Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 2018 London Local Elections : The religious factors analys

13

Comments

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    in fact a good deal would have been more likely all along had the EU known we were serious about WTO as a fallback.

    We're not. We never were
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Deutsche Bank share price now below 9 EUR.

    Who goes bust first - Countrywide or Deutsche Bank ?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    No, 'beyond abysmal' for the Tories in London would have been losing Kensington and Chelsea, Wandsworth, Barnet, Hillingdon and Westminster which was possible. In the end the Tories held all the Labour target councils in London just losing Kingston upon Thames and Richmond Upon Thames to the LDs. For many wealthy upper middle class Londoners keeping out Corbynism clearly beat protesting about Brexit.

    While the Tories also did badly in some areas of outer London like Redbridge, with their loss of councillors in double figures, in other areas like Enfield and Waltham Forest the Tories did better than expected with their number of councillors virtually unchanged.
    The only result it stands comparison with is 1994. It's actually worse for the Conservatives than 1971.
    In London only
    Er yes, that is indeed what I (and indeed the thread as a whole) was discussing.
    The thread was actually about the religious vote (which I commented on earlier) using London as an example, rather than specifically about the London elections
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,472

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Do you have the figures for the car/automotive sector?
    Sadly no, the ONS doesn't give them as a subsection of 'engineering and vehicles' or if it does I've not been able to find it.
    Thanks.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Sandpit said:

    Here's an interesting Irish perspective.

    https://twitter.com/CloughOlive/status/1011858602670415872

    No, the interesting Irish perspective is Ireland is doing nothing re Brexit. So if Brexit is the catastrophe remainers claim, then Ireland is deep in the brown stuff - worse than we are . Yet currently they are working on business as usual post 2019.
    Because Ireland are banking on the EU insisting on a Brexit In Name Only worst of all case scenarios where we regain no control just simply lose our MEPs and voting rights.

    And as Theresa May and Hammond won't countenance no deal the Irish think they will get that.
    The chances are steadily increasing that we end up with no deal by default, as neither side is prepared to compromise to the extent required to get a deal.

    We should have approached the negotiations the other way around, starting with WTO terms and opting back in to things, rather than starting with the status quo and trying to selectively opt out.
    Indeed. Set WTO as a fallback and prepare for it. Doesn't mean we will end up with WTO, in fact a good deal would have been more likely all along had the EU known we were serious about WTO as a fallback.
    The question I guess is how things move forward from here.

    Our biggest leverage is the money, so perhaps we say that we are reallocating £10bn of the £39bn for no-deal preparations, and when a deal gets agreed we’ll stop spending the money and pass what’s left to the EU as previously agreed?

    That or try and get agreement to bring in an international group of arbitrators to thrash out a deal.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009

    I’ve asked Shadsy to price up Boris not standing in the next Tory leadership contest. Anyone got any ideas on what would be a good price?

    https://twitter.com/pickardje/status/1011708180286656513?s=21

    Boris is the most charismatic Tory in Parliament so will always be a potential contender but if he does not stand he might back Rees Mogg if he thinks he has a better chance of winning instead to annoy the Tory establishment, Rees Mogg has been tweeting positive things about Boris last week in contrast to some of his Cabinet colleagues
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    in fact a good deal would have been more likely all along had the EU known we were serious about WTO as a fallback.

    We're not. We never were
    Which is the problem, we should have been.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,472
    See I knew it.

    Gerry Adams is a man of exclusively peaceful means.

    https://twitter.com/sjamcbride/status/1011882031523954688?s=21
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    HYUFD said:


    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    No, 'beyond abysmal' for the Tories in London would have been losing Kensington and Chelsea, Wandsworth, Barnet, Hillingdon and Westminster which was possible. In the end the Tories held all the Labour target councils in London just losing Kingston upon Thames and Richmond Upon Thames to the LDs. For many wealthy upper middle class Londoners keeping out Corbynism clearly beat protesting about Brexit.

    While the Tories also did badly in some areas of outer London like Redbridge, with their loss of councillors in double figures, in other areas like Enfield and Waltham Forest the Tories did better than expected with their number of councillors virtually unchanged.
    The only result it stands comparison with is 1994. It's actually worse for the Conservatives than 1971.
    In London only
    Er yes, that is indeed what I (and indeed the thread as a whole) was discussing.
    The thread was actually about the religious vote (which I commented on earlier) using London as an example, rather than specifically about the London elections
    It's headed "The 2018 London Local Elections". I'm feeling on fairly strong ground here.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Which is the problem, we should have been.

    Not really. Building Unicorn stables would not have helped anybody.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,358
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    edited June 2018
    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college.

