what exactly is it about the Chinese that you don't like, tim?
You remind me of the 2012 Republicans.
Nothing at all But I'm not keen on their totalitarian govt.
If you can't see the difference between welcoming Chinese Saudi or Russian tourists and individuals without doing financial favours for the ruling cliques stretching over decades then there's not much I can do to help you
First, you're right, there is nothing you can do to help me.
Secondly, you're kidding re. China, right? Totalitarian govt? Well of course it is but have you not noticed things have changed a teeny weeny bit in China since 1978?
I'm genuinely surprised.
The Chinese Communist Party has pulled literally (!) hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and attempted, in as much as possible on its own terms, to participate to an ever greater degree in the modern global, market-based economy.
Capitalism with Chinese characteristics is not just a slogan, and though we may laugh at it, it allows the CCP to square the circle of trying to enrich its country while maintaining its guiding principles (I disagree with them but then I'm on the right, politically).
Are there still human rights issues? You betcha. But they are better than they were and will be better in future than they are now, given the current engagement.
but tim the thing is, do you honestly think it's better to vilify the Chinese (I mean they are communists, for heaven's sake) and keep them outside the global community or to welcome them in and thus aid their progress towards being a modern, equal member of the community of nations?
Note that Britain long ago fell out with Blair clones as prospective PMs and is seeking an older, wiser, more experienced-outside-politics person who (preferably) has a science/engineering degree.
In his favour, he was not, AFAIK, a SPAD and his degree is not an Oxford PPE one.
So why, pray, is he not addressed as 'Doctor Hunt' by interviewers? The choice is not his to make............
As the son of a Baron he is Dr The Honourable Tristram Hunt.
Happy Trafalgar Day to you, MrW! A day to make all true Jacobite Scots rejoice!
Johnny-come-lately Life Peers don't count is terms of sons having titles (in MY book - never mind Tebrett's!)
Oh - and most BBC interviewers cannot even pronounce 'right' (=rye) let alone 'Honourable' (=onnible). And that's ignoring that anything 'Right' (all senses) is ALWAYS verboten within the BBC.
I don't agree with mu h you post SO but it seems considered and from your personal perspective, constructive. Also courteous. Manners cost nothing. Aggressive partisan repetition persuades no one and restricts civilised discourse. It is also vexatious to the spirit. Best avoided on a damp October Monday morning. Regards FattyBolger
The central question about Chinese investment in British infrastructure is whether it is value for money for Britain. As a Chinese man once said:
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
What's xenophobic about having concerns that laying out the red carpet for a totalitarian regime is not necessarily in our long term national interest? Given the inherent uncertainty surrounding such forms of government and their rejection of concepts such as an independent judiciary, freedom of movement, thought and capital, what looks a good deal now may well look very different in a few years' time - especially as we do have an independent judiciary. Statements that GO has made over the last week seem to indicate he may not have the clearest and most forensic understanding of how China functions. But, then again, if the government did have a proper appreciation of the Communist Party regime there is no way Dave would have met the Dalai Lama.
Money has no odour. We can turn our back on China on the basis that we don't like its government, but that would be remarkably foolish given the size of its economy and its rapid growth. Or we can try to get a piece of the action. I'm in favour of trying to get a piece of the action.
You can hardly present yourself as principled if you think that David Cameron shouldn't have met the Dalai Lama because it might upset the Chinese government.
I am not arguing from a "principled" standpoint. My worry is that it may not be in our long term interests to become over-dependent on a totalitarian government, especially one that is instinctively anti-British. The fact that a photo-opportunity caused so much trouble in the first place emphasises that. It definitely caused us problems as a company seeking to do business in China. Taking the money now is not always the best option. It's something we tend to do in this country and it has come back to bite us on more than one occasion, as I have argued on here many times before.
I am excited because I have been re-tweeted by someone who is more beautiful than 99.999999972% of the world's population and uglier than 0.000000014%. Just saying.
Note that Britain long ago fell out with Blair clones as prospective PMs and is seeking an older, wiser, more experienced-outside-politics person who (preferably) has a science/engineering degree.
In his favour, he was not, AFAIK, a SPAD and his degree is not an Oxford PPE one.
So why, pray, is he not addressed as 'Doctor Hunt' by interviewers? The choice is not his to make............
As the son of a Baron he is Dr The Honourable Tristram Hunt.
Happy Trafalgar Day to you, MrW! A day to make all true Jacobite Scots rejoice!
Johnny-come-lately Life Peers don't count is terms of sons having titles (in MY book - never mind Tebrett's!)
Oh - and most BBC interviewers cannot even pronounce 'right' (=rye) let alone 'Honourable' (=onnible). And that's ignoring that anything 'Right' (all senses) is ALWAYS verboten within the BBC.
