Getting a bit sick of football and to a lesser extent other sports being used as some kind of wider arena of societies morals or pet projects . The shoelaces for gay pride or the countless minutes silences (or applause) or anti racism 'initiatives' etc Footballers dive, and cheat and spit and argue with the ref and swear etc . God knows why its picked for any cause to advance itself. I like football , I always have but I don't like all the connections it seems to have these days
I didn't realise how good Red Ed's speech must have been until I read the start of the article by a certain Mr Dan Hodges
"There is an outside chance that Labour could still win the next election – we may yet see Ed Miliband strolling confidently up Downing Street one sunny morning in May 2015."
This is the man who for the last two years has said repeatedly ( at least twice a week) that Ed M will never be PM.
Astounded!
Dan Hodges is using philophronesis, a rhetorical device which aims to disarm adversaries and capture their attention through the use of mild speech and the promise of a desired outcome.
I'm not comfortable with the sentence that he received originally, but given that he has served it and appears to be remorseful, it seems wrong to prevent him from successfully taking up a job with high pay that he would have earned on merit - that would be an additional punishment. On the other hand, football is part of the entertainment industry and clubs are entitled to say that non-footballing reasons can influence whether a potential recruit is suitable for them.
In short, I'm not sure what I think.
Once any criminal has paid the debt imposed for his or her crime by the courts, whether that be incarceration or financial, the should have the right to seek to make their livelihood back in society.
At the same time, employers should have the right, within reason, to take into account an individual's past in deciding whether to employ them. For less serious crimes, there should be some limit to how long that should last (it would be wrong for someone to have their employment chances affected because they nicked a few sweets from a shop when they were 12), but for serious crimes - say, where a prison sentance of 5 years or more has been imposed - I wouldn't have any limit on the rehabilitation period.
I'd disagree with antifrank that these conditions, and the consequences that follow from them, amount to an additional punishment. In reailty, they're part and parcel of the same punishment and it would be unrealistic and wrong to expect a former jailbird have exactly the same opportunities as anyone else, the moment they emerge from prison. If, however, an employer is willing to take him on, in the full knowledge of his past, then fair play to both sides.
The Ed's prior squeeze seems to be ditching the beeb to be an evil banker...
BBC News Press Team @BBCNewsPR 6m We're sad to say that BBC Economics Editor, @BBCStephanie is to leave the BBC in November for a new role with J.P Morgan Asset Management
Getting a bit sick of football and to a lesser extent other sports being used as some kind of wider arena of societies morals or pet projects
Another thing that grates is the flaming torches, dramatic music, ticker tape, pink smoke, dancing girls etc etc etc that accompany so many sports.
The people who have turned up are generally enthusiasts. Why not just have the teams run out and have the atmosphere build naturally?
One of the very first live games shown on Sky was a Everton v Liverpool derby. At the start the teams were met by cheerleaders and fireworks. At half time we were entertained by two ten foot model sumo wrestlers wearing blue and red and after the match we were back to the cheerleaders and fireworks. I remember vividly so many people after the match saying "What the f*** was that all about"....now a days these silly thing are taken as a given in the whole "footballing experience" of a matchday.
Getting a bit sick of football and to a lesser extent other sports being used as some kind of wider arena of societies morals or pet projects
Another thing that grates is the flaming torches, dramatic music, ticker tape, pink smoke, dancing girls etc etc etc that accompany so many sports.
The people who have turned up are generally enthusiasts. Why not just have the teams run out and have the atmosphere build naturally?
Yes , Taffys - I was lucky to get first day tickets to the Ashes at Trent Bridge this summer and was shocked a sport normally as classy as cricket put on hideous playings of the national anthems , fireworks and some guard of honour . Ridiculous and was proud I did not join in or stand up for it
How illogical of the energy companies to suggest a blackout if their profits are capped.If there is a blackout they will not be able to charge customers for energy they don't receive.
Given the likely Labour candidates for London Mayor seem to be narrowing to Sadiq Khan, Tessa Jowell, David Lammy, Robin Whales and Lord Adonis isnt there likely to be some value in backing the 1st three of those (generally 12s / 14) in the expectation that any Labour candidate will come in to close enough to evens at some point in the race. If it is an open selection as Ed promised then Tessa looks the best bet to me at current odds.
I'm not comfortable with the sentence that he received originally, but given that he has served it and appears to be remorseful, it seems wrong to prevent him from successfully taking up a job with high pay that he would have earned on merit - that would be an additional punishment. On the other hand, football is part of the entertainment industry and clubs are entitled to say that non-footballing reasons can influence whether a potential recruit is suitable for them.
In short, I'm not sure what I think.
Those are two different questions: firstly whether the sentence was appropriately and secondly whether there is a further appropriate punishment.