    The reaction of the liberal media if Trump wins a second term is going to be something to behold. They’ve already pretty much lost their minds about him.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    Alistair said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    The tone deafness of the 'civility police's is truly astonishing.
    It is indeed - but there is a difficult balance to be struck.
    The Democrats cannot win unless they also carry with them those who are made uncomfortable by the abandonment of civility - and by extension the same is likely true of the contest for the nomination.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,945
    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    Which is the problem, we should have been.

    Not really. Building Unicorn stables would not have helped anybody.
    No but building customs facilities in Dover would have.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,358
    Scott_P said:
    What effective answers is Blair offering?
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Mortimer said:

    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
    They don't think May is serious. Given we're still not preparing for No Deal why should they think we're serious?

    If they force the issue as their deal or no deal and May isn't prepared to accept No Deal then that means they get what they want. Its Game Theory 101.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    Mr. Royale, he's an advocate of a second referendum, is he not?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009
    Mortimer said:

    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
    The Commons has already voted against EEA by a 200 vote majority, with Corbyn refusing to back it too
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    No but building customs facilities in Dover would have.

    The Brexiteers who said this would be the easiest deal in history would stand up in parliament and then claim we need to concrete over Kent (instead of spending our Brexit dividend on the NHS)

    Nope, can't see any problems with that...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009
    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009
    edited June 2018
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college.

    The reaction of the liberal media if Trump wins a second term is going to be something to behold. They’ve already pretty much lost their minds about him.
    It actually suggests a win for Sanders or Warren and a populist leftist more than anything minority or no minority, Biden is going to have his hands full but so are Hillary style fiscal centrists.

    Populist economic leftism and anti globalisation politics may have more appeal in the rustbelt than wealthy parts of California and New York, it was Hillary's cultural left liberalism plus pro free trade pro corporation politics that was the problem for the Democrats in the Midwest
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Scott_P said:

    No but building customs facilities in Dover would have.

    The Brexiteers who said this would be the easiest deal in history would stand up in parliament and then claim we need to concrete over Kent (instead of spending our Brexit dividend on the NHS)

    Nope, can't see any problems with that...
    It would have been an easy deal if the EU thought WTO was a serious option.

    You wouldn't need to concrete over Kent and temporary facilities that can then be converted to permanent ones if necessary or removed if rendundant would be quite quick and cheap to develop.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,311
    Scott_P said:

    No but building customs facilities in Dover would have.

    The Brexiteers who said this would be the easiest deal in history would stand up in parliament and then claim we need to concrete over Kent (instead of spending our Brexit dividend on the NHS)

    Nope, can't see any problems with that...
    Don't be unfair. PB Leavers are only thinking of paving over "a bit" of the Green Belt.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    It would have been an easy deal if the EU thought WTO was a serious option.

    Wrong. And wrong.

    Apart from that...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,472
    edited June 2018
    Mortimer said:

    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
    As was observed yesterday Max Fac really doesn’t work so Mrs May is about to offer them a solution that does work.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Scott_P said:
    What effective answers is Blair offering?
    Many populists offer snake oil. But, many non-populists offer nothing, while feathering their own nests.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    She might have spent only 5 grand. Indeed my campaign provided infinite value for money, and I still beat the kippers.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    So we had record investment in engineering manufacturing in Q1 and the economy grew 0.1%?

    *hollow laughter*
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college.

    The reaction of the liberal media if Trump wins a second term is going to be something to behold. They’ve already pretty much lost their minds about him.
    Minorty votes for Dems fell in 2016. If African Americans had turned out for Hilary how they had turned out for Obama thrn Hilary would be president.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Scott_P said:

    No but building customs facilities in Dover would have.

    The Brexiteers who said this would be the easiest deal in history would stand up in parliament and then claim we need to concrete over Kent (instead of spending our Brexit dividend on the NHS)

    Nope, can't see any problems with that...
    It would have been an easy deal if the EU thought WTO was a serious option.

    You wouldn't need to concrete over Kent and temporary facilities that can then be converted to permanent ones if necessary or removed if rendundant would be quite quick and cheap to develop.
    I don't think it would have been an easy deal. But, we'd certainly get further if we were prepared for no deal. In the same way that if you want peace, prepare for war.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Ditto. Even more laughter.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,009
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Yes, Dent Coat looks like a one termer
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Are the figures inflation adjusted?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    If the Tories ever lost Kensington council, Kensington the westminster seat would be reasonably safe for labour due to the population distribution within the borough.
    Winning Kensington council is altogether harder for labour
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    If the Tories ever lost Kensington council, Kensington the westminster seat would be reasonably safe for labour due to the population distribution within the borough.
    Winning Kensington council is altogether harder for labour
    The Tories were slightly ahead in the wards making up Kensington constituency, in May.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    Given we have a massive trade deficit in goods with the EU and our strength is services . . .