I'm minded to issue you a personal invitation to view the proceedings of those fine pie makers at Auchentennach !!
I am excited because I have been re-tweeted by someone who is more beautiful than 99.99999997% of the world's population and uglier than 0.00000003%. Just saying.
Strange how David Mellor seems to attract such adoration but there we are.
I am excited because I have been re-tweeted by someone who is more beautiful than 99.999999972% of the world's population and uglier than 0.000000014%. Just saying.
Strange how David Mellor seems to attract such adoration but there we are.
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
Labour always struggles under public school leaders.
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
Just like in 1997.
The Tories did very well led by nabobs for a hundred and fifty years, until about 1960.
Times change. It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory.
Yet the political system keeps churning out these cookie-cutter metrosexual NW1, NW3, W11, candidates like Hunt, who is virtually indistinguishable from Clegg, Miliband, Cameron.
If Hunt wins the leadership of the Labour party, that opens up an enormous space for the Conservatives to exploit. Good.
Someone who knows the UK outside London and the Home Counties would be nice. I don't think posh or public school per se is an issue. The key thing is about being seen to be in touch. That's why the leader's background is so much more of an issue for the Tories. Rightly or wrongly, Labour politicians from privileged backgrounds seem to be given more leeway, perhaps because they are felt to have made something of a leap and/or because they tend to represent less affluent constituencies.
I am excited because I have been re-tweeted by someone who is more beautiful than 99.999999972% of the world's population and uglier than 0.000000014%. Just saying.
Strange how David Mellor seems to attract such adoration but there we are.
I have never been retweeted by David Mellor.
Is that an unrequited plea or a measure of desperation ?!?
The UK has foreign exchange reserves of $106 billion, around 3% of China's, and has run an average trade deficit of £1.2 billion per month for the past sixty years.
Well we know you're knowledge of the trade balance is somewhat weak Avery but that's a rather silly comment.
If you take a look at the ONS trade stats they show that between 1948 and 1997 we had an average trade deficit of £0.02bn per month and from 1998 onwards we've had an average trade deficit of £2.24bn per month.
Britain's trade deficit problems are a recent and fundamental problem.
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
Labour always struggles under public school leaders.
Clement Attlee? Tony Blair?
Did you have your sense of irony surgically removed, or were you born without it?
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
Just like in 1997.
The Tories did very well led by nabobs for a hundred and fifty years, until about 1960.
Times change. It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory.
Yet the political system keeps churning out these cookie-cutter metrosexual NW1, NW3, W11, candidates like Hunt, who is virtually indistinguishable from Clegg, Miliband, Cameron.
If Hunt wins the leadership of the Labour party, that opens up an enormous space for the Conservatives to exploit. Good.
Someone who knows the UK outside London and the Home Counties would be nice. I don't think posh or public school per se is an issue. The key thing is about being seen to be in touch. That's why the leader's background is so much more of an issue for the Tories. Rightly or wrongly, Labour politicians from privileged backgrounds seem to be given more leeway, perhaps because they are felt to have made something of a leap and/or because they tend to represent less affluent constituencies.
Blair knew he was out-of-touch so took measures (at least initially) to stay in touch -- polling, focus groups, John Prescott and so on. Cameron does not seem to realise that his circle is not typical even of Conservative supporters around the country.
@OborneTweets: The Government is opposed to state ownership of British assets unless they are owned by the French or Chinese governments.
Why does the Tory Party hate Britain?
Even by the standards of twitter, that's a remarkably stupid tweet.
Let's see which govts besides the British one are barred from having a stake in East Coast Rail
k tim as I see long posts aren't your thing, let me boil it down for you.
Do you think it better to welcome Chinese inward investment into the UK thereby encouragng China's participation in the global community of nations with all that implies for eg their human rights record?
Times change. It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory.
The widget is for pathetic wimps who can't take their stick, can't handle debate. I have never understood why people would come on here and close the whole thing down by sanitising it with the thing.
The widget is for pathetic wimps who can't take their stick, can't handle debate. I have never understood why people would come on here and close the whole thing down by sanitising it with the thing.
OGH Tweets: "LAB has only won working majorities at 6 general elections, 5 of them with public school educated leaders at helm Good for @TristramHuntMP?
"The Tories did very well led by nabobs for a hundred and fifty years, until about 1960."
I'd nudge that through to 1964 when against all the odds Alec Douglas-Home nearly deprived Harold Wilson of a majority.
Home was a fine fellow .... incidentally a Scottish noble .... and was our last peer to become PM, the last PM to be neither a member of the either house of parliament, the last Knight of the Thistle to become PM and the last former PM to subsequently serve in the cabinet.
