Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Joe Biden raises doubts about whether hell run for White House

24

Comments

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756
    DavidL said:

    Germany finish bottom of the group. Not even @Tissue Price would have recommended that one.

    ahem

    I was told by @logical song that I was smoking something when I said Germany might not make the next round

    and that was prior to any games
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364
    edited June 2018
    On topic: Biden will not run, but his endorsement may well be quite important in the Primaries. Ditto Berni.

    It is easy to underestimate how guelling the Primary trail is in America at such an age.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669

    MaxPB said:

    VAR 1 - 0 Germany

    Hardly, it was a goal, it came off Kroos.
    Without VAR it wasn't a goal, the linesman having his flag up would have been the end of the matter.

    VAR has done it's job.
    I think we are stuck with it. Whether a foul was in or out the box, whether someone was offside its really useful. Whether the defender or the attacker were play acting more, not so much.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,972
    I prefer "Don't mention the VAR".
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,640
    I think Özil becomes the fall guy after his stupid comments about Erdogan. That has to have hit squad unity.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,891
    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669

    DavidL said:

    Germany finish bottom of the group. Not even @Tissue Price would have recommended that one.

    ahem

    I was told by @logical song that I was smoking something when I said Germany might not make the next round

    and that was prior to any games
    Fair enough but bottom? This is not the Germany of old but they still had Kroos, Ozil and Neur.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,891
    Some Koreans are on the pitch.....they think it's all over....

    It is now.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,640
    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    VAR 1 - 0 Germany

    Hardly, it was a goal, it came off Kroos.
    Without VAR it wasn't a goal, the linesman having his flag up would have been the end of the matter.

    VAR has done it's job.
    I think we are stuck with it. Whether a foul was in or out the box, whether someone was offside its really useful. Whether the defender or the attacker were play acting more, not so much.
    Hopefully the FA and FIFA will extend VAR usage to post game citations for play acting.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,783

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    We haven't left yet. :)
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,891
    RoyalBlue said:

    Poor Germany. How sad.

    :lol:

    POGWAS.....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669

    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
    You're right, there's 3.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,640

    I prefer "Don't mention the VAR".
    Nice.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,640
    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    I think he means champions at the next world cup.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,132

    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
    No he means

    2014 Winners Germany - eliminated Group stage in 2018

    2010 Winners Spain - eliminated Group stage in 2014

    2006 Winners Italy - eliminated Group stage in 2010

    1998 Winners France - eliminated Group stage in 2002
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
    I think he means that the holders curse has affected Germany 2018, Spain 2014, Italy 2010. All went out in the group stage of next World Cup.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,891

    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
    No he means

    2014 Winners Germany - eliminated Group stage in 2018

    2010 Winners Spain - eliminated Group stage in 2014

    2006 Winners Italy - eliminated Group stage in 2010

    1998 Winners France - eliminated Group stage in 2002
    You got there.....
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    Continuing the 'the economy is doing better than the GDP stats say':

    43% of retailers said that sales volumes were up in the year to June, whilst 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +32%

    32% of respondents expect retail sales volumes to increase in the year to July with 14% expecting a decrease, giving a balance of +18%.

    34% of retailers placed more orders with suppliers than they did a year ago, while 13% placed fewer, giving a balance of +20%

    30% of retailers said the volume of sales was good for the time of year, with 11% saying they were poor, giving a balance of +19%. Retailers expect seasonal sales volumes to improve in the year to July, with 30% anticipating good sales and just 5% expecting poor sales – giving a balance of +25%.

    http://www.cbi.org.uk/news/june-sees-summer-boost-for-retailers/

    The +32 is in comparison to the forexfactory prediction of +10

    Tbh I'm surprised as there are clearly many retailers struggling so I'm not sure who is doing better than usual.

    Though it does back up the retail sales data which has been coming in ahead of expectations.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,132

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    We’re meant to be resting key players too. Albeit not on the scale of Belgium.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    DavidL said:

    All four of the past European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the group stages.

    Despite Brexit.

    Is there not one left?
    France Spain England all still in?
    No he means

    2014 Winners Germany - eliminated Group stage in 2018

    2010 Winners Spain - eliminated Group stage in 2014

    2006 Winners Italy - eliminated Group stage in 2010

    1998 Winners France - eliminated Group stage in 2002
    You got there.....
    So you should have typed: The last four European winners of the World Cup have failed to progress from the subsequent tournament's group stage.