    . . . can anyone please explain why we would want free trade in goods but to lose free trade in services?

    Its a point I have made before.

    The answer, such as it is, is that even although the net trade in goods is horrendously against us we do gain from some intermediate manufacturing in supply chains, particularly in car manufacturing, which we might lose if free flows in the trade of goods is impeded. Whether this would be offset by the advantages that our domestic producers would gain by reduced competition from Europe is really hard to predict.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Exactly, two camps which are unwilling to see or compromise at all.

    A Civil War Doesn't tend to end well for most people stuck in the middle.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Mortimer said:

    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
    As was observed yesterday Max Fac really doesn’t work so Mrs May is about to offer them a solution that does work.
    Could they not have called it Max Fac, I can only think of bloody make-up. Same with the Department for Exiting the EU, my mind immediately springs to God (And the machine)..
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Alistair said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Are the figures inflation adjusted?
    Yes.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Sean_F said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    If the Tories ever lost Kensington council, Kensington the westminster seat would be reasonably safe for labour due to the population distribution within the borough.
    Winning Kensington council is altogether harder for labour
    The Tories were slightly ahead in the wards making up Kensington constituency, in May.
    Battersea too.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,091
    Alistair said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Are the figures inflation adjusted?
    Yes, they're at current prices.
  • Options
    hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 642
    Alistair said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Are the figures inflation adjusted?
    Around 40% of uk investment is by the large car and aircraft groups. This is why they are so important if they stop investing it will be a disaster for the economy
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Is @Alanbrooke here? One interesting thing from those figures another_richard linked to is how much of a 'march of the makers' there has been since George Osborne took over. Manufacturing investment is now not just at a record high but up nearly 50% from its low point under Labour.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,311
    o/t

    where's @TwistedFireStopper I would really like his views on this.

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/25/grenfell-fire-chief-had-no-training-in-stay-put-policy-inquiry-told

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/26/grenfell-firefighters-unable-to-get-water-to-top-floors-inquiry-told

    No training on high-rise fires and, in the second article, saying that even if they had wanted to change the "Stay Put" policy they couldn't because they didn't have the resources. Presumably on the assumption that each evacuation would have had to be assisted?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Exactly, two camps which are unwilling to see or compromise at all.

    A Civil War Doesn't tend to end well for most people stuck in the middle.
    I sometimes wonder if the US is like Spain c.1935.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Pulpstar said:

    Mortimer said:

    Doesn’t really tally with the cabinet position of Max Fac.

    The article suggests the EU think they can force us into EEA. Despite our government telling them so many times that this is not our position.

    Can someone teach Selmayr what we are leaving the single market and customs union means?
    As was observed yesterday Max Fac really doesn’t work so Mrs May is about to offer them a solution that does work.
    Could they not have called it Max Fac, I can only think of bloody make-up. Same with the Department for Exiting the EU, my mind immediately springs to God (And the machine)..
    I blame Lynton for starting all this when he stole half of a well used phrase for stock market upticks for companies that have just plumetted in value.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Sadly that’s right. The story yesterday was of someone being kicked out of a restaurant in Washington because they worked for Trump. The US is close to returning to segregation, where one group of people eats in one room and a different group of people in another.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307

    Alistair said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.


    .
    Not just engineering manufacturing, as far as I can tell all manufacturing is at record highs too.
    1997 £24.795bn
    1998 £25.43bn
    1999 £24.815bn
    2000 £24.061bn
    2001 £21.12bn
    2002 £19.077bn
    2003 £18.078bn
    2004 £17.573bn
    2005 £18.751bn
    2006 £19.032bn
    2007 £20.381bn
    2008 £20.742bn
    2009 £16.674bn
    2010 £17.055bn
    2011 £19.411bn
    2012 £20.651bn
    2013 £21.237bn
    2014 £23.78bn
    2015 £25.359bn
    2016 £24.522bn
    2017 £26.851bn

    For 2018Q1 it is £6.863bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.
    Are the figures inflation adjusted?
    Around 40% of uk investment is by the large car and aircraft groups. This is why they are so important if they stop investing it will be a disaster for the economy
    Whilst that is true they seem to currently be investing record amounts. Which is not the mood music we are getting from the media or twittersphere.

    Having said that, I am cautious. I think at the moment there is a general assumption that we will get a sensible deal with the EU and things won't change much. What we have been hearing in the media in recent days is some exasperation that this has not been done already. I for one accept that the current uncertainty is not good for our economy even although it is clearly more robust than some figures would indicate.