OGH Tweets: "LAB has only won working majorities at 6 general elections, 5 of them with public school educated leaders at helm Good for @TristramHuntMP?
Re the Chinese ‘buying up Britain’ – well someone has to. We run a large trade deficit and must finance this somehow.
We have for some time been on a journey of deficit funded welfarism. We live beyond our means and import a fair chunk of those means. If we don’t want to fund this via sale of British assets to foreigners then we need to balance our trade books (and not just the fiscal / budget deficit books). Driving exports up is good – but very hard in today’s environment. We can drive imports down – but equally hard given how important energy is in this space. (So, for example, even if shale gas doesn’t drive energy costs down it will drive down gas imports). Maybe a programme of import substitution would help.
In my view it is a failing of democracy that there is no electoral advantage to managing an economy for the long term, to ensure we balance books and don’t forever seek to ‘kick the can down the road’.
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
Labour always struggles under public school leaders.
Clement Attlee? Tony Blair?
Did you have your sense of irony surgically removed, or were you born without it?
He lost it to a schoolyard rival in one of his massive bets.
"It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory."
Tristram Hunt now 16/1 with Paddy Power, and they will only let me put on a Max stake of 5 pounds 49 p. Can't be bothered at that price.
Stuart, at least it has saved you throwing a fiver down the drain
True. I don't really rate Mike as much of a tipster these days anyway. His Carmichael tip a few days back could be a final nail in that particular coffin.
UK firms lack skills, expertise to compete for high value contracts.
And as today's FT points out on page 2, the previous government 'hollowed' out the UK's advantage in nuclear engineering when it sold Westinghouse Electric Co to Toshiba in 2006, and Britain lost it's reactor design and manufacturing capability.
UK firms lack skills, expertise to compete for high value contracts.
The reason we in the UK lack the skills is because we haven't built many reactors recently, at least in part that will be due to papers like the Guardian campaigning against nuclear power. So do they want UK firms to be able to build nuclear reactors or not?
"GDP in the three months to September is estimated to have surged 0.8pc, according to economists. It would be the UK’s best performance since the second quarter of 2010, beating the strong 0.7pc growth between March and June. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will publish the official data on Friday."
"Separate public finance figures on Tuesday will show that the recovery is helping the Chancellor make inroads on the deficit. Higher tax revenues and lower benefit spending has meant borrowing this year has been coming down faster than expected. Economists reckon this week’s figures will confirm the trend, putting the Government on course to borrow about £10bn less than the £120bn originally forecast for this year."
UK firms lack skills, expertise to compete for high value contracts.
And as today's FT points out on page 2, the previous government 'hollowed' out the UK's advantage in nuclear engineering when it sold Westinghouse Electric Co to Toshiba in 2006, and Britain lost it's reactor design and manufacturing capability.
Wasn't Westinghouse an American company BNFL bought and sold within a few years?
"It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory."
Dan Jarvis supporting Tristram Hunt.
The Tories would have no chance.
Dan Jarvis does look a prospect, but he'll need to build a base. If he does, he could well be unstoppable.
Any more direct or indirect references to the phone hacking trials, and your posting privileges will be suspended until after the conclusion of the phone hacking trials.
I think my record for idiotic travel was when I flew to Shanghai from London en route to New York. A colleague really really wanted me to attend a lunch meeting with the Chairman of a Chinese SOE. But didn't tell me that the lunch was going to be in Mandarin...
@OborneTweets: The Government is opposed to state ownership of British assets unless they are owned by the French or Chinese governments.
Why does the Tory Party hate Britain?
Even by the standards of twitter, that's a remarkably stupid tweet.
Not stupid but hardly original: the same point was made in the 1980s.
The government's position is simply that it is not the appropriate owner of certain assets (NB not all assets - it still seems to feel the need to own some). This has been the position of all governments since the 1980s and is, I think, still the position of Ed Miliband's Labour party. It's spectacularly cretinous.
It's fun to see that xenophobia is dressing to the left this morning. No doubt it will be dressing to the right again later in the week.
Wholesale prices are not going up in the energy industry, according to the head of a small energy firm, despite British Gas following SSE's rises with a 9.2% increase in its dual-fuel bill price.
Stephen Fitzpatrick, MD and founder of Ovo Energy, said he had not seen wholesale prices rise for about two years.
"If they're buying more expensive gas, more expensive electricity, in a large part we think this is because they're selling it to themselves".
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure...
As I understand it, all the Chinese are giving us is a large wodge of cash. It's the French who will be directly involved in building the things.
It's pretty embarrassing that we can have a huge frenzy of excitement about making a quick profit on the sale of Royal Mail shares, but we can't find the money to fund investment in our energy infrastructure. Instead we will be sending money overseas for decades.