The issue with the second is that if you cast people into the outer darkness for ever then you remove their incentive to reform and become a contributing member of society. The tendency to create thoughtless mobs is my biggest concern with twitter.
How illogical of the energy companies to suggest a blackout if their profits are capped.If there is a blackout they will not be able to charge customers for energy they don't receive.
I don't think they mean they will go on strike. More that investment will not happen that might then cause them
Jeez who needs to boost the atmosphere at a merseyside derby?
At the millenium stadium when the roofs closed there's sometimes so much smoke its difficult to see for the kick off.
I still remember my dear old dad staring up at the fireworks as the players came out at the start of the match wondering what the hell was going on. He went down stairs for a pint at half time, god know whats set of expletives he would have come out with if he seen the ten foot over sized puppet babies bouncing around the centre circle being egged on by a cockney with a microphone.
Though the Gwladys Street did ask them the question "What the f***ing hell is that".
@Neil - A long time to wait and there are always twists and turns in such markets, with early favourites dropping out and new runners appearing on the radar, so I personally wouldn't try to hedge this early. I agree Tessa looks quite a likely contender - in fact I checked the odds on her earlier today but I wasn't quite convinced it's currently a worthwhile bet.
I'm not comfortable with the sentence that he received originally, but given that he has served it and appears to be remorseful, it seems wrong to prevent him from successfully taking up a job with high pay that he would have earned on merit - that would be an additional punishment. On the other hand, football is part of the entertainment industry and clubs are entitled to say that non-footballing reasons can influence whether a potential recruit is suitable for them.
In short, I'm not sure what I think.
As one of PB's few advocates of rehabilitation and creative sentencing, even I can understand why West Ham fans and owners pulled the plug on the deal, given the nature of the crime.
He meets my criteria for rehabilitation and second chances.
He's served a sentence for his crime, he's expressed remorse, he's built a life for himself, and the risk of re-offending must be low.
Still don't know why they insist of playing national anthems at football internationals as a) its nothing to do with football and b) they are never respected anyway. At least with rugby only (a) applies . As for cricket ,words fail me why an anthem (or Jerusalem) needs to be belted out before bails are put on
How illogical of the energy companies to suggest a blackout if their profits are capped.If there is a blackout they will not be able to charge customers for energy they don't receive.
Rose, think of it like this.
You have a shop and you sell eggs for 20p each. You buy them at 15p, bring them to a convenient place for your customers and sell them for a bit more. Sometimes you don't sell them all, but most times you do.
The price you have to pay goes up to 25p, but you are bound by law to sell them at 20p. You can't have more because there aren't any to buy (that's why the price you pay has gone up).
I think the fact she addressed the fringe meeting for the main contenders for Labour's nomination means she is thinking very seriously of running. Also friends let it be known that she would only serve one term and hey presto Eddie Izzard says he will run ... in 2020.
I think it's coming together but presumably the price wont come in too much until she really hints she's standing.
Given the likely Labour candidates for London Mayor seem to be narrowing to Sadiq Khan, Tessa Jowell, David Lammy, Robin Whales and Lord Adonis isnt there likely to be some value in backing the 1st three of those (generally 12s / 14) in the expectation that any Labour candidate will come in to close enough to evens at some point in the race. If it is an open selection as Ed promised then Tessa looks the best bet to me at current odds.
@Neil - A long time to wait and there are always twists and turns in such markets, with early favourites dropping out and new runners appearing on the radar, so I personally wouldn't try to hedge this early. I agree Tessa looks quite a likely contender - in fact I checked the odds on her earlier today but I wasn't quite convinced it's currently a worthwhile bet.
Without wanting to sound ageist and ungallant, wouldn't Dame Tessa Jowell's age (she'll be 69 in 2016) be a factor? (I know Ken was 67 in 2012)
Add in the problems with her mortgage in the past, you can imagine the sort of campaign the Tory strategists would run
...as Ed promised then Tessa looks the best bet to me at current odds.
Best-bets from:
JML (as advised by "The 'Red-Socialist' Labour Party"), Dvaid Mills (a lawyer with a criminal - albeit in Italy - record), Silvio Burlesconi (a man facing a time in Italy's jails than his painful assault by some eejit with a statuete), and...?
I think the fact she addressed the fringe meeting for the main contenders for Labour's nomination means she is thinking very seriously of running. Also friends let it be known that she would only serve one term and hey presto Eddie Izzard says he will run ... in 2020.
I think it's coming together but presumably the price wont come in too much until she really hints she's standing.
Did you see this?
Iain Dale @IainDale: On my @lbc973 show @jowellt just told me she is "seriously thinking about" putting herself forward for London Mayor in 2016.