    I also think it is fair to say that our investment record is not good and we have a lot of catching up to do. Even record levels of investment are not necessarily brilliant.
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    Er...which ones ? Richmond ?
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    edited June 2018
    DavidL said:

    Given we have a massive trade deficit in goods with the EU and our strength is services . . .

    . . . can anyone please explain why we would want free trade in goods but to lose free trade in services?

    Its a point I have made before.

    The answer, such as it is, is that even although the net trade in goods is horrendously against us we do gain from some intermediate manufacturing in supply chains, particularly in car manufacturing, which we might lose if free flows in the trade of goods is impeded. Whether this would be offset by the advantages that our domestic producers would gain by reduced competition from Europe is really hard to predict.
    The ESRI in Ireland published a research paper. where they applied the CET to the product groups. i.e they did not say average tariff of 3% and apply that to all goods. They said average tariff for processed food is actually X% and average tariff for textiles is Y%. They also applied price elasticity. They did not factor in customs.
    Because the tariffs vary wildly i.e 0% for pharma and med equipment but 40 odd percent for processed food. the results ranged for trade ceases completely to trade is unaffected.
    But in simple terms. because the economies of the EU and the UK are at the same level of development. trade both ways would decline by circa 45%. So food, textiles, carpets and other stuff stopped completely.
    The overall result was because of the same percentage fall. because the UK imports more than exports. the UK has a gap to fill and the rest of EU has products looking for new markets.
    This report was the basis of the Irish position papers on the effects of brexit, Irish agriculural exports to the UK cease, that then led to the hard line position of the Irish government. that the UK must stay in the customs union and single market and nothing else will do,
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    surby said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    Er...which ones ? Richmond ?
    Richmond Park would have been neck and neck, along with Croydon Central, while the Conservatives would have been slightly ahead in Battersea and Kensington.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    DavidL said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    So we had record investment in engineering manufacturing in Q1 and the economy grew 0.1%?

    *hollow laughter*
    What’s going on with the GDP stats, there’s obviously something big that’s changed that the ONS are not picking up?

    It surely can’t be that there’s a systemic problem with those in change of the statistics disagreeing with the government over a major policy issue, and choosing their numbers carefully in order to show their own views?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    So we had record investment in engineering manufacturing in Q1 and the economy grew 0.1%?

    *hollow laughter*
    What’s going on with the GDP stats, there’s obviously something big that’s changed that the ONS are not picking up?

    It surely can’t be that there’s a systemic problem with those in change of the statistics disagreeing with the government over a major policy issue, and choosing their numbers carefully in order to show their own views?
    I think it's more that flash estimates of economic growth are inherently unreliable.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    So we had record investment in engineering manufacturing in Q1 and the economy grew 0.1%?

    *hollow laughter*
    What’s going on with the GDP stats, there’s obviously something big that’s changed that the ONS are not picking up?

    It surely can’t be that there’s a systemic problem with those in change of the statistics disagreeing with the government over a major policy issue, and choosing their numbers carefully in order to show their own views?
    While manufacturing is doing well the high street isn't and that represents a bigger share of the economy. I suspect the high street is probably over-sampled in the ONS figures though.

    That's just a guess.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Good no reason for that anomaly. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:
    However sensible the arguments Blair might put forward, the fact that it is him making them discredits them.
    Has he not yet realised that any public intervention he makes is utterly counterproductive ?
    Also it's not a solution. The reason why 'popularists' are succeeding at least electorally is because of the failure of the 'old' mainstream.

    Not just failure of their policies, but failure to communicate and listen to people. That failure is just as, if not more important. The disconnect between politicans and the people is oh so clear to see.
    Blair has a nerve criticising populists given how often he tried to claim that the size of his election victories meant that Labour was the representative of the British people. He was all in favour of populism when it benefited him.

    Second, had he not repeatedly doubled down on his disastrous immigration policies (while at the same time saying that he would do something about peoples’s concerns and doing nothing) especially in the years before the accession countries joined, it is very likely that FoM would never have become the toxic issue it did. Blair more than anyone is responsible for the situation we now face. He begat the immigration issue, Corbyn and distrust in politicians.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Same here, though I think we'd be better off in the EEA.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    So yet again actual data on business investment in engineering manufacturing isn't commented upon.

    This is the actual ONS data for business investment, at current prices, in the 'engineering and vehicles' manufacturing sector:

    1997 £9.247bn
    1998 £9.165bn
    1999 £8.763bn
    2000 £8.730bn
    2001 £7.797bn
    2002 £6.809bn
    2003 £6.139bn
    2004 £5.989bn
    2005 £6.678bn
    2006 £6.728bn
    2007 £6.927bn
    2008 £7.836bn
    2009 £6.902bn
    2010 £6.838bn
    2011 £7.854bn
    2012 £8.729bn
    2013 £8.630bn
    2014 £10.286bn
    2015 £10.540bn
    2016 £9.946bn
    2017 £11.225bn

    From page 4 of the spreadsheet on this link:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/datasets/businessinvestmentbyindustryandasset

    For 2018Q1 it is £2.722bn, which is the highest Q1 figure on record.