    That would have been rather less ambiguous.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    If you want a competitive game tomorrow then support Serbia to beat Brazil. Currently with ENG and Brazil top of groups they meet in the Qtrs. Seeing as a draw tomorrow means we stay top need Brazil in second position for Belgium to have to get a result.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,544
    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia at 8. Just for fun really. But who knows...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,972
    It sounds like the Brexit White Paper will be a complete fudge if this is accurate.

    https://www.channel4.com/news/by/gary-gibbon/blogs/brexit-white-paper-takes-shape
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    Brazilians seem confident, or is this hubris before nemesis?

    https://twitter.com/FoxSportsBrasil/status/1012000729010180098
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since 2001, the number of people in their early 30s leaving the capital has doubled since 2009 meaning net internal migration out of London climbed to 90,000 last year. '

    ' The thinktank said the average household in London is now paying a £5,400 “housing failure bill”, reflecting the extent to which rising housing costs had outpaced income growth over the last 50 years. Falling home ownership meant London was now the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia outright but tonight's prices look fair enough.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257

    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia at 8. Just for fun really. But who knows...
    That's good value IMO.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia at 8. Just for fun really. But who knows...

    If you want a competitive game tomorrow then support Serbia to beat Brazil. Currently with ENG and Brazil top of groups they meet in the Qtrs. Seeing as a draw tomorrow means we stay top need Brazil in second position for Belgium to have to get a result.

    If Serbia beat Brazil, and Switzerland beat Costa Rica, the Brazilians could be going home too!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,747

    It sounds like the Brexit White Paper will be a complete fudge if this is accurate.

    https://www.channel4.com/news/by/gary-gibbon/blogs/brexit-white-paper-takes-shape

    If JRM is involved will it be toffee-nosed fudge?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    Its a pity that the second SK goal didn't go in from 100 yards.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    Foxy said:

    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia at 8. Just for fun really. But who knows...

    If you want a competitive game tomorrow then support Serbia to beat Brazil. Currently with ENG and Brazil top of groups they meet in the Qtrs. Seeing as a draw tomorrow means we stay top need Brazil in second position for Belgium to have to get a result.

    If Serbia beat Brazil, and Switzerland beat Costa Rica, the Brazilians could be going home too!
    If Serbia beat Brazil and Switzerland don't lose then Brazil WILL be going home.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since 2001, the number of people in their early 30s leaving the capital has doubled since 2009 meaning net internal migration out of London climbed to 90,000 last year. '

    ' The thinktank said the average household in London is now paying a £5,400 “housing failure bill”, reflecting the extent to which rising housing costs had outpaced income growth over the last 50 years. Falling home ownership meant London was now the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    I think that we do need to allow that much of Londons GDP is produced by commuters from the Home Counties, rather than bone fide Londoners.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,544

    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I'm on Serbia outright but tonight's prices look fair enough.
    My bet that Germany would be in the final has gone.

    I'm so choked...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,015
    edited June 2018

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since 2001, the number of people in their early 30s leaving the capital has doubled since 2009 meaning net internal migration out of London climbed to 90,000 last year. '

    ' The thinktank said the average household in London is now paying a £5,400 “housing failure bill”, reflecting the extent to which rising housing costs had outpaced income growth over the last 50 years. Falling home ownership meant London was now the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    Isn't it always the case that young people move to London in their twenties and rent and have fun (at the most buying a flat) then in their 30s once they start a family use their London wage to buy a larger family home in the Home Counties and commute in to work?

    London still has a higher average wage than the rest of the UK even with lower growth in productivity and also far higher property prices
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    Foxy said:

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since 2001, the number of people in their early 30s leaving the capital has doubled since 2009 meaning net internal migration out of London climbed to 90,000 last year. '

    ' The thinktank said the average household in London is now paying a £5,400 “housing failure bill”, reflecting the extent to which rising housing costs had outpaced income growth over the last 50 years. Falling home ownership meant London was now the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    I think that we do need to allow that much of Londons GDP is produced by commuters from the Home Counties, rather than bone fide Londoners.
    True.

    But that's always been the case.

