relatively unimportant ephemera. They're the cheap and easy things to do (governmentally) when the spectre of Brexit is hanging overhead.
Distraction politics at its best/worst depending on your viewpoint.
Cynical, me?
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
You could perhaps more reasonably ask why Mrs May hasn't appointed a big hitter like that to sort out Universal Credit.
O/T: Finding it mildly annoying that Jess Phillips being Jess Phillips is somehow considered reflective of the left, Jess protests and complains about whatever is in her interest, she doesn't criticise when it is her interest. She has been one of the biggest cheerleaders against Labours move left using every trick available to her to complain.
The fact she isn't criticising this is reflective of Jess Phillips, if Brendan Cox was somehow seen as a Corbyn supporter she would she this as typical of the left and jump on it with her usual glee. If Jess Phillips is reflective of anything it is a more centrist anti Corbyn viewpoint than a left wing one.
Yet unlike some, I'm intensely relaxed about where we're heading wrt environmental legislation. It's before my time, but my dad tells me there was a certain amount of criticism over the various clean air acts, and yet who would go back to those old smoggy days?
We may be doing the right things for the wrong reasons. But less coal and petrochemical burning is good, as long as it does not further harm the environment or wider economy in other ways.
(In passing, I wasn't implying Gove should do anything. My point was not specific to him)
2024 is actually the approximate date of the next solar peak (of sunspot and flares) based on the 11 year solar cycle. Though it is fair to say expectations are low for a lot of activity given the experience of the current cycle, I don't think many are predicting a low peak will lead to a mini ice age in 2024!
Using National Insurance to pay for increases in NHS and social care funding and welfare costs will ensure it is focused and clearly hypothecated, merging National Insurance into Income Tax just gives Labour an excuse to raise tax to spend on its pet projects just as much as the NHS etc
The puzzling thing is how left wing Labour are at the moment and still doing alright in the polls. I think a lot of people like me forget that for Labour, the party platform has to take on policies in obscure subject areas to follow through the political narrative they wish to paint. It is ideologically driven and so the pacifism of the left is not just confined to defence policy but encompasses banning the sales of weapons, ammunition and military vehicles. Some of these ideas tend to be repellent to more centrist free minded voters or Tories.
I do wonder if Corbyn will produce a manifesto in 2022 like the 1983 version, though much derided by opponents. Corbyn could claim after all that the electorate were enthused by his previous offering in 2017 and a more left wing manifesto might engender real change. The UK has elected left-wing governments in the past in 1945, 1950 and 1974, so without a split on the left it is a possibility of it happening again.
'OK. Well, it may help you to know that until three years ago when he died I had a friend called Nick Baker who was a private secretary at No. 10 in Wilson's first tenure and lived very close to Marcia Falkender. Two mornings a week while walking the dog he would greet the man coming out of her house with the words 'Good morning Prime Minister' and get a grunt in reply.
Now that is of course not conclusive. Maybe she did a mean full English or something. But it is suggestive.'
I think you have related that story before - and indeed it is far from being conclusive. Perhaps Mary was also staying there, and there could well have been good political reasons for Wilson's presence. Morever, that was surely the period during which Marcia was involved with Walter Terry - father of her twins.
In late 1977 or early 1978 I attended as a young PPC a meeting addressed by Joe Haines - Wilson's former press secretary. This had been set up by a member of the Young Socialists and took place less than two years after Wilson had left office. Some of the local press had got wind of the meeting and had turned up. Joe Haines noticed this on his arrival - and proceeded to make it clear that he would not be as open and forthcoming in his remarks were the press permitted to remain. The press were asked to leave - with the result that we were left with a small group of six to hear Joe Haines.
I don't believe his working relationship with Falkender was particularly good, but I do recall him saying that at no time had he seen Harold even put his arm around Marcia. He very much conveyed the sense of there not having been an affair.
Now, years later - circa 20 years later by which time Wilson was dead - Joe Haines began to sing a different tune and did imply the likelihood of a relationship. In view of his earlier comments, I no longer was inclined to take his statements seriously and thereafter have held a cynical view as to his motives.
Of course in 1950 and October 1974 Labour only won with tiny majorities of 5 and 3 respectively.
If the Tories are serious on the issue, they should declare immediately that fox hunting is wrong, and that they will start enforcing properly the law against it from tomorrow morning.
Labour should draw up a manifesto commitment to do something about the costs and charges of vets.
And every Labour member should read a copy of Animal Farm by George Orwell, and understand that they should beware that in their mission to make the farm a fairer place they should not hand it over to the Corbynista pigs.
"Save the Children" must have been sponsoring him for their own reasons. I'd strongly suspect all of those reasons.
The parties have fought each other to a standstill on the big issues. The economy? The deficit has gone from urgent crisis to “Is that still a thing?” in public consciousness. Brexit? Clearly difficult and not really under British control. The NHS? In crisis for so long that many people have lost confidence that it will be fixed. Immigration? The Tories aren’t doing much, Labour doesn’t want to do much, UKIP has imploded. Competence? Much of the public doesn’t rate anyone on that score. So the parties are locked at about 40% each with no sign of movement.
Corbyn's spending plans cannot be paid for without putting up income tax to before Thatcher. Why cant he admit that?
Though I agree the middle classes and businesses will likely have to pay more tax too for Corbyn's spending and nationalisation plans beyond simply taking corporation tax and inheritance tax back to the level of the New Labour years
Its time for Corbyn to stop treating voters on the tax issue as if they are as dumb as hamsters.