    Clearly people prefer to be copying tweets to each other within their own echo chambers and the more fake news the better.
    So we had record investment in engineering manufacturing in Q1 and the economy grew 0.1%?

    *hollow laughter*
    What’s going on with the GDP stats, there’s obviously something big that’s changed that the ONS are not picking up?

    It surely can’t be that there’s a systemic problem with those in change of the statistics disagreeing with the government over a major policy issue, and choosing their numbers carefully in order to show their own views?
    I can't believe that. But investment, employment and tax take all seem to indicate to me that the economy is running along quite nicely, at at least 0.5% a quarter. There is clearly something fundamentally wrong with the way construction figures are compiled. It is supposedly permanently in recession and yet growing at about 7% a year.

    It may be that more and more of the modern economy is more difficult to catch. It is a lot easier to count widgets than the value to the UK of Youtube downloads. But something is not right.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TOPPING said:

    o/t

    where's @TwistedFireStopper I would really like his views on this.

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/25/grenfell-fire-chief-had-no-training-in-stay-put-policy-inquiry-told

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/26/grenfell-firefighters-unable-to-get-water-to-top-floors-inquiry-told

    No training on high-rise fires and, in the second article, saying that even if they had wanted to change the "Stay Put" policy they couldn't because they didn't have the resources. Presumably on the assumption that each evacuation would have had to be assisted?

    The second article is more important imo and indeed urgent. London and other towns and cities up and down the land are full of high-rise blocks yet our fire brigades by and large cannot get water or people to the top. At the time it was reported that equipment was sent from Kent. The government (or even the mayor) should set up a technical inquiry to investigate how to deal with these situations, quite separate from the Grenfell inquiry. All we've seen over the past decade is politicians closing fire stations.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited June 2018
    Sean_F said:

    I don't think it would have been an easy deal. But, we'd certainly get further if we were prepared for no deal. In the same way that if you want peace, prepare for war.

    The gyrations this morning are just the latest in a long line of variations of

    "Brexit would be brilliant, if only..."

    There is no set of words that can complete that sentence in any way that makes the first clause true, but today's effort is pretty special

    Brexit would be brilliant if only, the day after the vote prominent Brexiteers had said

    - Easiest deal was a lie
    - We are going to crash out to WTO terms
    - We need to concrete over Kent
    - That will cost billions of pounds, which will either come from cutting services or raising taxes
    - Thankyou

    I can't understand why Boris didn't give that speech, win the leadership election at a canter and call a General Election to be returned with a thumping majority...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
    Filling in the forms wrongly is the offence. And it’s a very serious offence for both the candidate and their agent, being a matter of honesty and propriety.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,680
    MaxPB said:

    Same here, though I think we'd be better off in the EEA.
    The key will be to what extent it is possible to say “Freedom of Movement has ended” (except for......) and what the “except for” covers - otherwise voters will twig they’ve been sold a pig in a poke....
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    surby said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    Er...which ones ? Richmond ?
    The Tories could get an overall majority by losing Richmond and winning Kensington at the nxt GE. In reality I'd expect Battersea to turn blue if there was a majority also; St Ives and Richmond could be lost and an overall maj still won.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,307
    edited June 2018

    DavidL said:

    Given we have a massive trade deficit in goods with the EU and our strength is services . . .

    . . . can anyone please explain why we would want free trade in goods but to lose free trade in services?

    Its a point I have made before.

    The answer, such as it is, is that even although the net trade in goods is horrendously against us we do gain from some intermediate manufacturing in supply chains, particularly in car manufacturing, which we might lose if free flows in the trade of goods is impeded. Whether this would be offset by the advantages that our domestic producers would gain by reduced competition from Europe is really hard to predict.
    The ESRI in Ireland published a research paper. where they applied the CET to the product groups. i.e they did not say average tariff of 3% and apply that to all goods. They said average tariff for processed food is actually X% and average tariff for textiles is Y%. They also applied price elasticity. They did not factor in customs.
    Because the tariffs vary wildly i.e 0% for pharma and med equipment but 40 odd percent for processed food. the results ranged for trade ceases completely to trade is unaffected.
    But in simple terms. because the economies of the EU and the UK are at the same level of development. trade both ways would decline by circa 45%. So food, textiles, carpets and other stuff stopped completely.
    The overall result was because of the same percentage fall. because the UK imports more than exports. the UK has a gap to fill and the rest of EU has products looking for new markets.
    This report was the basis of the Irish position papers on the effects of brexit, Irish agriculural exports to the UK cease, that then led to the hard line position of the Irish government. that the UK must stay in the customs union and single market and nothing else will do,
    From the UK perspective the key question is whether the £10bn-£20bn of EU goods we no longer buy are replaced by UK production (in which case the effect on GDP is positive) or by third party imports in which case we may well have a net negative effect because of the reduction of our exports. What Ireland are working out is that anything other than free trade with the UK is disastrous for them but they have a far, far higher share of their exports coming here than any other EU country.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
    Filling in the forms wrongly is the offence. And it’s a very serious offence for both the candidate and their agent, being a matter of honesty and propriety.
    Are matters related to Thanet South sub judice at the moment ?
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    http://www.esri.ie/pubs/WP550.pdf