You could not make it up , the Tory genius, give all our money to the Chinese for 35 years and in return they will give a wedge of it to our French friends to build a monstrosity and milk the public, whilst some chums will no doubt grace the boardrooms of all involved. Makes Brown's PFI look clever and a bargain.
If it is really only a 9.5% ROIC then that is not unreasonable provided the risks are appropriately borne by the French. Where PFI was a problem was that (a) the taxpayer got stiffed when their needs/wants changes - all we want a nuclear facility to do is produce power - and (b) the risks ended up being carried by the taxpayer anyway. So it was really just money for old rope.
UK firms lack skills, expertise to compete for high value contracts.
The reason we in the UK lack the skills is because we haven't built many reactors recently, at least in part that will be due to papers like the Guardian campaigning against nuclear power. So do they want UK firms to be able to build nuclear reactors or not?
Yes, the key is to develop a steady pipeline of reactor building and that will make it worth people's while to be involved in nuclear engineering. If we start building one reactor every 5-10 years for the next 2 decades, you'll see plenty of UK engineering companies able to compete in that area.
In my view it is a failing of democracy that there is no electoral advantage to managing an economy for the long term, to ensure we balance books and don’t forever seek to ‘kick the can down the road’.
I don't think that is a failing of democracy as such - it's a more general facet of human psychology.
That said, it is worth pointing out that people in general do not agree on what is the best strategy to take for our short term collective benefit, and it seems reasonable that predicting the optimal strategy for the long term would be more difficult, making agreement harder to achieve.
One reason the can is kicked down the road is because the democratic debate has not yet reached a conclusion on the best course of action to take. I would think that having more historians with good communication skills involved with politics could only help improve the long-term focus, particularly when contrasted with the very many lawyers in politics who do not look beyond the short-term nature of the particular brief they have for that day.
Tristram Hunt now 16/1 with Paddy Power, and they will only let me put on a Max stake of 5 pounds 49 p. Can't be bothered at that price.
Stuart, at least it has saved you throwing a fiver down the drain
True. I don't really rate Mike as much of a tipster these days anyway. His Carmichael tip a few days back could be a final nail in that particular coffin.
You can only judge tips against outcomes and you cannot cope with me entering into the Scottish IndyRef debate.
40/1 shots are exactly that. Carmichael is probably the biggest certainty amongst LD MPs to hold his seat and on that basis alone 40/1 is great price.
The fact that you have to rubbish my view suggests that you are scared of Carmichael 's ability to mix it with Salmond. He can negate your biggest asset and you know it.
I think my record for idiotic travel was when I flew to Shanghai from London en route to New York. A colleague really really wanted me to attend a lunch meeting with the Chairman of a Chinese SOE. But didn't tell me that the lunch was going to be in Mandarin...
A friend of mine used to work for Miramax. He was at Wembley watching Arsenal in some game or another and got a call from Harvey Weinstein telling him he had to meet Nicole Kidman for dinner that evening. In New York. He got limoed to Heathrow after the game and flew over on Concorde; had a really uncomfortable meal with la Kidman and came home the next morning. Harvey was a pretty demanding bloke to work for!
Someone who knows the UK outside London and the Home Counties would be nice. I don't think posh or public school per se is an issue. The key thing is about being seen to be in touch. That's why the leader's background is so much more of an issue for the Tories. Rightly or wrongly, Labour politicians from privileged backgrounds seem to be given more leeway, perhaps because they are felt to have made something of a leap and/or because they tend to represent less affluent constituencies.
They are given more 'leeway' because of the hypocrisy of the left.
@OborneTweets: The Government is opposed to state ownership of British assets unless they are owned by the French or Chinese governments.
Why does the Tory Party hate Britain?
Even by the standards of twitter, that's a remarkably stupid tweet.
Not stupid but hardly original: the same point was made in the 1980s.
The government's position is simply that it is not the appropriate owner of certain assets (NB not all assets - it still seems to feel the need to own some). This has been the position of all governments since the 1980s and is, I think, still the position of Ed Miliband's Labour party. It's spectacularly cretinous.
It's fun to see that xenophobia is dressing to the left this morning. No doubt it will be dressing to the right again later in the week.
The point is that it does not fit the original privatisation rhetoric of freeing management from the dead hand of the state. If there is something inherently wrong with state ownership, it ought to apply equally to ownership by foreign states.
The fact that you have to rubbish my view suggests that you are scared of Carmichael 's ability to mix it with Salmond. He can negate your biggest asset and you know it.
I think Sturgeon will be allowed to deal with Fat Al. Are you predicting a Carmichael effect on the Indy polling?
Wholesale prices are not going up in the energy industry, according to the head of a small energy firm, despite British Gas following SSE's rises with a 9.2% increase in its dual-fuel bill price.