Corbyn has a long shopping list of spending plans. He wants to roll back spending to the days before Thatcher.
Yet at the election he claims this can be done with 95% of the population paying no more income tax or NI, with the top rate of income tax up only to Gordon Brown 2010 levels, lower than under Thatcher, and with Corporation Tax only at the level under Gordon Brown.
Pre Thatcher spending at Post Thatcher tax rates.
Who does Mr Corbyn think he is fooling?
Instead of posing and preening as a red blooded socialist, he should put his mouth where his money is and stop hiding behind Blairite promises on tax.
He wants the NHS to be properly funded, he wants good social care, a pay rise for all public sector workers, nationalisation of public utilities, a national education service, an end to tuition fees, more spending on welfare..................................That will cost a lot.
This cannot be paid for by 95% paying no extra income tax or NI, and the rich and companies paying less than under Thatcher.
Time for Corbyn and McDonnell to be honest on tax. If you want to turn back the clock to before Thatcher on spending, you have to turn back the clock on taxes too.
Anything else is a lie.
Labour party slogan 2022 NAILED ON
Hey, yeah, I get it.
I am willing to pay higher income tax to pay for the NHS, why isnt Corbyn?
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/965009465123770368
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/theresa-mays-made-a-hash-of-brexit-and-now-the-door-is-open-to-a-second-referendum-g7vh7lj9d
Peanuts are for monkeys Mr Corbyn.
I am willing to pay more income tax to pay for the NHS, for decent social care and education.
Why is Mr Corbyn not willing to raise the basic rate of income tax to pay for these things?
The basic rate of income tax was actually higher under most of Tony Blair's premiership than what Corbyn is proposing. And Blair did not have Corbyn's long spending list.
Stop lying to us about tax Mr Corbyn. Your spending plans cannot be funded by your tax plans.
Not going to happen
Let’s see what happens when the Cabinet settles on the desired end state, and starts preaching with one voice.
We're still trying to sort out the mess of the last lot of PFI deals
So much for a debate on the environment. It's back to taxation and the usual suspect telling us just how bad Jeremy Corbyn is.
As for the environment and irrespective of whether you are a climate change denier or not, Gove's speech was excellent until he started harping on about the EU and how bad it was. There are sound reasons for all politically thoughtful people to be concerned about and to be motivated about the environment and its impact on human behaviour.
IF part of the migration of peoples from sub-Saharan Africa is down to a deteriorating environment and IF sea level rises threaten the very existence of islands which should mean more to us than simply nice places to visit on holiday, it forces a globally-focussed internationalist post-EU Britain to be in the vanguard of leading international and global efforts aimed at conservation, preservation and protection.
On that, I would stand four-square with Gove and whether your motives are coldly rational or entirely sentimental it matters little if the net effect is the same. There would be a backlash against eco-authoritarianism in the UK (and rightly so) but if Government can use education and legislation (carrot and stick) to inform and persuade so much the better.
A lot has happened already - cars are so much cleaner and more efficient than 30 years ago while solar, wind and tidal energy sources are being encouraged and whatever you may think of seeing the desert outside Palm Springs full of solar panels and windmills, it's a step forward however much some may view it as spoiling the view.
It would also be encouraging to see a wider cross-party concensus on this issue - I suspect there are elements of common thinking in all parties and taking this issue forward collaboratively will make getting things done so much easier.
NP and his fellow Labour supporters are trying to foist upon the public representatives that they know are awful. They're doing this simply because they all share the Labour badge. That they are doing it at all just shows how devoid of foundation the left has been for a long time.
Quite how the Tories have managed to look even less convincing against that background is beyond me.
I can only start to imagine the LDs incredulity that given the above they're going backwards.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tax-burden-wealthy-has-trebled-since-1970s-telegraph-analysis/
The pips have not yet squeaked.
I suspect that in the end the headbangers will be glad that Remainers forced a Commons vote, so that they can vote against it.
Rochdale looking good! I though them worth a couple of quid pre match. Now all green.
My thoughts beyond Brexit is do we really want someone so useless representing our interests in any other trade deals assuming the UK can get anywhere in trying to initiate them?
Personally, I don't think another referendum is a good idea as they get hijacked by issues only tangentially connected to the main question. I also think they are too divisive and spread hatred in those people that are less civilised. However, some people might be wanting a second referendum to settle this question once and for all.
Far from taking back control we seem to have NO control at all.
They want to talk about kittens and hamsters instead...............
Eventually, Corbyn and his pigs from Animal Farm are going to have to explain how you pay for pre Thatcher state spending with post Thatcher levels of taxation.
I'm willing to pay more income tax, why isnt Corbyn willing to admit that he will put it up to pay for those great socialist projects?
The People are entitled to know.
https://goo.gl/yvBRDJ
The UHNWIs are very mobile indeed, but they're not likely to fall within any national tax jurisdiction.
The state of play is a cutting of the deficit of £6.6 billion to £50.0 billion in the 9 months of the fiscal year so far. The OBR not so long ago thought we would see borrowing rise by an increase of £3.9 billion across the year - so if we tread even on Wednesday, they could be £10bn wrong.
If things go right for the government in the next three months, it is not unreasonably to think we could hit the £37-38bn mark, which was in fact, exactly what the OBR originally forecasted two years ago.
That really would show up Osborne's Emergency Budget Project Fear pantomime for what it was. Fingers crossed!