    Above is the ESRI report and my memory was faulty exports EU to UK drop 30%, exports UK to EU drop 22%.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,822
    edited June 2018
    Theresa will go for the third way - We will indeed leave everything... But not until after years and years and years of transitional arrangements so that most of us are dead before it ever happens (assuming a future government doesn't cancel the whole thing at some point)

    #longgrass
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Pulpstar said:

    Deutsche Bank share price now below 9 EUR.

    Who goes bust first - Countrywide or Deutsche Bank ?
    Imagine if DB had to raise money on the capital markets (as many have suggested it does) in the next few weeks and months?
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited June 2018
    .
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
    Filling in the forms wrongly is the offence. And it’s a very serious offence for both the candidate and their agent, being a matter of honesty and propriety.
    Here it looks more like competence rather than honesty is in doubt. Could the numbers actually be correct though since this is traditionally a safe Conservative seat?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,626
    edited June 2018
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Sadly that’s right. The story yesterday was of someone being kicked out of a restaurant in Washington because they worked for Trump. The US is close to returning to segregation, where one group of people eats in one room and a different group of people in another.
    'Someone' ... aka the spokesperson whose job it is to defend Trump's lies*. It's not what I'd have done, but I can quite see why they did what they did. The New Yorker has quite a good article exploring the issue:
    https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/sarah-huckabee-sanders-and-who-deserves-a-place-at-the-table
    To sit and share or to shame and shun? On the issue of Sanders being expelled from a restaurant, mixed emotions are the only ones a rational person can have....

    *I'd have a little more sympathy for her if she didn't appear to carry it out with such enthusiasm...
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Scott_P said:

    Sean_F said:

    I don't think it would have been an easy deal. But, we'd certainly get further if we were prepared for no deal. In the same way that if you want peace, prepare for war.

    The gyrations this morning are just the latest in a long line of variations of

    "Brexit would be brilliant, if only..."

    There is no set of words that can complete that sentence in any way that makes the first clause true, but today's effort is pretty special

    Brexit would be brilliant if only, the day after the vote prominent Brexiteers had said

    - Easiest deal was a lie
    - We are going to crash out to WTO terms
    - We need to concrete over Kent
    - That will cost billions of pounds, which will either come from cutting services or raising taxes
    - Thankyou

    I can't understand why Boris didn't give that speech, win the leadership election at a canter and call a General Election to be returned with a thumping majority...
    Conversely, you cannot conceive why any voter would feel unhappiness with the direction of the EU, so you rail against caricatures and straw men.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sean_F said:

    Conversely, you cannot conceive why any voter would feel unhappiness with the direction of the EU, so you rail against caricatures and straw men.

    The vote was not won on "unhappiness with the direction of the EU" as you well know
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    Scott_P said:

    Sean_F said:

    Conversely, you cannot conceive why any voter would feel unhappiness with the direction of the EU, so you rail against caricatures and straw men.

    The vote was not won on "unhappiness with the direction of the EU" as you well know
    I rather think it was.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
    Filling in the forms wrongly is the offence. And it’s a very serious offence for both the candidate and their agent, being a matter of honesty and propriety.
    Are matters related to Thanet South sub judice at the moment ?
    The trial was supposed to start last month but got postponed, so yes, I think it is still sub judice
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,311

    TOPPING said:

    o/t

    where's @TwistedFireStopper I would really like his views on this.

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/25/grenfell-fire-chief-had-no-training-in-stay-put-policy-inquiry-told

    https://theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/26/grenfell-firefighters-unable-to-get-water-to-top-floors-inquiry-told

    No training on high-rise fires and, in the second article, saying that even if they had wanted to change the "Stay Put" policy they couldn't because they didn't have the resources. Presumably on the assumption that each evacuation would have had to be assisted?