Stephen Fitzpatrick, MD and founder of Ovo Energy, said he had not seen wholesale prices rise for about two years.
"If they're buying more expensive gas, more expensive electricity, in a large part we think this is because they're selling it to themselves".
OGH Tweets: "LAB has only won working majorities at 6 general elections, 5 of them with public school educated leaders at helm Good for @TristramHuntMP?
OGH trying to move the market so he can lay his bet?
Mr. Ajob, although it doesn't affect me (single, and not earning enough to be affected anyway) the child tax benefit stuff does seem remarkably stupid. However, the whole system is over-complicated. Better to tear down the Byzantine (Westminsterian for our SNP friends) bureaucracy and put into place something simpler (ie, flat rate for only 2-3 kids, and only for those earning a middling to low salary rather than those earning a lot).
Someone who knows the UK outside London and the Home Counties would be nice. I don't think posh or public school per se is an issue. The key thing is about being seen to be in touch. That's why the leader's background is so much more of an issue for the Tories. Rightly or wrongly, Labour politicians from privileged backgrounds seem to be given more leeway, perhaps because they are felt to have made something of a leap and/or because they tend to represent less affluent constituencies.
They are given more 'leeway' because of the hypocrisy of the left.
You believe that if you want to Richard. It is certainly a comfy blanket to cling to.
After Ed Miliband has been PM for 10 years from 2015, Hunt may not want or be available to take over as PM from 2025. Perhaps by 2025 we will have Tony Blairs son Euan in a senior position within the Labour government and he may stand for election as leader.
On Edmund's excellent widget, it's important to recognise that the biggest advantage is not that you can block out posters (I only block out two regular posters), but that you can highlight the posts from some of the key posters you wouldn't want to miss, in my case people like Peter the Punter, David Herdson, Sean Fear, tim, Nick Palmer, Jack W, Mike, another richard, antifrank, and several others. I find that very useful especially when looking quickly through a long thread.
So the energy companies are building a strategic reserve in case Labour wins the next election.
Alternatively, the next election will make it clear - reject Labour and your gas and electricity bills will actually fall. Who could possibly have predicted that situation would come about within, oh I don't know, a few hours of Ed's conference speech?
I think my record for idiotic travel was when I flew to Shanghai from London en route to New York. A colleague really really wanted me to attend a lunch meeting with the Chairman of a Chinese SOE. But didn't tell me that the lunch was going to be in Mandarin...
A friend of mine used to work for Miramax. He was at Wembley watching Arsenal in some game or another and got a call from Harvey Weinstein telling him he had to meet Nicole Kidman for dinner that evening. In New York. He got limoed to Heathrow after the game and flew over on Concorde; had a really uncomfortable meal with la Kidman and came home the next morning. Harvey was a pretty demanding bloke to work for!
Wholesale prices are not going up in the energy industry, according to the head of a small energy firm, despite British Gas following SSE's rises with a 9.2% increase in its dual-fuel bill price.
Stephen Fitzpatrick, MD and founder of Ovo Energy, said he had not seen wholesale prices rise for about two years.
"If they're buying more expensive gas, more expensive electricity, in a large part we think this is because they're selling it to themselves".
Until you can prove that your net salary increases by only 34p for every £1 of extra income you need to STFU about earning soooo much that you lose your undeserved benefits.
I think my record for idiotic travel was when I flew to Shanghai from London en route to New York. A colleague really really wanted me to attend a lunch meeting with the Chairman of a Chinese SOE. But didn't tell me that the lunch was going to be in Mandarin...
A friend of mine used to work for Miramax. He was at Wembley watching Arsenal in some game or another and got a call from Harvey Weinstein telling him he had to meet Nicole Kidman for dinner that evening. In New York. He got limoed to Heathrow after the game and flew over on Concorde; had a really uncomfortable meal with la Kidman and came home the next morning. Harvey was a pretty demanding bloke to work for!
And dinner with Nicole a reasonable perk!
Dull as dishwater apparently. She was pitching an idea Miramax hated and Weinstein did not want to be the one to say No.
You believe that if you want to Richard. It is certainly a comfy blanket to cling to.
Did you ever answer my question many months ago, when you were railing against tax cuts for the 'rich' by Osborne, and saying this was proof of the priorities of the Tories and therefore you could never vote for them, as to why you didn't apply the same logic to Gordon Brown cutting CGT to 10% for hedge fund managers?
So the energy companies are building a strategic reserve in case Labour wins the next election.
Alternatively, the next election will make it clear - reject Labour and your gas and electricity bills will actually fall. Who could possibly have predicted that situation would come about within, oh I don't know, a few hours of Ed's conference speech?
Ahem.