That was what got me looking at the odds. Could be worth a punt - I was tempted at 14/1 (PP)
This is what makes Ed Mili the greatest opposition leader in my lifetime. Redefining politics #Murdoch #Syria #Big6
pic.twitter.com/pBd2qTqfZf
George Eaton@georgeeaton25m Several energy companies pledging to freeze prices until 2017. Miliband changing capitalism from opposition. pic.twitter.com/JmdbqODW0g
I hadnt - I was going on her appearance at the fringe / comments around Eddie Izzard's announcement. I think 14/1 is good value. If it was an open selection then her name recognition is better than the others and the fact that she's viewed as a Blairite not so toxic.
This is what makes Ed Mili the greatest opposition leader in my lifetime. Redefining politics #Murdoch #Syria #Big6
pic.twitter.com/pBd2qTqfZf
George Eaton@georgeeaton25m Several energy companies pledging to freeze prices until 2017. Miliband changing capitalism from opposition. pic.twitter.com/JmdbqODW0g
What Ed didn't talk about in his speech: tackling the defecit, what cuts he would make, how he would grow the economy, whether he would trust the British people and let them have a say on their future in Europe, no mention on dealing with Britains Welfare - something for nothing culture, nothing on education, or how he would improve the NHS. Just populist short term headline grabbers and a massive lurch to the left. I had better get my passport renewed just in case people are actually stupid enough put him in power
Perhaps you think the energy company is thinking, crikey that Ed's well hard, let's offer a fixed deal now at a massive loss but so we keep him happy.....
What I can't get over is that so many Lefties are totally misunderstanding a spot price limited customer offer [like a fixed term mortgage term] and HMG freezing all prices.
They just don't get the difference at all and think the energy firms are somehow responding to EdM's speech - they aren't - they're using it as advertising copy to promote existing deals FFS.
This is what makes Ed Mili the greatest opposition leader in my lifetime. Redefining politics #Murdoch #Syria #Big6
pic.twitter.com/pBd2qTqfZf
George Eaton@georgeeaton25m Several energy companies pledging to freeze prices until 2017. Miliband changing capitalism from opposition. pic.twitter.com/JmdbqODW0g
Thinking about 2016, anyone else think George Galloway in 2016 at 66/1* maybe value.
Assuming Ed wins in 2015, Labour could become unpopular, Boris will probably be trying to become Tory leader, so both major parties could be a bit toxic, step forward George Galloway on a populist wave?
Thinking about 2016, anyone else think George Galloway in 2016 at 66/1 maybe value.
Assuming Ed wins in 2015, Labour could become unpopular, Boris will probably be trying to become Tory leader, so both major parties could be a bit toxic, step forward George Galloway on a populist wave?
No. Nah. Nein, Nein, Nein. Nada. Nooooo. Not On Your Nellie.
Plato - Headlines the other day "Ed M to Freeze energy prices". Headlines yesterday"Tories say it would cause blackout, it could never happen" "Energy companies attack Freeze". Tomorrows headlines "Energy companies to freeze energy prices until 2017". What does that look like to the man on the street?
Thinking about 2016, anyone else think George Galloway in 2016 at 66/1 maybe value.
Assuming Ed wins in 2015, Labour could become unpopular, Boris will probably be trying to become Tory leader, so both major parties could be a bit toxic, step forward George Galloway on a populist wave?
No. Nah. Nein, Nein, Nein. Nada. Nooooo. Not On Your Nellie.
[with apologies to SeanT for the plagiarism]
Thanks, I just wanted confirmation that this would be a sub-optimal betting strategy.
What I can't get over is that so many Lefties are totally misunderstanding a spot price limited customer offer [like a fixed term mortgage term] and HMG freezing all prices.
They just don't get the difference at all and think the energy firms are somehow responding to EdM's speech - they aren't - they're using it as advertising copy to promote existing deals FFS.
They realise in their hearts of hearts that it's a major, major blunder and are casting around in the hope of finding scraps of evidence that it might not be such a disaster after all.
@TSE If you can get odds of 66/1 on me becoming next Mayor of London, you'd be better advised betting on me than on George Galloway. In the interests of full disclosure, I have no intention of standing.
Laura Kuenssberg @ITVLauraK Energy firms, big and small, are writing to main parties to call meetings, concerns over lack of political consensus + effect on investment
What I can't get over is that so many Lefties are totally misunderstanding a spot price limited customer offer [like a fixed term mortgage term] and HMG freezing all prices.
They just don't get the difference at all and think the energy firms are somehow responding to EdM's speech - they aren't - they're using it as advertising copy to promote existing deals FFS.
They realise in their hearts of hearts that it's a major, major blunder and are casting around in the hope of finding scraps of evidence that it might not be such a disaster after all.
This is what makes Ed Mili the greatest opposition leader in my lifetime. Redefining politics #Murdoch #Syria #Big6
pic.twitter.com/pBd2qTqfZf
George Eaton@georgeeaton25m Several energy companies pledging to freeze prices until 2017. Miliband changing capitalism from opposition. pic.twitter.com/JmdbqODW0g
Now that is one hell of a PR scoop for Red Ed!