    The second article is more important imo and indeed urgent. London and other towns and cities up and down the land are full of high-rise blocks yet our fire brigades by and large cannot get water or people to the top. At the time it was reported that equipment was sent from Kent. The government (or even the mayor) should set up a technical inquiry to investigate how to deal with these situations, quite separate from the Grenfell inquiry. All we've seen over the past decade is politicians closing fire stations.
    Agree. But that's why I would like to hear from @Twisted. Closing stations notwithstanding it seems to a casual observer that there were several failings within LFB. Such a level of omission/unpreparedness as Dowden displays I think goes beyond budget cuts.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    Cyclefree said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Deutsche Bank share price now below 9 EUR.

    Who goes bust first - Countrywide or Deutsche Bank ?
    Imagine if DB had to raise money on the capital markets (as many have suggested it does) in the next few weeks and months?
    Personally I like to see a company acknowledge it has an issue and come round with a turnaround plan before chucking money at it. I'm sure potential investors with much more than myself think the same. DB knows it'll be bailed out by the germans though so I guess they'll just carry on the same course - I think a proposed rights issue to the general market would flop badly.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    Mr. B, there was an interesting line on a BBC segment, forget if it were the journalist or the resident near the restaurant who said it, to the effect of questioning whether they'd end up with Democrat and Republican restaurants.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    New thread.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited June 2018
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Sadly that’s right. The story yesterday was of someone being kicked out of a restaurant in Washington because they worked for Trump. The US is close to returning to segregation, where one group of people eats in one room and a different group of people in another.
    Oh no, someone was judged by the content of their character and not the colour of their skin.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    2014 was already a very good result for Labour in London. An additional 1.9% swing to them was impressive, undermined only by hopeless expectations management. Less commented upon, the result in May in London was beyond abysmal for the Conservatives.

    The Conservatives need about two dozen London seats to win an overall majority. May's results would likely give them those seats.
    The Tories only need 8 gains for an overall majority and only one of which is in London, Kensington and the Tories held Kensington and Chelsea so correct
    And the police are currently looking into how the new Labour MP in Kensington managed to spend almost nothing in her campaign.
    https://order-order.com/2018/06/26/emma-dent-coad-reported-cops/
    Does it matter? Even if she's filled the forms in wrongly there is £40,000 headroom so is it more than a technical offence? I don't suppose Malcolm Rifkind's and Michael Portillo's old seat would have been high up on Labour's target list anyway.
    Filling in the forms wrongly is the offence. And it’s a very serious offence for both the candidate and their agent, being a matter of honesty and propriety.
    Here it looks more like competence rather than honesty is in doubt. Could the numbers actually be correct though since this is traditionally a safe Conservative seat?
    It’s possible, although the overturned majority was only 7,000. The journalist (not Guido!) is noting that she declared no expenditure on office and admin costs, which seems highly unusual. I guess we’ll find out soon enough.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    The overnight primary result in NY-14 (Bronx & Queen’s) is astonishing. Rep Joe Crowley, tipped to succeed Pelosi, was comprehensively beaten by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old local Hispanic woman running well to his left...

    Interesting implications for the Democrats Presidential nominee choice...
    They increasingly look as if they’re going to double down on the identity politics and support for illegal immigration, having utterly failed to learn from Hillary’s experience that huge piles of votes in NY and CA don’t win the electoral college....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Sadly that’s right. The story yesterday was of someone being kicked out of a restaurant in Washington because they worked for Trump. The US is close to returning to segregation, where one group of people eats in one room and a different group of people in another.
    'Someone' ... aka the spokesperson whose job it is to defend Trump's lies*. It's not what I'd have done, but I can quite see why they did what they did. The New Yorker has quite a good article exploring the issue:
    https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/sarah-huckabee-sanders-and-who-deserves-a-place-at-the-table
    To sit and share or to shame and shun? On the issue of Sanders being expelled from a restaurant, mixed emotions are the only ones a rational person can have....

    *I'd have a little more sympathy for her if she didn't appear to carry it out with such enthusiasm...
    And did those who shunned and shamed Ms Huckabee feel equally strongly about spokesmen for Obama when he was deporting people from the US at a record rate? Would they do the same to a spokesman for Justin Trudeau, whose government also separates children from their parents when the latter try to get into Canada illegally? I’m fine with people having principles but it would be nice if they were applied consistently rather than on an ad hominem basis.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,898
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    ...

    ...
    ....
    Do they ?

    Last night's result was a local one; Senate primaries have had quite different outcomes. What it does do is force the party to try to accommodate the concerns of its activist wing, rather than carry on the transactional politics of the past as if nothing has changed.