That's right. But for Ed's speech prices would not have risen. That said, given this is opportunistic price raising if one company decided not to do it, it would clean up given the number of new accounts it would generate.
Mixed emotions for George Osborne on Help to Buy, I suspect:
"Rightmove said the average asking price in London rose to £544,232 in October from £493,748 the previous month – an increase of more than 10%. Across England and Wales, the rise over the month was a more modest 2.8% to £252,418.
Describing the London increases as unsustainable, Rightmove said Help to Buy would mainly benefit buyers in the rest of England and Wales because many Londoners would not be able to afford mortgage repayments on a house costing double the national average."
I hope he goes far, honestly, if he became Labour leader and Boris was Tory leader, PMQs would be a classical history lesson, as Boris would say Hunt has the worst economic policies in Europe since Emperor Diocletian tried to fix the price of groceries across the Roman Empire.
Whilst Hunt would say Boris is the worst leader since Darius said to Alexander III "come on and have a go if you think you're hard enough"
Hallelujah! We're 'only' going to borrow 110bn instead of 129bn! All our worries are over!
:-(
Austerity hasn't even started in reality.
The $120 bn figure is the pluperfect subjunctive nonsense, Patrick.
What the government would have borrowed had it not transferred the Royal Mail pension assets, received additional funds from the BoE throught the Asset Purchase Facility, been paid tax by the Swiss Banks on behalf of its British customers, sold a sixth of its shares in Lloyds Bank, sold 60% of Royal Mail, ignored substantial downward revisions by ONS to prior year borrowings, disregarded all revenues from the intervened banks etc. etc.
Once all that is taken into account, add a £10 bn improvement from higher than forecast tax revenues and lower expenditure and the downward trend in actual borrowing starts to look reasonably healthy.
On Edmund's excellent widget, it's important to recognise that the biggest advantage is not that you can block out posters (I only block out two regular posters), but that you can highlight the posts from some of the key posters you wouldn't want to miss, in my case people like Peter the Punter, David Herdson, Sean Fear, tim, Nick Palmer, Jack W, Mike, another richard, antifrank, and several others. I find that very useful especially when looking quickly through a long thread.
Neil and I are in a big sulk. Talk about pbTory loyalty? Airbrushed out, discarded, cast aside. After all we've won for you.
You believe that if you want to Richard. It is certainly a comfy blanket to cling to.
Did you ever answer my question many months ago, when you were railing against tax cuts for the 'rich' by Osborne, and saying this was proof of the priorities of the Tories and therefore you could never vote for them, as to why you didn't apply the same logic to Gordon Brown cutting CGT to 10% for hedge fund managers?
I can't remember. But Labour's pandering to the already very wealthy was one of the reasons why by 2010 I could no longer vote for them. That was a process, of course, as I had a lot of baggage to cast off before I could contemplate such a move.
On Edmund's excellent widget, it's important to recognise that the biggest advantage is not that you can block out posters (I only block out two regular posters), but that you can highlight the posts from some of the key posters you wouldn't want to miss, in my case people like Peter the Punter, David Herdson, Sean Fear, tim, Nick Palmer, Jack W, Mike, another richard, antifrank, and several others. I find that very useful especially when looking quickly through a long thread.
Neil and I are in a big sulk. Talk about pbTory loyalty? Airbrushed out, discarded, cast aside. After all we've won for you.
Fear not, both Neil and JohnO are in the privileged list!
I once had to go on the train from Sheffield to Southampton, just so I could have a meeting with someone on the way back from Southampton to Sheffield.
Terrible journey on the way back, the train conductor let the rowdy plebs into first class without tickets, as the rest of the train was packed.
I sent a strongly worded to Richard Branson complaining about this, some of us had paid nearly £400 for the privilege.
If I became Prime Minister, I would pass a law calling for death by vivisection of train conductors who allow non first class ticket holders into first class.
Comments
Secondly, you're kidding re. China, right? Totalitarian govt? Well of course it is but have you not noticed things have changed a teeny weeny bit in China since 1978?
I'm genuinely surprised.
The Chinese Communist Party has pulled literally (!) hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and attempted, in as much as possible on its own terms, to participate to an ever greater degree in the modern global, market-based economy.
Capitalism with Chinese characteristics is not just a slogan, and though we may laugh at it, it allows the CCP to square the circle of trying to enrich its country while maintaining its guiding principles (I disagree with them but then I'm on the right, politically).
Are there still human rights issues? You betcha. But they are better than they were and will be better in future than they are now, given the current engagement.
but tim the thing is, do you honestly think it's better to vilify the Chinese (I mean they are communists, for heaven's sake) and keep them outside the global community or to welcome them in and thus aid their progress towards being a modern, equal member of the community of nations?