Urrrm, they're almost certainly setting prices according to long-term deals they've done for supply of power, as was explained on here yesterday. I haven't seen the details, but I bet the price-per-unit of these deals for the consumer are far from being the cheapest deal on the market at the moment, and above anything Ed would set.
ISTR these sorts of deals have been available for some time - I think SSE offered us one when we moved two years ago. We couldn't take it up as we knew we'd be moving again before the end of the term.
That's another point: if it's like the deal I was offered, it ties the customer in with the provider for the period of the deal. This gives the provider a captive customer and almost-guaranteed income.
What Ed wanted was for the government to set the price irrespective of the deals the power companies had. Surely you can see the difference between the two?
Oh, and as it's SSE, I bet they've got the ludicrous tie-in with Cancer Research or a.n.other charity. Give me the ten quid a year, and I'll choose who I'll give money to, thanks.
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
@TSE If you can get odds of 66/1 on me becoming next Mayor of London, you'd be better advised betting on me than on George Galloway. In the interests of full disclosure, I have no intention of standing.
I'd move back to London just so I could vote for you.
What I can't get over is that so many Lefties are totally misunderstanding a spot price limited customer offer [like a fixed term mortgage term] and HMG freezing all prices.
They just don't get the difference at all and think the energy firms are somehow responding to EdM's speech - they aren't - they're using it as advertising copy to promote existing deals FFS.
They realise in their hearts of hearts that it's a major, major blunder
He says, whilst his Party's top "brains" are locked in a darkened room, ordering another pizza, scrabbling around trying to work out how to respond to Miliband with an energy pledge of their own...
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
SSHHH ....we are not allowed to tak about that....it's not on the Grid.
What I can't get over is that so many Lefties are totally misunderstanding a spot price limited customer offer [like a fixed term mortgage term] and HMG freezing all prices.
It has been observed on here many times that most people (including journalists and politicians) are woefully ignorant when it comes to matters of finance and economics, or even basic mathematics if they happen to be Labour MPs.
It's depressing that such important matters have to be dumbed-down to something like a shopping analogy for most people to grasp what it means. Because of that Ed's got a good of winning voters over with this daft policy.
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
I'm still surprised that many posters persist in referring to tim by singular rather than plural pronouns... the last day or so is presumably explained by a catastrophic failure of holiday co-ordination.
"But he urged customers to consider longer-term deals where the price is set for several years. Scottish Power, for example, has a Fixed Price Energy January 2017 tariff. Fixed till that date, it equates to a typical annual cost of £1,350"
Does anyone know the typical annual cost for a fixed price deal now?
He says, whilst his Party's top "brains" are locked in a darkened room, ordering another pizza, scrabbling around trying to work out how to respond to Miliband with an energy pledge of their own...
The disaster is not political, it is the effect on investment.
The question is, is Ed Miliband so staggeringly ignorant that he really doesn't understand that no-one is going to be keen to commit to investing £110bn in an environment of regulatory uncertainty, or so staggeringly irresponsible that he doesn't care?
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
it's not on the Grid.
Bit like electricity if Ed Miliband becomes PM.
(See what I did there? Satire, Rightwing style, right in your face)
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
I'm still surprised that many posters persist in referring to tim by singular rather than plural pronouns... the last day or so is presumably explained by a catastrophic failure of holiday co-ordination.
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
I'm still surprised that many posters persist in referring to tim by singular rather than plural pronouns... the last day or so is presumably explained by a catastrophic failure of holiday co-ordination.
I'm sort of expecting the Conservatives to have a riposte on the cost of living question. If I had to guess, I'd guess it would be to do with petrol prices rather than energy bills.
It will no doubt be just as ill-thought-through, would-be populist, actively harmful and liable to fall apart under examination as Labour's.
How illogical of the energy companies to suggest a blackout if their profits are capped.If there is a blackout they will not be able to charge customers for energy they don't receive.
Brownouts are more likely than blackouts.
The cause probably wouldn't be energy companies taking their ball home: it would be lack of generating capacity. In his infinite wisdom, Ed chose to shut down loads of power stations whilst at DECC, yet did not allow enough generating capacity to be built to replace the closures. (*) Worse, AIUI he set in place schemes that make the whole baseload-generation business more marginal.
Energy companies can only sell energy they have. If they can't generate enough, you'll get brown- or black- outs. If you want them to build more stations, you need to make it profitable for them to do so.
(*) In one case, Kingsnorth, he changed his mind a month after a luvvie handbagged him, threatening to hand in his OBE if the scheme went ahead. Either it was a coincidence, or that's the sort of weak-willed leader Labour have ...
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
I'm still surprised that many posters persist in referring to tim by singular rather than plural pronouns... the last day or so is presumably explained by a catastrophic failure of holiday co-ordination.