    Whether that will happen is of course another matter.
    this issue with of this is that it descend politics all over the place into an increasingly bitter and violent place (which is the fault of both the right and left). Not much coming together, and building bridges on the cards in the future.
    Bluntly, lots of Republicans and Democrats view their political opponents as sub-human.
    Sadly that’s right. The story yesterday was of someone being kicked out of a restaurant in Washington because they worked for Trump. The US is close to returning to segregation, where one group of people eats in one room and a different group of people in another.
    'Someone' ... aka the spokesperson whose job it is to defend Trump's lies*. It's not what I'd have done, but I can quite see why they did what they did. The New Yorker has quite a good article exploring the issue:
    https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/sarah-huckabee-sanders-and-who-deserves-a-place-at-the-table
    To sit and share or to shame and shun? On the issue of Sanders being expelled from a restaurant, mixed emotions are the only ones a rational person can have....

    *I'd have a little more sympathy for her if she didn't appear to carry it out with such enthusiasm...
    Elected politicians are certainly fair game for criticism and public condemnation, but I don’t think their members of staff should fall into the same category. I’d say that Mrs Huckabee Sanders does a bloody good job at an almost impossible role, given that her boss changes his mind on things by the minute and prefers to communicate directly with the world from his phone.

    The whole thing is just playing to Trump’s game, he’ll be saying at his next rally that the Washington Establishment hate him so much tha they even refuse to serve people who work for him in restaurants.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,305
    GIN1138 said:

    Theresa will go for the third way - We will indeed leave everything... But not until after years and years and years of transitional arrangements so that most of us are dead before it ever happens (assuming a future government doesn't cancel the whole thing at some point)

    #longgrass
    Theresa's a wily old thing. She's acutely aware that if Brexit turns out to be apocalyptic (maybe it'll be fine, but who really know for sure?) then the Tory brand will be damaged for decades, perhaps even destroyed for ever. Better to have stability and a bit of vassal-statehood than risk everything. I also get the impression that Theresa would like to remain in Britain during her dotage and wouldn't want to be exiled as a pariah from these fair shores should everything go to hell.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited June 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Deutsche Bank share price now below 9 EUR.

    Who goes bust first - Countrywide or Deutsche Bank ?
    Imagine if DB had to raise money on the capital markets (as many have suggested it does) in the next few weeks and months?
    Personally I like to see a company acknowledge it has an issue and come round with a turnaround plan before chucking money at it. I'm sure potential investors with much more than myself think the same. DB knows it'll be bailed out by the germans though so I guess they'll just carry on the same course - I think a proposed rights issue to the general market would flop badly.

    It's hard to know what a turn around plan could be for an investment bank.

    Results can be quite volatile and depend on what's happening in the markets.

    The best turn around plan is for the markets to be favourable with lots of voltility, making the right bets and plenty of M&A activity.

    Investment banks are of course like workers cooperatives with the profits mostly shared by the workers - not the shareholders.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,002
    Sandpit said:


    Elected politicians are certainly fair game for criticism and public condemnation, but I don’t think their members of staff should fall into the same category. I’d say that Mrs Huckabee Sanders does a bloody good job at an almost impossible role, given that her boss changes his mind on things by the minute and prefers to communicate directly with the world from his phone.

    The whole thing is just playing to Trump’s game, he’ll be saying at his next rally that the Washington Establishment hate him so much tha they even refuse to serve people who work for him in restaurants.

    Fuck her. They should have blown a snot rocket into her salad before they threw her out.
  • Options
    anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,578

    GIN1138 said:

    Theresa will go for the third way - We will indeed leave everything... But not until after years and years and years of transitional arrangements so that most of us are dead before it ever happens (assuming a future government doesn't cancel the whole thing at some point)

    #longgrass
    Theresa's a wily old thing. She's acutely aware that if Brexit turns out to be apocalyptic (maybe it'll be fine, but who really know for sure?) then the Tory brand will be damaged for decades, perhaps even destroyed for ever. Better to have stability and a bit of vassal-statehood than risk everything. I also get the impression that Theresa would like to remain in Britain during her dotage and wouldn't want to be exiled as a pariah from these fair shores should everything go to hell.
    You are probably correct about TM's own view of the way forward. But history tells us that the headbangers are in the driving seat when's it comes to Tory Brexit policy and there's no sign of that situation changing. They saw off the sensibles last week and their ultimate dream of a cliff edge exit is getting closer and closer. The "government" is scarcely worthy of the name, cabinet ministers are openly contemptuous of the PM and several of them are overtly campaigning to replace her. It's very hard to see how she can come up with a deal that will get through parliament and so either we will go over the cliff or parliament will have to throw itself on the mercy of the EU and accept their terms, which will presumably be SM/CU and continuing budget contributions for the indefinite future.
This discussion has been closed.