Johnny-come-lately Life Peers don't count is terms of sons having titles (in MY book - never mind Tebrett's!)
Oh - and most BBC interviewers cannot even pronounce 'right' (=rye) let alone 'Honourable' (=onnible). And that's ignoring that anything 'Right' (all senses) is ALWAYS verboten within the BBC.
As for the 25,000 jobs, a convenient big round number for the lazier Members of Parliament and the press to play with.
Worth a read
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/india-early-discussion.html
http://order-order.com/2013/10/21/richs-monday-morning-view-41/
Michael Thrasher, Sky News Elections Analyst
"A projection of the latest polling figures using simple uniform swing suggests that the Liberal Democrats will win only 21 seats in 2015."
If you take a look at the ONS trade stats they show that between 1948 and 1997 we had an average trade deficit of £0.02bn per month and from 1998 onwards we've had an average trade deficit of £2.24bn per month.
Britain's trade deficit problems are a recent and fundamental problem.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=KTMY&dataset=pnbp&table-id=A
Do you think it better to welcome Chinese inward investment into the UK thereby encouragng China's participation in the global community of nations with all that implies for eg their human rights record?
Or not?
Times change. It's clear to me that the country is desperate to be led by a non-posh, non-Oxbridge, non-private school, non-40-something non-nitwit, the country WANTS to be led by a Brit who knows what it's like outside London, who has had a real job (not "TV historian"), who can maybe claim a bit of gritty backstory.
Still work to be done, Sean, but enough to start on.
The widget is for pathetic wimps who can't take their stick, can't handle debate. I have never understood why people would come on here and close the whole thing down by sanitising it with the thing.
@Financier
Erm, sarcasm alert...
@Antifrank
Why? Oborne makes a good point.
Good for @TristramHuntMP?
"The Tories did very well led by nabobs for a hundred and fifty years, until about 1960."
I'd nudge that through to 1964 when against all the odds Alec Douglas-Home nearly deprived Harold Wilson of a majority.
Home was a fine fellow .... incidentally a Scottish noble .... and was our last peer to become PM, the last PM to be neither a member of the either house of parliament, the last Knight of the Thistle to become PM and the last former PM to subsequently serve in the cabinet.
OGH Tweets: "LAB has only won working majorities at 6 general elections, 5 of them with public school educated leaders at helm
Good for @TristramHuntMP?
talking your own book, much?
Let's see...
A key week - hope squirrel stocks are in order.
"How to write Chris Huhne columns. Oppose govt policy. Say 'I was in govt, I know what's what'. Admit you knew/did nothing. Call for action."
We have for some time been on a journey of deficit funded welfarism. We live beyond our means and import a fair chunk of those means. If we don’t want to fund this via sale of British assets to foreigners then we need to balance our trade books (and not just the fiscal / budget deficit books). Driving exports up is good – but very hard in today’s environment. We can drive imports down – but equally hard given how important energy is in this space. (So, for example, even if shale gas doesn’t drive energy costs down it will drive down gas imports). Maybe a programme of import substitution would help.
In my view it is a failing of democracy that there is no electoral advantage to managing an economy for the long term, to ensure we balance books and don’t forever seek to ‘kick the can down the road’.
Three letters from HMRC
Two codes/passwords
Time wasted - nearly two hours.
Form? I still haven't got one.
A far cry from the 10 minutes Richard N was spinning.
George Osborne - smashing you with prohibitive taxes and wasting your family time, since 2010.
11,746 < Clever.
Dan Jarvis supporting Tristram Hunt.
The Tories would have no chance.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/14/british-hinkley-nuclear-contracts-edf
UK firms lack skills, expertise to compete for high value contracts.
Just a reminder, embedding pictures (and tweets) into posts isn't allowed.
Such posts will get deleted.
We will no longer edit those posts to stop the embedding.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10392071/UK-economic-growth-hits-fastest-pace-since-2010.html
"GDP in the three months to September is estimated to have surged 0.8pc, according to economists. It would be the UK’s best performance since the second quarter of 2010, beating the strong 0.7pc growth between March and June. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will publish the official data on Friday."
"Separate public finance figures on Tuesday will show that the recovery is helping the Chancellor make inroads on the deficit. Higher tax revenues and lower benefit spending has meant borrowing this year has been coming down faster than expected. Economists reckon this week’s figures will confirm the trend, putting the Government on course to borrow about £10bn less than the £120bn originally forecast for this year."
Clearly you missed the warning last night.
Any more direct or indirect references to the phone hacking trials, and your posting privileges will be suspended until after the conclusion of the phone hacking trials.
I think my record for idiotic travel was when I flew to Shanghai from London en route to New York. A colleague really really wanted me to attend a lunch meeting with the Chairman of a Chinese SOE. But didn't tell me that the lunch was going to be in Mandarin...