Q: How can energy companies game the Ed Milliband freeze. A1: First have all contracts with an end date after which the customer automatically goes onto a "standard", but higher, tariff. (Something they already do) A2: Have all its new contracts run at prices through 2016 and 2017 that are highly unlikely to lose money on tariffs fixed pre GE 2015. Then sit back and focus on avoiding all the price sensitive internet customers who currently enjoy lower than average prices. Also hire most of the experts in OFGEM to reduce OFGEMs ability to challenge what you are doing and hire banks of lawyers to tie the Govt down for 5 years. PS Pay for all these extra folk through using their salaries to suppress the short term profits.
(*) In one case, Kingsnorth, he changed his mind a month after a luvvie handbagged him, threatening to hand in his OBE if the scheme went ahead. Either it was a coincidence, or that's the sort of weak-willed leader Labour have ...
He says, whilst his Party's top "brains" are locked in a darkened room, ordering another pizza, scrabbling around trying to work out how to respond to Miliband with an energy pledge of their own...
The disaster is not political, it is the effect on investment.
The question is, is Ed Miliband so staggeringly ignorant that he really doesn't understand that no-one is going to be keen to commit to investing £110bn in an environment of regulatory uncertainty, or so staggeringly irresponsible that he doesn't care?
o/t tim couldnt be here today but I just know he would have wanted to point out the irony in the former Tory Treasurer's involvement in the LIBOR scandal after Osborne's rather pathetic attempts to link Labour to the issue last year.
I'm still surprised that many posters persist in referring to tim by singular rather than plural pronouns... the last day or so is presumably explained by a catastrophic failure of holiday co-ordination.
Has @Tory Treasury tweeted anything about the Energy Price Fix - If not, why not?
That;s a good point RR.
Partly they are rattled I guess, and partly Cameron is a bit of a counter puncher by nature. He quite likes assessing the full force of the opposition's blow before landing one of his own.
That's another point: if it's like the deal I was offered, it ties the customer in with the provider for the period of the deal. This gives the provider a captive customer and almost-guaranteed income.
Exactly, such deals are offered to reduce churn as the cost of customer acquisition is very high. You get similar tariff offers for lots of services. They are not designed to save YOU money.
Has @Tory Treasury tweeted anything about the Energy Price Fix - If not, why not?
That;s a good point RR.
Partly they are rattled I guess, and partly Cameron is a bit of a counter puncher by nature. He quite likes assessing the full force of the opposition's blow before landing one of his own.
Perhaps something to do with the fact they have a conference next week which would be the perfect venue for it. Also, isn't their an unwritten rule that you don't announce policies during your opponent's conference?
Has @Tory Treasury tweeted anything about the Energy Price Fix - If not, why not?
That;s a good point RR.
Partly they are rattled I guess, and partly Cameron is a bit of a counter puncher by nature. He quite likes assessing the full force of the opposition's blow before landing one of his own.
Can't leave it any longer surely, or he will look as if he has been outmaneuvered. If he waits until the conference, it will look weak.
Could be, but if so it's rather odd to be ruthless in a way which, if successful, would land him with a humdinger of a mess to clear up and no time or money to clear it up. I mean, the Brown approach was to try to stuff his opponents with booby traps, it's a novel twist on Brownism to lay booby traps for yourself.
The disaster is not political, it is the effect on investment.
The question is, is Ed Miliband so staggeringly ignorant that he really doesn't understand that no-one is going to be keen to commit to investing £110bn in an environment of regulatory uncertainty, or so staggeringly irresponsible that he doesn't care?
See, the problem with democracy is that we have these election things, ahead of which there is often considerable doubt about the governance of the country in the next decade, naturally including the regulatory environment. Somehow, despite this, we seem to have muddled along with investment taking place. There have even been tales, wild and outlandish I'm sure, of private companies being willing to enter into areas of business where [shock] price caps are already known to be in place, and [shockier] the future level of those caps cannot be determined with certainty. Somehow, I guess, they think they can make money. Guess it's that private sector efficiency that we hear about from time to time.
Seriously, and with due apologies for the level of snark above, this is not a paradigm shift (would that it were so brave), it's tinkering round the edges. If you believe that moving wealth from big business to everyone else benefits you, even after taking pensions etc into account, it's probably a good thing. If you don't, you're likely to be in a pretty small minority, but you won't like it.
And on the question of investment, most listed companies invest the least they can to maintain their share price on a short- to mid-term horizon. Whilst totally acknowledging the point of view of the posters here who believe we face an energy crisis pretty soon (they understand, I don't know that much about it, so I'm happy to believe they're disinterestedly right), let's be realistic: if the energy companies see an attractive return on investment, they'd be investing enough already. They're not. They're sitting on cash piles in a period of unprecentedly low borrowing rates. If this stuff is going to get built, government is going to pick up the tab one way or another - it doesn't seem credible to suggest that companies who are currently investing too little were just about to spring into action and start spending, but now won't because of a 20-month hit to their super-profits.