    Now there might be more working from home these days and less location specific work but housing unaffordability and the collapse in home ownership in London must be acting as a serious negative for the young and talented to work there.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    edited June 2018
    Also if Brazil top the group tonight Belgium will not care how many goals England score. So Harry Kane could get a shed full. He is current 2/1 for golden boot. Closest competition Lukalu, will be told not to score. Then Ronaldo.

    edit scrub the 2/1 looks about 4/1
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    tlg86 said:

    This is the first World Cup since 1966 that England have gone further than Germany

    Thanks for that. Amazing record.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    We’re meant to be resting key players too. Albeit not on the scale of Belgium.
    But who don't England and Belgium want to face in the following match.

    I'll guess that would prefer Japan but not Colombia, with Senegal in the middle.

    And they'll know who has topped Group H before they kick off.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,045
    Probably been mentioned already, but ever since the World Cup expanded to 32 teams (in 1997), only Brazil have been immune to the Champion's Curse.
    Every other defending champion has crashed out in the Group stage.
    France, Italy, Spain, Germany.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756

    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    Brazilians seem confident, or is this hubris before nemesis?

    https://twitter.com/FoxSportsBrasil/status/1012000729010180098
    no

    the Brazilians lost 7-1 to Germany a while back, this is just pure joy from a grudge
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    We’re meant to be resting key players too. Albeit not on the scale of Belgium.
    But who don't England and Belgium want to face in the following match.

    I'll guess that would prefer Japan but not Colombia, with Senegal in the middle.

    And they'll know who has topped Group H before they kick off.
    Win and gain momentum! also the small matter of a much more pleasant St Petersburg for the Semi*

    *DOI: that is my match ticket! :)
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    HYUFD said:

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since 2001, the number of people in their early 30s leaving the capital has doubled since 2009 meaning net internal migration out of London climbed to 90,000 last year. '

    ' The thinktank said the average household in London is now paying a £5,400 “housing failure bill”, reflecting the extent to which rising housing costs had outpaced income growth over the last 50 years. Falling home ownership meant London was now the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    Isn't it always the case that young people move to London in their twenties and rent and have fun (at the most buying a flat) then in their 30s once they start a family use their London wage to buy a larger family home in the Home Counties and commute in to work?
    So who used to buy all those houses in London suburbia ?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,923

    So who are we going to lose to on penalties now?

    Argentina are still in.....
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257

    tlg86 said:

    This is the first World Cup since 1966 that England have gone further than Germany

    Thanks for that. Amazing record.
    The only other WC where England have gone further was 1950 and that's because Germany wasn't there.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,538

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    Plenty of experts (I know) have said to rest players is a mistake. If the team is playing well and gelling then why mess with it?

    I mean also rest from what? Two games in two weeks, longer? These are athletes at the top of their game here.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,748
    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,940
    AndyJS said:

    I'd like to know what TissuePrice thinks will happen in the Brazil match tonight...

    I stuck £10 on South Korea following Tissue Price's tip and then had a nap. I've Just woken up. I think I've woken up - or is it still a dream?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,923
    Now small matter of England vs Australia in the T20.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669
    I think that the England Belgium game will be competitive but in a different way. For many of the players in the squad this is their world cup. But it is also their chance to play their way into the starting 11 for the next round. So it will be more about the individuals than the team.

    Seriously tempted to put a few quid on Rashford to score, possibly twice.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    TOPPING said:

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    Plenty of experts (I know) have said to rest players is a mistake. If the team is playing well and gelling then why mess with it?

    I mean also rest from what? Two games in two weeks, longer? These are athletes at the top of their game here.
    But it would give an opportunity to try something else in problem areas.

    Rashford instead of Raheem Sterling for example.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,538

    TOPPING said:

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    Plenty of experts (I know) have said to rest players is a mistake. If the team is playing well and gelling then why mess with it?

    I mean also rest from what? Two games in two weeks, longer? These are athletes at the top of their game here.
    But it would give an opportunity to try something else in problem areas.

    Rashford instead of Raheem Sterling for example.
    Both excellent I can't see one game affecting that. Is Sterling having an off moment? Not to my mind. The goals will come.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,748
    edited June 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    So who are we going to lose to on penalties now?

    Argentina are still in.....
    They have the Frogs on Saturday, I think that will send them home.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    edited June 2018

    So who are we going to lose to on penalties now?

    Argentina are still in.....
    Yes England lost on penalties to Argentina in 1998.

    Perfectly good English goal , disallowed in extra time.