It's fun to see that xenophobia is dressing to the left this morning. No doubt it will be dressing to the right again later in the week.
Hallelujah! We're 'only' going to borrow 110bn instead of 129bn! All our worries are over!
:-(
Austerity hasn't even started in reality.
Stephen Fitzpatrick, MD and founder of Ovo Energy, said he had not seen wholesale prices rise for about two years.
"If they're buying more expensive gas, more expensive electricity, in a large part we think this is because they're selling it to themselves".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24606614
Yes, the key is to develop a steady pipeline of reactor building and that will make it worth people's while to be involved in nuclear engineering. If we start building one reactor every 5-10 years for the next 2 decades, you'll see plenty of UK engineering companies able to compete in that area.
That said, it is worth pointing out that people in general do not agree on what is the best strategy to take for our short term collective benefit, and it seems reasonable that predicting the optimal strategy for the long term would be more difficult, making agreement harder to achieve.
One reason the can is kicked down the road is because the democratic debate has not yet reached a conclusion on the best course of action to take. I would think that having more historians with good communication skills involved with politics could only help improve the long-term focus, particularly when contrasted with the very many lawyers in politics who do not look beyond the short-term nature of the particular brief they have for that day.
40/1 shots are exactly that. Carmichael is probably the biggest certainty amongst LD MPs to hold his seat and on that basis alone 40/1 is great price.
The fact that you have to rubbish my view suggests that you are scared of Carmichael 's ability to mix it with Salmond. He can negate your biggest asset and you know it.
Are you predicting a Carmichael effect on the Indy polling?
What on earth are you doing wrong???
After Ed Miliband has been PM for 10 years from 2015, Hunt may not want or be available to take over as PM from 2025. Perhaps by 2025 we will have Tony Blairs son Euan in a senior position within the Labour government and he may stand for election as leader.
They are just oppotunistically picking up a nearest stick to hit the government with.
They don't really have principles or a consistent philosophy. They just really hate the Tories.
Alternatively, the next election will make it clear - reject Labour and your gas and electricity bills will actually fall. Who could possibly have predicted that situation would come about within, oh I don't know, a few hours of Ed's conference speech?
Ahem.
Until you can prove that your net salary increases by only 34p for every £1 of extra income you need to STFU about earning soooo much that you lose your undeserved benefits.
http://www.edochan.com/widgets/pb/pb_disqus_edmund_widget.user.js
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/oct/21/london-house-price-50000-month
Mixed emotions for George Osborne on Help to Buy, I suspect:
"Rightmove said the average asking price in London rose to £544,232 in October from £493,748 the previous month – an increase of more than 10%. Across England and Wales, the rise over the month was a more modest 2.8% to £252,418.
Describing the London increases as unsustainable, Rightmove said Help to Buy would mainly benefit buyers in the rest of England and Wales because many Londoners would not be able to afford mortgage repayments on a house costing double the national average."
Top bloke.
I hope he goes far, honestly, if he became Labour leader and Boris was Tory leader, PMQs would be a classical history lesson, as Boris would say Hunt has the worst economic policies in Europe since Emperor Diocletian tried to fix the price of groceries across the Roman Empire.
Whilst Hunt would say Boris is the worst leader since Darius said to Alexander III "come on and have a go if you think you're hard enough"
What the government would have borrowed had it not transferred the Royal Mail pension assets, received additional funds from the BoE throught the Asset Purchase Facility, been paid tax by the Swiss Banks on behalf of its British customers, sold a sixth of its shares in Lloyds Bank, sold 60% of Royal Mail, ignored substantial downward revisions by ONS to prior year borrowings, disregarded all revenues from the intervened banks etc. etc.
Once all that is taken into account, add a £10 bn improvement from higher than forecast tax revenues and lower expenditure and the downward trend in actual borrowing starts to look reasonably healthy.
'Clegg loves the chauffeurs and people greasing up to him': Deputy PM savaged for free schools U-turn pandering to Labour
and
One source warned his name had ‘become a byword for cheap sanctimony, opportunism, gimmicks and lying’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2469745/Clegg-savaged-free-schools-U-turn-Deputy-Prime-Minister-accused-pandering-Labour.html#ixzz2iLZWGWqJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
"How long have you been using the widget Roger, I think we should be told."
I'm sorry I've widgeted you
Terrible journey on the way back, the train conductor let the rowdy plebs into first class without tickets, as the rest of the train was packed.
I sent a strongly worded to Richard Branson complaining about this, some of us had paid nearly £400 for the privilege.
If I became Prime Minister, I would pass a law calling for death by vivisection of train conductors who allow non first class ticket holders into first class.