He chooses not to, He is unable, He has finally found a life, or He has a Brummie sacrascm that is waiting to explode...?
His "PBUOGHSO" is as tedious as my next music video - which will be Skunk-n-Ansie (save a slight "keyboard-error"). In the meantime does anyone have some classic, childhood music...?
I wonder when Caroline Flint stopped being intensely relaxed about Peter Mandelson being filthy rich off the back of his interests in energy companies?
Hur hur hur.... Labour. File under "Ferrets in a sack".
Could be, but if so it's rather odd to be ruthless in a way which, if successful, would land him with a humdinger of a mess to clear up and no time or money to clear it up. I mean, the Brown approach was to try to stuff his opponents with booby traps, it's a novel twist on Brownism to lay booby traps for yourself.
There was also another Labour figure so desperate to become PM that he encouraged many people to do desperate evil stupid things. It is that person that Ed Milliband is copying through promising economically illiterate policies. Ed's teacher was Gordon Brown.
Has @Tory Treasury tweeted anything about the Energy Price Fix - If not, why not?
That;s a good point RR.
Partly they are rattled I guess, and partly Cameron is a bit of a counter puncher by nature. He quite likes assessing the full force of the opposition's blow before landing one of his own.
Can't leave it any longer surely, or he will look as if he has been outmaneuvered. If he waits until the conference, it will look weak.
I am guessing Miliband has taken the wind out of the Tory sails(Do yachts have sails I hear you ask)
They turned up for the debate they have prepared for three years and suddenly realised someone has changed the topic.
How illogical of the energy companies to suggest a blackout if their profits are capped.If there is a blackout they will not be able to charge customers for energy they don't receive.
Brownouts are more likely than blackouts.
Energy companies can only sell energy they have. If they can't generate enough, you'll get brown- or black- outs. If you want them to build more stations, you need to make it profitable for them to do so.
Hmn. 'Make it profitable for them', eh?
Honestly, leaving aside Ed's policy, don't you think this all highlights a horrible flaw in our energy sector? The "market" simply doesn't serve us very well. We need a new structure, public and private working in partnership (part renationalisation / heavier subsidies and regulation if necessary, like the railways).
Energy is one of those awkward natural monopolies where market forces will always fail us miserably.
The alternative might be to encourage more, healthier competition. This seems to be where Labour want to go. But I can't see that working. In fact, it might just encourage even more short-termism, and make matters worse.
He chooses not to, He is unable, He has finally found a life, or He has a Brummie sacrascm that is waiting to explode...?
His "PBUOGHSO" is as tedious as my next music video - which will be Skunk-n-Ansie (save a slight "keyboard-error"). In the meantime does anyone have some classic, childhood music...?
My assumption would be point number one. Though if I was Tim, I would be highly impressed about the number of posts on here that contain his name since he stopped posting.
Comments
I like football , I always have but I don't like all the connections it seems to have these days
Lab maj: 2.94
Con maj: 3.50
No maj: 2.42
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490
At this point before the last election, in October 2008, YouGov asked:
Do you believe the Conservatives today are or are not ready for government?
Ready 43%
YouGov asked the same question about Labour on 16 September:
Do you believe the Labour Party today are or are not ready for government?
Ready 22%
Similarly, 19 months before the last election, YouGov asked:
Do you believe that at the moment David Cameron does or does not look like a prime minister in waiting?
He does look like a PM in waiting 49%
And they asked the same question about Ed Miliband this month:
Do you believe that at the moment Ed Miliband does or does not look like a prime minister in waiting?
He does look like a PM in waiting 12%"
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/09/26/ed-the-unready/
Another thing that grates is the flaming torches, dramatic music, ticker tape, pink smoke, dancing girls etc etc etc that accompany so many sports.
The people who have turned up are generally enthusiasts. Why not just have the teams run out and have the atmosphere build naturally?
At the same time, employers should have the right, within reason, to take into account an individual's past in deciding whether to employ them. For less serious crimes, there should be some limit to how long that should last (it would be wrong for someone to have their employment chances affected because they nicked a few sweets from a shop when they were 12), but for serious crimes - say, where a prison sentance of 5 years or more has been imposed - I wouldn't have any limit on the rehabilitation period.
I'd disagree with antifrank that these conditions, and the consequences that follow from them, amount to an additional punishment. In reailty, they're part and parcel of the same punishment and it would be unrealistic and wrong to expect a former jailbird have exactly the same opportunities as anyone else, the moment they emerge from prison. If, however, an employer is willing to take him on, in the full knowledge of his past, then fair play to both sides.