    Also a harsh sending off Beckham.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Pooor alten Deutschland, klopfte in den letzten 32. Eine nationale Schande???
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,748
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,748
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
    Inner London in 2010, 52.8% of infant kids got free school meals, and Camden was 58.3%.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
    I wonder if the criteria have got tougher. I agree the percentages are amazing. In some parts of London it must be close to universal.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
    Is it the Dinkies that are fleeing London, rather than the yummy mummies?
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,765
    Take a look at the BBC Have Your Say responses to proposal for new tax to fund social care.

    Absolutely massive opposition by ratio of about 10:1.

    Link - sort comments by highest rated.

    Surely it's going to be impossible to get any specific brand new tax passed Con backbenchers (other than something like freezing thresholds).

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44621047
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
    Inner London in 2010, 52.8% of infant kids got free school meals, and Camden was 58.3%.
    Even in the Eighties when I was a student in London, it was a place that you could live in only if you were very rich, or very poor. That seems to have become even more true.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669
    Australia to field first. What's a good score at Edgbaston? 190?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669
    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,375
    Just in case no one's thought of this as a headline …

    For you, Fritz, the VAR is over.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,132
    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    CD13 said:

    Just in case no one's thought of this as a headline …

    For you, Fritz, the VAR is over.

    If I were a headline writer I’d go for “Seoul casualty”.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Birmingham is definitely back on the up. Five years ago it seemed to be in a long term spiral of decline.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @another_richard

    Re the London property market and the early 30s, for my generation (I'm 43) lots of people turned up in London in 1995 to get jobs post University. Most bought flats in London in their mid 20s, which they'd struggle to do today, but then moved out of London in their early 30s when they got married and had kids.

    I think that exodus - to places where you get more for your money - is not particularly unusual. It may be that there is more of an exodus now than there was.

    If there is, the best evidence to see it would be in primary school rolls. So, if we see the number of primary pupils in decline, it suggests either that families are being forced out (at a more than normal rate) by those without kids, living in cramped accommodation, or by people who are sufficiently wealthy (the global elite) to send their kids to private school.

    From https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-and-pupil-numbers

    Number of children at state primary schools in London
    2010: 644,630
    2017: 759,584

    Hard to see the evidence of more people fleeing London in their early 30s from that. It might be that the people are on average more deprived, and if so that will show up in the free school meal stats.
    2010 - proportion of infant school kids getting free school meals in London 42.7%!
    2018 36.8%

    Staggeringly high numbers. But clearly what you are identifying is not a new trend, given things have significantly improved since 2010.
    Have criteria changed ?

    You would need to compare it with non London boroughs to see the relative change.

    As to the number of school kids couldn't that be explained by the kids of the much increased 'hospitality class' workers ?

    The big falls in home ownership and the reported falls in socioeconomic levels in middle suburbia suggest that the London middle classes are being squeezed from both ends.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,132

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Manchester and Sheffield are both a sea of cranes.

    Plus you can understand Mancs and Sheffielders, Brummies you cannot.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,375
    edited June 2018
    Never mind, I now see I was an hour late.

    Sorry.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    England now down to 9.6 last matched on Betfair for the tournament. I'm still humming and hawing over the optimal time to lay them. My guess is that they will beat a Belgian team that is resting key players, so after that?

    Plenty of experts (I know) have said to rest players is a mistake. If the team is playing well and gelling then why mess with it?

    I mean also rest from what? Two games in two weeks, longer? These are athletes at the top of their game here.
    But it would give an opportunity to try something else in problem areas.

    Rashford instead of Raheem Sterling for example.
    Both excellent I can't see one game affecting that. Is Sterling having an off moment? Not to my mind. The goals will come.
    Raheem Sterling has scored twice for England from 40 games.

    Clearly the goals haven't come.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,364

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Birmingham is definitely back on the up. Five years ago it seemed to be in a long term spiral of decline.
    HS2 will move it South. Eventually...
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    Yorkcity said:

    So who are we going to lose to on penalties now?

    Argentina are still in.....
    Yes England lost on penalties to Argentina in 1998.

    Perfectly good English goal , disallowed in extra time.

    Also a harsh sending off Beckham.
    There was no choice to send Beckham off, what made it look harsh was that it was such a pathetic kick out.