BBC News Press Team @BBCNewsPR 6m
We're sad to say that BBC Economics Editor, @BBCStephanie is to leave the BBC in November for a new role with J.P Morgan Asset Management
Jumpers for goalposts, I say.
* Too cryptic: StJohn is from the manor...
Jeez who needs to boost the atmosphere at a merseyside derby?
At the millenium stadium when the roofs closed there's sometimes so much smoke its difficult to see for the kick off.
The issue with the second is that if you cast people into the outer darkness for ever then you remove their incentive to reform and become a contributing member of society. The tendency to create thoughtless mobs is my biggest concern with twitter.
Though the Gwladys Street did ask them the question "What the f***ing hell is that".
Good for you. I get embarrassed by the teary eyed warbling of land of my fathers at the millenium before a game.
As I age I realise that in sport today's winners are mostly tomorrow's losers, and so it pays to be gracious both in victory and defeat,.
meet with triumph and disaster and all that.....
He meets my criteria for rehabilitation and second chances.
He's served a sentence for his crime, he's expressed remorse, he's built a life for himself, and the risk of re-offending must be low.
Edit: Can we please stop talking about football.
You have a shop and you sell eggs for 20p each. You buy them at 15p, bring them to a convenient place for your customers and sell them for a bit more. Sometimes you don't sell them all, but most times you do.
The price you have to pay goes up to 25p, but you are bound by law to sell them at 20p. You can't have more because there aren't any to buy (that's why the price you pay has gone up).
What do you do?
I think the fact she addressed the fringe meeting for the main contenders for Labour's nomination means she is thinking very seriously of running. Also friends let it be known that she would only serve one term and hey presto Eddie Izzard says he will run ... in 2020.
I think it's coming together but presumably the price wont come in too much until she really hints she's standing.
Unless David Blanchflower is the replacement at the Beeb!!
George Eaton@georgeeaton14m
Stephanie Flanders (@BBCStephanie) leaving the Beeb for JP Morgan. Big loss.
Add in the problems with her mortgage in the past, you can imagine the sort of campaign the Tory strategists would run
JML (as advised by "The 'Red-Socialist' Labour Party"),
Dvaid Mills (a lawyer with a criminal - albeit in Italy - record),
Silvio Burlesconi (a man facing a time in Italy's jails than his painful assault by some eejit with a statuete), and...?
Our resident Soilent-"Green" [Donegal]. You-pays-youse-monies....
Iain Dale @IainDale: On my @lbc973 show @jowellt just told me she is "seriously thinking about" putting herself forward for London Mayor in 2016.
That was what got me looking at the odds. Could be worth a punt - I was tempted at 14/1 (PP)
Éoin Clarke @DrEoinCl
This is what makes Ed Mili the greatest opposition leader in my lifetime. Redefining politics #Murdoch #Syria #Big6
pic.twitter.com/pBd2qTqfZf
George Eaton@georgeeaton25m
Several energy companies pledging to freeze prices until 2017. Miliband changing capitalism from opposition. pic.twitter.com/JmdbqODW0g
I hadnt - I was going on her appearance at the fringe / comments around Eddie Izzard's announcement. I think 14/1 is good value. If it was an open selection then her name recognition is better than the others and the fact that she's viewed as a Blairite not so toxic.
tackling the defecit, what cuts he would make, how he would grow the economy, whether he would trust the British people and let them have a say on their future in Europe, no mention on dealing with Britains Welfare - something for nothing culture, nothing on education, or how he would improve the NHS. Just populist short term headline grabbers and a massive lurch to the left. I had better get my passport renewed just in case people are actually stupid enough put him in power
Perhaps you think the energy company is thinking, crikey that Ed's well hard, let's offer a fixed deal now at a massive loss but so we keep him happy.....
They just don't get the difference at all and think the energy firms are somehow responding to EdM's speech - they aren't - they're using it as advertising copy to promote existing deals FFS.
Assuming Ed wins in 2015, Labour could become unpopular, Boris will probably be trying to become Tory leader, so both major parties could be a bit toxic, step forward George Galloway on a populist wave?
*66/1 with a bookie i've never heard about
Mr. Rag (and others), I'm reasonably sure that fixed prices precede the Socialist Speech.
Also, the difference between a voluntary and involuntary action is rather significant.
[with apologies to SeanT for the plagiarism]
It is, of course, a disaster after all.
Oh wait...
Possibly.
Energy firms, big and small, are writing to main parties to call meetings, concerns over lack of political consensus + effect on investment
ISTR these sorts of deals have been available for some time - I think SSE offered us one when we moved two years ago. We couldn't take it up as we knew we'd be moving again before the end of the term.
That's another point: if it's like the deal I was offered, it ties the customer in with the provider for the period of the deal. This gives the provider a captive customer and almost-guaranteed income.
What Ed wanted was for the government to set the price irrespective of the deals the power companies had. Surely you can see the difference between the two?
Oh, and as it's SSE, I bet they've got the ludicrous tie-in with Cancer Research or a.n.other charity. Give me the ten quid a year, and I'll choose who I'll give money to, thanks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2009/07/the_prime_minis_2.html
Well it appears Ed doesn't want to use it either
Ed - Son of Brown
:warning-high-energy:
P.S. No football was involved with this post....
It's depressing that such important matters have to be dumbed-down to something like a shopping analogy for most people to grasp what it means. Because of that Ed's got a good of winning voters over with this daft policy.
This was published on Monday.
"But he urged customers to consider longer-term deals where the price is set for several years. Scottish Power, for example, has a Fixed Price Energy January 2017 tariff. Fixed till that date, it equates to a typical annual cost of £1,350"
Does anyone know the typical annual cost for a fixed price deal now?
The question is, is Ed Miliband so staggeringly ignorant that he really doesn't understand that no-one is going to be keen to commit to investing £110bn in an environment of regulatory uncertainty, or so staggeringly irresponsible that he doesn't care?
(See what I did there? Satire, Rightwing style, right in your face)
TSE will know what a Katra is!
We are hoping to replace the server tonight and there might be more down time
It will no doubt be just as ill-thought-through, would-be populist, actively harmful and liable to fall apart under examination as Labour's.
The cause probably wouldn't be energy companies taking their ball home: it would be lack of generating capacity. In his infinite wisdom, Ed chose to shut down loads of power stations whilst at DECC, yet did not allow enough generating capacity to be built to replace the closures. (*) Worse, AIUI he set in place schemes that make the whole baseload-generation business more marginal.
Energy companies can only sell energy they have. If they can't generate enough, you'll get brown- or black- outs. If you want them to build more stations, you need to make it profitable for them to do so.
(*) In one case, Kingsnorth, he changed his mind a month after a luvvie handbagged him, threatening to hand in his OBE if the scheme went ahead. Either it was a coincidence, or that's the sort of weak-willed leader Labour have ...
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/mar/16/the-age-of-stupid-renewableenergy
A1: First have all contracts with an end date after which the customer automatically goes onto a "standard", but higher, tariff. (Something they already do)
A2: Have all its new contracts run at prices through 2016 and 2017 that are highly unlikely to lose money on tariffs fixed pre GE 2015.
Then sit back and focus on avoiding all the price sensitive internet customers who currently enjoy lower than average prices. Also hire most of the experts in OFGEM to reduce OFGEMs ability to challenge what you are doing and hire banks of lawyers to tie the Govt down for 5 years. PS Pay for all these extra folk through using their salaries to suppress the short term profits.
That;s a good point RR.
Partly they are rattled I guess, and partly Cameron is a bit of a counter puncher by nature. He quite likes assessing the full force of the opposition's blow before landing one of his own.
Seriously, and with due apologies for the level of snark above, this is not a paradigm shift (would that it were so brave), it's tinkering round the edges. If you believe that moving wealth from big business to everyone else benefits you, even after taking pensions etc into account, it's probably a good thing. If you don't, you're likely to be in a pretty small minority, but you won't like it.
And on the question of investment, most listed companies invest the least they can to maintain their share price on a short- to mid-term horizon. Whilst totally acknowledging the point of view of the posters here who believe we face an energy crisis pretty soon (they understand, I don't know that much about it, so I'm happy to believe they're disinterestedly right), let's be realistic: if the energy companies see an attractive return on investment, they'd be investing enough already. They're not. They're sitting on cash piles in a period of unprecentedly low borrowing rates. If this stuff is going to get built, government is going to pick up the tab one way or another - it doesn't seem credible to suggest that companies who are currently investing too little were just about to spring into action and start spending, but now won't because of a 20-month hit to their super-profits.
If Wee-Timmy has not posted do we assume:
He chooses not to,
He is unable,
He has finally found a life, or
He has a Brummie sacrascm that is waiting to explode...?
His "PBUOGHSO" is as tedious as my next music video - which will be Skunk-n-Ansie (save a slight "keyboard-error"). In the meantime does anyone have some classic, childhood music...?
OK: keyboard-mishap....
Lulaby music: I was only two...!
Hur hur hur.... Labour. File under "Ferrets in a sack".
They turned up for the debate they have prepared for three years and suddenly realised someone has changed the topic.
For today, we are all tim.
Honestly, leaving aside Ed's policy, don't you think this all highlights a horrible flaw in our energy sector? The "market" simply doesn't serve us very well. We need a new structure, public and private working in partnership (part renationalisation / heavier subsidies and regulation if necessary, like the railways).
Energy is one of those awkward natural monopolies where market forces will always fail us miserably.
The alternative might be to encourage more, healthier competition. This seems to be where Labour want to go. But I can't see that working. In fact, it might just encourage even more short-termism, and make matters worse.