    And Owen dived to get a penalty.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I thought it was London
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,015
    edited June 2018

    HYUFD said:

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    Isn't it always the case that young people move to London in their twenties and rent and have fun (at the most buying a flat) then in their 30s once they start a family use their London wage to buy a larger family home in the Home Counties and commute in to work?
    So who used to buy all those houses in London suburbia ?
    London suburbia is demographically closer to the Home Counties than Inner London admittedly, homes are significantly cheaper though wages are lower. The property owning London lower middle class and skilled working class is concentrated in the London suburbs.

    The London suburbs also had a far bigger Leave vote in 2016 and a bigger Tory vote in 2017 and 2018 than Inner London
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,669

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Manchester and Sheffield are both a sea of cranes.

    Plus you can understand Mancs and Sheffielders, Brummies you cannot.
    No, no, no, you're both wrong. Construction is in recession. It always is.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Manchester and Sheffield are both a sea of cranes.

    Plus you can understand Mancs and Sheffielders, Brummies you cannot.
    wrecking balls have their uses
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    I thought it was London
    This is the correct answer. London is so dominant in the UK that the only way you can get a power law to work in relation to its cities is by treating London as two cities, making it the first and second cities of Britain. Then the other British cities conform reasonably well to a power law.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,257
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    A few talking points in this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/27/londons-property-prices-leads-to-exodus-of-early-30s

    ' London’s expensive property prices are leading to an exodus of people in their early 30s from the capital, according to a report showing the economy of Britain’s biggest city increasingly dominated by low-skill jobs.

    A report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank said the blow to living standards caused by high housing costs meant more people were leaving London than arriving from the rest of the UK.

    While London’s overall population has grown by 1.6 million since the only region of the UK where the typical household had no net property wealth. '

    ' Job growth has largely been in low-paying, low-productivity sectors, such as hospitality (up 35%) and administrative services (up 29%). Even where employment had increased in higher-paying, high-productivity sectors, such as ICT and professional services, those sectors had seen a significant slump in productivity (down 5% and 2.5% respectively.)

    As a result, London’s productivity had actually fallen over the last decade by 1%, compared to an increase of 1.5% across the UK as a whole. '

    ' People assume London’s economy has been running away from the rest of the UK since the financial crisis. But London’s economic growth is purely down to its population explosion, with hospitality replacing banking as the big growth sector in the capital. Sectors that have traditionally powered London’s productivity growth, from finance to IT, are if anything going backwards.

    This shift has been great news for employment. But it means that London, far from racing ahead, has actually been holding the country back on productivity, with troubling consequences for pay and living standards. '

    Isn't it always the case that young people move to London in their twenties and rent and have fun (at the most buying a flat) then in their 30s once they start a family use their London wage to buy a larger family home in the Home Counties and commute in to work?
    So who used to buy all those houses in London suburbia ?
    London suburbia is demographically closer to the Home Counties than Inner London admittedly, homes are significantly cheaper though wages are lower. The property owning London lower middle class and skilled working class is concentrated in the London suburbs.

    The London suburbs also had a far bigger Leave vote in 2016 and a bigger Tory vote in 2017 than Inner London
    But home ownership in outer London has been falling rapidly which must mean that the young middle classes are being squeezed out.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Manchester and Sheffield are both a sea of cranes.

    Plus you can understand Mancs and Sheffielders, Brummies you cannot.
    Manchester voted to give Andy Burnham a position of responsibility

    I rest my case.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,548

    DavidL said:

    I think Manchester proper is about half the size but the whole surrounding area has a larger population, whatever that proves.
    I work in Manchester (and occasionally live there) ergo is the second city of the UK after Sheffield.

    I think between George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse and the IRA helping to launch a massive regeneration project Manchester has supplanted Birmingham.

    I think City's Etihand Campus helps too.
    chortle

    Brum is currently a sea of cranes

    Mankies need to get out more
    Manchester and Sheffield are both a sea of cranes.

    Plus you can understand Mancs and Sheffielders, Brummies you cannot.
    Manchester voted to give Andy Burnham a position of responsibility

    I rest my case.
    Make sure you rest it within sight at all times. Otherwise it will be taken away by the British Transport Police and may be destroyed.


    Sorry, I think I spend too much time travelling by train!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,132


    Manchester voted to give Andy Burnham a position of responsibility

    I rest my case.

    You keep on electing Jack Dromey and Liam Byrne as your MPs.
This discussion has been closed.